OUCH, Porsche Carrera GT
01-28-2006, 11:35 AM
#26
Registered
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cambridge, MA - 617
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If he was able to buy a $500k supercar, he's able to buy himself out of trouble, or at least have the connections to get himself out of trouble. I am unfortunate enough to know a couple of rich idiots who routinely get themselves into messes like these. Driving drunk, getting their GT3 stuck on train tracks, getting it destroyed by an Amtrak train. These guys will barely get a slap on the wrist...
-P23
-P23
01-29-2006, 10:12 PM
#27
Int'l Man of Mystery
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mugatu
excuse me? we all haven't taken a supercar onto residential street and done 140mph on wet roads to impress our friends. that is idiotic and deserves no sympathy. he SHOULD have done jail time for what he did, putting people in danger.
but you go ahead and defend him because 'we all have done dumb things in our lives'. maybe this guy should buy a ferrari as his next car and impress his friends on YOUR block.
but you go ahead and defend him because 'we all have done dumb things in our lives'. maybe this guy should buy a ferrari as his next car and impress his friends on YOUR block.
Ditto!
There is NO excuse for doing 140mph in the city, especially on wet roads. This loser's license should be revoked with no hope for return for 3 years. If he did it again 5 years. After that it's revoked for life. No more chances.
01-30-2006, 10:57 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nemesis8
Residential neighborhood!
When are ******** going to learn that you can kill peolpe this way. What a frickin dumbass. Look what just happened in Seattle the other day:
When are ******** going to learn that you can kill peolpe this way. What a frickin dumbass. Look what just happened in Seattle the other day:
01-30-2006, 11:59 AM
#30
Anyone who drives like that through a residential area should have their license permanently revoked, period.
He may feel fortunate that he didn't die. How would he have felt had he hit some small child on their bike, or a family of five in their car?
Idiot.
He may feel fortunate that he didn't die. How would he have felt had he hit some small child on their bike, or a family of five in their car?
Idiot.
01-30-2006, 12:26 PM
#32
Actually, I can nearly guarantee that the insurance company is attempting to deny his claim.
There is all sorts of boilerplate language in insurance contracts/policies that void coverage for "illegal" or "unlawful" or "hazardous" operation or "misuse."
If someone does 140mph on a residential or public street, and an accident ensues, the insurance company is going to attempt to deny the claim, and will move for what's known as a declaratory relief action in court, whereby they can get a judgment of equitable relief stating they do not have to cover the economic/non-economic loss.
There is all sorts of boilerplate language in insurance contracts/policies that void coverage for "illegal" or "unlawful" or "hazardous" operation or "misuse."
If someone does 140mph on a residential or public street, and an accident ensues, the insurance company is going to attempt to deny the claim, and will move for what's known as a declaratory relief action in court, whereby they can get a judgment of equitable relief stating they do not have to cover the economic/non-economic loss.
01-30-2006, 01:30 PM
#33
Originally Posted by RotoRocket
Actually, I can nearly guarantee that the insurance company is attempting to deny his claim.
There is all sorts of boilerplate language in insurance contracts/policies that void coverage for "illegal" or "unlawful" or "hazardous" operation or "misuse."
If someone does 140mph on a residential or public street, and an accident ensues, the insurance company is going to attempt to deny the claim, and will move for what's known as a declaratory relief action in court, whereby they can get a judgment of equitable relief stating they do not have to cover the economic/non-economic loss.
There is all sorts of boilerplate language in insurance contracts/policies that void coverage for "illegal" or "unlawful" or "hazardous" operation or "misuse."
If someone does 140mph on a residential or public street, and an accident ensues, the insurance company is going to attempt to deny the claim, and will move for what's known as a declaratory relief action in court, whereby they can get a judgment of equitable relief stating they do not have to cover the economic/non-economic loss.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
