"Well, Ok, as soon as I'm done with airline
dress code and big breakfast cereal, I'll go
after Porsche".
Posted on 06/22/2011 9:36:27 PM PDT by BraveMan
-snip-
The question here, obviously, is - who is responsible for the accident? Some can claim that Porsche should not make its car to speed up that much. Porsche 911 GT3, the car he drove during his fatal crash on Monday, was capable of hitting speeds around 190 miles per hour. Porsche is known to be the car James Dean loved, and eventually drove to death - Dean was driving Porsche 550 Spyder when the fatal accident occurred, killing the American film hero on September 30, 1955.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at newyork.ibtimes.com ...
I may be wrong... but I thought Carol Shelby owned one of them and Bill Cosby owned the other one. Cosby sold his to somebody else because he said it frightened him. It was just too much and he didn't trust himself with it. I think it was the guy he sold it to that ended up wrapping it around a telephone pole (or otherwise destroying the car).
While it's true most (virtually all) insurance policies - both standard liability and automobile insurance policies - contain what is known as a Crime Act Exclusion clause, most (but not necessarily all) will pay for a damages even when convicted of a DUI.
There are exceptions written in for DUIs in some policies to especially include high-risk policies.
Of course, you're very likely to get cancelled as a result of an at fault DUI accident.
I recently saw a show on the anatomy of an accident, of the James Dean crash. He was only going about 70 mph when he crashed. My 1987 Dodge Lancer could go faster than that, you know, when I still had it.
700 HP in that car? Really? Holy Sh___
“He was in the mix and had fans and such”
In the mix??????
“Of course, you’re very likely to get cancelled as a result of an at fault DUI accident.”
Well, I think he got canceled.
Sorry to be so crass, but the passenger was also killed. I don’t think that insurance will cover that person’s survivor claims against the estate.
Movie Star. His ‘genre’ was played out in Meat Space so to speak . . .
Yet another example from which we should all learn.
It gets better. They make a station wagon (with the same capabilities). Talk about your Grocery Hauler . . .
Sure, the claims against the estate for negligent driving (drunk and reckless operation, both crimes), the insurance company will have to pay. There's not a state in the union that insulates insurance companies from DUI liability claims from victim's. In fact, this is reason that states mandate liability insurance - to pay the claims of victims.
There is a chance that the driver's estate's claim would go unpaid, and the claim to replace the vehicle would (might) go unpaid.
Think about the libality insurance you carry on your own home - if you own a home and have a liability rider for you home policy - which most people do - if someone dies in your home from your criminal negligence, then that liability insurance still pays the victim of your crime (criminal negligence). Criminal Act Exclusions are designed to keep the perpetrator from financially benefiting from his crime. They are not designed to insulate insurance companies from the claims of victims.
"Well, Ok, as soon as I'm done with airline
dress code and big breakfast cereal, I'll go
after Porsche".
The minute I read the above sentence, I knew the writer lacked the aptitude to write a sentence and have a logical understanding beyond the mind of a twit. It takes a certain aptitude to comprehend what makes someone want to speed his Porsche at 130 miles per hour at 2 in the morning. Hint: A blood alcohol level of .196.
Drunk driving will get you killed in almost any kind of vehicle eventually. It’s not Porsche’s problem. The driver broke the law and acted stupidly.
When I was 18 a long, long time ago I was going out the front door of the house and a gust of wind came up and slam the front door window into my elbow resulting in 12 stitches. So poor design? was it a safe door and functioning? I guess I should have sued the door manufacturer.
That certainly isn’t your dad’s Vista Crusier!
What a remarkably brilliant question. I think we should certainly delve into this with a FULL scale investigation.
We'll be counting on you for the first $50-thousand dollars to get this underway so we can get at the truth.
Please keep in mind that this make take some time and we may need to ask you to provide further funds to help subsidize this ongoing thorough investigation. /sarc
“Hint: A blood alcohol level of .196.”
Testosterone and being 18 did it for me, with a blood alcohol level of zero. Over 40 years ago. And not in a Porche.
Not only does his estate get nothing, but it can also be held liable for the repair or restoration of any damages resulting from the accident, including roadway, structures, trees, etc.
I’ve owned a few performance cars over the years yet have never killed myself because I don’t drive drunk and never pushed them to their limits. It is my choice to own a car like that until the government mandates some kind of limiter...first it will be set around 140, then 100...then 85. Then gee, why stop at 85, why not go for something safer, let’s say 20 MPH which will also benefit the environment. The nanny state driven by a cadre of “close match book before striking” lawyers will drive this nation into oblivion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.