You're not being very straightforward with us. "Normal" insurance claims never involve a "discovery" questionaire, nor do they normally involve lawyers. A mere parking lot fender-bender certainly should not involve either.

So, if you want some "real" advice, how about starting with the "real" story.

Under 5mph. Damage estimate was around 3K. His first contact with insurance he stated that he suffered no injuries. Now he has 8G in medical expenses. Now it seems that he has suffered neck, back, knee and ankle injuries. He is also including a fee for an interpretor because he doesn't speak english very well.
In his formal deposition he stated that he didn't actually "see" me hit him. He felt an impact and concluded it was me as I was the only car around him. Both insurance companies sent out damage appraisers and there was NO new damage on my vehicle. Both insurance companies also sent out accident investigators. The results showed that even though my vehicle "MAY" have been able to cause that type of damage, the damage on his car, his car showed two distinct points of impact neither of which aligned with any part of my vehicle. And again NO NEW DAMAGE on my car.
Already done. I feel like I'm in good hands.

Sound like one of those old "Ow-OW! My neck hurts like a new Ferrari" cases. Sorry you got caught in one, Kevin.

I guess you know this is just an insurance scam. Sorry for the money it will cost you for some jerk trying to play the system. Good luck.

If I've left anything out it would be only because I didn't think it was pertinent to the case.
Two things to help clarify.
1. He claimed I hit him, I claimed I did not. His claim was denied by my insurance company. It was then that he hired an attorney.
2. After talking to a second attorney it appears that I misunderstood the attorney appointed by my insurance company. It turns out that I can't be held in contempt until I have been ordered by the court to answer the questions. I have not at this point been ordered to.

Better lawyer up, been there, done that.
Value of home, is it a high dollar address is what that amounts to, then they try and go after you home owners insurance as well, 1st test to see how deep they think your pockets are..

Goes to level of education, state, private or Ivy league again, goes to your earning potential, the higher the degrees, the better the school = more $$$$$


Again, looking for your value

jeff has a very valid point, unless you were the target of someone because of you driving a nice car (as I said, I have been a target:mad:) or looked like you have $$$ in any case, I assume that now the other party is also claiming injury and looking at other things to try and tack on to raise the claim... Again, lawyer up, set up to counter sue, even if they are judgment proof (they will be) and start looking into their history, have they done this before (the ones who went after me had a long history). When the judge ask why you didn't want to give your personal info, point out that it had nothing to do with the accident and you don't like the idea of unbalance people, whom you know nothing about stalking your home & work (again, been there) and interfering in your privacy at home and showing up at your work. You are also worried about identity theft.

Stick to your guns and protect yourself, and if you don't already haven, look into Trust. The less you own, the safer you are..

That sounds an awful lot like what my oldest son just went through. He rear ended a boat trailer on an icy freeway over two years ago. Tore the headlight bucket and front frnder up pretty good on his SC, but no visible damage to the trailer. The guy driving the truck pulling it got out and started a very animated rant about speeding Porsches, racing on the freeway, etc. He was clearly in fine health. His lungs and arms worked just fine. He drove away, unharmed, still fuming.

A couple of months later my son gets served. The guy is suing for unspecified damages, including mental distress. We immediately contact our insurance company who, surprisingly, already has a lawyer on it.

To make a long story short, their lawyer handled everything magnificantly. This stuff is their bread and butter. His interest went well beyond minimizing the insurance payout - he was going to win outright, rather than look for the infamous "quick settlement" that leaves his company's customer hanging out to dry. He was actually working on principle. Imagine that. A lawyer. It took two years, and a couple of depositions, but net payout was zero.

I think we get too used to hearing the notorious cases of unjust payouts - the newsworthy ones. There is, however, the "real story" wherein meritless cases go nowhere the vast majority of the time. It's still in the insurance companies' interests to ensure this is the case. So, while she may be employed by the insurance company and technically working for them, their best interests are your best interests, and they won't sacrifice you to appease this guy. I would leave it in her hands and not worry too much about it.

Edit: just read your reply. In Washington, insurance law demands the company represent you even if they deny the claim, if the other party is claiming his injuries and losses stem from the incident. The insurance company cannot simply walk away and leave you hanging. You pay them for this sort of coverage, and when they deny it, the other party really has no recourse other than to sue you. At that point, your insurance company re-enters the fray with their lawyers. We were told that is the "standard procedure".

You are going to be backing into more than somebodys car if you go to jail. And this is sooo much about absolutily nothing.

Byron & 2nd atty gave you good advice.

Your atty needs to file a motion for a protective order (if it gets that far) or whatever your state calls it. You may have signed onto being required to give info to your ins. co. as part of your policy (a contract), but you are not required to answer many questions from an adverse party (maybe any - exceptions include whatever the laws of your state say; usually handing them your ins. card is enuff).

Good luck & don't post too much info on the internet...

your not going to jail !

i dont know california law however a questionnaire that isnt sworn to under oath, and on which you have not lied, is simply a document you have been asked to complete

once in court, you will be sworn in i suspect. at that point, you do not lie. and, when asked why you can not or will not answer a question, you are to give a sufficient reason. it is at this point, where you may wish you had hired an attorney who would have reviewed the document and completed it with you, knowing very well, the proper and legally justifiable reasons for declining to answer the discovery demand...

if you are unsure if certain answers are damaging to your rights in some way, you need to ask an attorney.

in NY, you dont receive "discovery demands" until after a lawsuit has been filed by the plaintiff......i have no idea if this is different in california. if you have been named as a defendant in a motor vehicle accident personal injury law suit, your insurance company should be providing the attorney as part of their duty to defend outlined in most motor vehicle insurance policies and would have assisted you with all of this....but, im not quite sure what the status of your "claim" is in relation to the court/justice- system

by the way...if you do not have an attorney and go to court anyway...if at any time you feel very uncomfortable in both giving an answer and explaining your reasons why you wont answer, i would ask the judge very politely if you may have an adjournment so that you may retain an attorney. he may say yes, he may say no...never ever hurts to ask the judge. i have found after many years of being in court that most judges are very interested in protecting the rights of the unrepresented and sworn witness

never forget that every word you say is being taken down either by audio recording or stenographer

good luck

I am not an attorney. Thankfully I wouldn't want to be associated with that species. However, I am in the insurance business and have been called as an expert witness on several occasions.

From what you have posted. I wouldn't sweat it, typical scumbag attorney taking a nothing case to squeeze money out of an insurance company.

1st- The burden of proof is on them. To PROVE you hit him. If he has stated to an investigator or an adjuster that he "can not be sure it was you" half the battle is over.
2Ind- damage to the vehicles doesn't match. "if the glove don't fit you must acquit".

3rd- Kalifronia has minimum limits of $15K Bodily injury and $5k Property. Assuming you carry the minimum. You stated his vehicle damage is $3k so your fine on that. His bodily injury is $8K (so far). So you have $7K to go until you exceed your limit. Assuming he is awarded damages over your limits the insurance company will pay the $15K you will pay over that.

My guess is your carrier is going to settle within your limits ($20K assuming you have minimum limits) The scumbag will agree and walk with a few dollars because they can not prove you hit him.

In any event wait till you go to court and are ordered to provide the information and then fill out the deposition. The information you stated is already on the record.

And don't forget you can always counter sue. You were injured to you know. And your wife can sue to because you're injuries and stress are keeping you from making whoopy with her. And your kids are so stressed their grades are dropping and .............

I probably should have also stated your carrier is going to weigh the coast to defend vs. what the scumbag is asking for. If the carrier calculates the cost to defend (even if they know you are 100% in the right) exceeds the demand, they will settle. Its a financial decision.

Also the insurance company attorney while hired by the carrier works for you. She is your representation in the matter. No need for you to pay for a second attorney.

Kevin, sounds like you have already been sued in court and your attorney has been served with interrogatories. If this is the case you only have two options. 1. Answer the questions in full. 2. Object to a particular question on the grounds of relevancy, privilege, etc. Your attorney will know what are the correct objections. Normally I have my client answer all the questions and then I weed out the ones that I am going to have an objection to. The judge will then determine if the objection is valid.

Failure to answer discovery can lead to you paying the other side's attorney's fees and you not be allowed to present evidence related to those questions.

[QUOTE=drcoastline;5610118]I am not an attorney. Thankfully I wouldn't want to be associated with that species.

Everybody hates lawyers. Until you need one of course.

I'm not a lawyer but deal with many.

So, now that this old thread has been brought to life...

Kevin, how did it turn out?

Kevin, hope it goes well for you.

Do we need to send him a carton of cigs??