service vehicle demand by other party due to accident

**altec** · January 21st, 2007 04:20 PM

our subdivision's motorcycle service had an accident with one of the homeowner's 2006 crdi starex. As the accident happened at an intersection inside the subdivision, pwede sana quits. But the security guard who was doing roving duties, didn't have a driver's license. And you couldn't get a police report because it happened in a private road. However, some eyewitness claim the guard didn't look where he was going, plus the car was on the main road while the motorcycle was coming from one of the side streets.

So the association offered to shoulder the participation, by asking the homeowner to claim under OD. It came out to over 11K. The owner, an american married to a filipina, insisted that the association should also provide a service vehicle while his car is in the shop for an estimated 2 weeks. The owner doesn't have a 2nd car to use. He even insisted on another crdi starex. But that's also because he needs to use a wheelchair to move around. No, he is just weak, but he can still stand and walk.

He insists that according to his lawyer, there is under philippine law that the other party must provide a replacement vehicle. If we don't agree, he threatens to sue for the full amount, plus moral, etc etc, damages for the inconvenience.

I checked with our insurance agent handling insurance of our company vehicles. He said it has never happened that the other party was granted a service vehicle as required by law. They have heard of people being provided a temporary vehicle, but more for PR purposes rather than a requirement.

Is there such a law? Are we required to provide a service vehicle if we are the guilty party, the one who caused the accident? A friend of mine who came back from the US says that over there, there is a clause in the insurance for a service vehicle, that the insurance can be the one to provide it.

**orly_andico** · January 21st, 2007 05:02 PM

"walang ganyan sa states!"

well in the US there is zero participation and the insurance company provides a service vehicle.

over here.. well acts of God aren't even covered by comprehensive insurance.

except Ford. they cover acts of God and at their discretion can provide a service vehicle as well. this doesn't help you though.

renting a starex for 2 week for this guy will cost a lot of money, but it would also cost a lot of money to sue you. :P

arguably (he's a cripple! and he lost use of his vehicle through no fault of his!) he deserves a service vehicle. put yourself in his shoes. but then the problem is bearing the cost of providing that service vehicle.

pwede ring pakapalan ng mukha and see if he actually sues.

**niky** · January 21st, 2007 10:29 PM

If it's the fault of the guard, take it out of his paycheck?

I haven't heard of anyone covering the cost of the service vehicle for the aggrieved party here... yeah, this isn't the States!... but medyo mahirap nga para sa owner yun...

**altec** · January 21st, 2007 10:39 PM

ang problema lang sa kano, sobrand demanding. not only for this particular incident but more of that's his character. Kaya ang dami na siyang kaaway sa subdivision. He is in a wheelchair not because he is a cripple but he is soo huge, plus asthma, he has a hard time to move around.

Curious nga ako if he does sue, and if he does win, I can use this as basis the next time someone bumps my car.

**CVT** · January 21st, 2007 10:46 PM

Well, sabi nga ni orly_andico, may ganyan sa US....

Keep us updated kung ano'ng mangyari. This is interesting....

:beam:

**mikmik316** · January 22nd, 2007 12:41 AM

e problema nga jan e na-perhuwisyo yung tao so pati yun kailangan nyo isipin... i guess everyone should settle the problem para di na lumaki ang problema...

**redorange** · January 22nd, 2007 12:54 AM

Originally Posted by orly_andico

"walang ganyan sa states!"

well in the US there is zero participation and the insurance company provides a service vehicle.

It's not called "participation" in the US but "deductible" and inorder to get zero deductible your premium payments would be extremely high. As far as service vehicle, yes they are required to provide a rental car if your vehicle will be in the shop.

I think it's only fair that a service vehicle be provided for the guy regardless of his citizenship since the accident was not his fault and his medical condition may be worst than you think. Next issue is your guards were operating a vehicle without a license so in a law suit that would also be taken into consideration. Provide a service vehicle just maybe not the one he wants since even in the US you can't request what kind of rental they give you.

**seonadancing** · January 22nd, 2007 05:01 AM

I think the guard not having a license made things complicated kasi kung ako yun kano, if the other party has a license then the accident was legitimate because two worthy drivers made a mistake. Pero kung walang licensya yun guard eh ibang usapan na yun, he shouldn't be driving at all and the accident wouldnt have happened if he stayed in his post. So for my inconvenience, i would be demanding too.

**KoKoNAT** · January 22nd, 2007 10:50 AM

The aggrieved party's (yun Kano) character does not matter in this situation. Whether he is saint or an asshole, does not have any bearing as he is still the victim of an accident. He has the right to demand all that he is accorded under the law.