Allstate just reversed liability over a year later. My friend was involved in a motor vehicle accident where she was driving straight, and the other vehicle came down a driveway without stopping. The driver of the other vehicle received a citation for reckless driving. My friend was injured and sought typical treatment, including ambulance transport, emergency room visits, physical therapy, and some testing. She also experienced wage loss. This incident occurred in Virginia, where Allstate determined their insured was 100% at fault.
Fast forward a year, and now, just 7 months shy of the statute of limitations in Virginia, a demand was sent. A month later, Allstate changes their liability decision, claiming they “obtained data” showing the other driver was speeding at 12.8 mph over the limit on my friend’s side of the road. This doesn’t seem right given the circumstances. There were no skid marks, and my friend had slowed down and moved into the other lane to avoid the collision, but the other driver didn’t check his surroundings.
The police report indicates my friend was driving the speed limit, but the officer didn’t witness any speeding. The other driver admitted fault at the scene, but later his family arrived and insisted my friend was speeding, despite not having witnessed the accident—clearly biased.
It’s suspicious that it took this long for any investigation into the event data recorder (EDR), and as someone in the insurance industry, I’ve never seen a personal auto claim where an EDR was pulled. I’m unsure how Allstate obtained this data at this point in the claim, especially considering potential issues with the chain of custody and extraction methods. I’m also not clear on the current status of the vehicle since it was a total loss.
Given Virginia’s strict contributory negligence laws, this reversal means our insurance will likely have to get involved, which is manageable since we have coverage. However, if our insurance also finds my friend to be partly at fault, they might deny the claim as well, which could be problematic. While I doubt they will, it’s still concerning.
Isn’t this a case of bad faith? Doesn’t Virginia law require insurers to get permission to access such data? Shouldn’t Allstate be transparent about how they obtained this information? This situation seems very unusual and risks becoming financially burdensome if both insurance companies deny liability. Allstate already compensated for the total loss a while ago. Even if the title was transferred, Virginia law states they can’t access the vehicle data without a request because they aren’t using it regularly.
I’m not entirely convinced they actually pulled the EDR, but it’s the only explanation I can think of for their claims. Any insights would be appreciated.
It sounds like a frustrating situation for your friend, especially given how the liability determination has shifted so dramatically. Here are some thoughts on the key points you raised:
Change in Liability: It’s certainly unusual for an insurer like Allstate to reverse their position after already assigning 100% liability, especially over a year later. This could raise questions about bad faith if they failed to act in good faith when evaluating the claim initially.
Data Acquisition and EDR: If they are indeed referencing data from an Event Data Recorder (EDR) without proper consent or protocol, that could be problematic. You’re right; there are strict regulations concerning access to such data, and it should typically require explicit permission, especially when it comes to third-party liability cases.
Contributory Negligence: Virginia’s pure contributory negligence law complicates things further. If your friend is found to be even partially at fault, it could bar her recovery completely. This creates high stakes, especially now that Allstate has shifted liability. Given the circumstances surrounding the accident (e.g., the other driver’s citation, their admission of fault on the scene), your friend may have a strong argument against this new finding.
Bad Faith Claims: For a claim to be considered bad faith, there needs to be clear evidence that the insurer did not properly evaluate the claim or that they failed to adhere to the requirements of good faith – which could include failing to disclose how the liability determination was reached based on the new data they’ve claimed.
Next Steps: Your friend should consider pressing Allstate for clarity regarding how they obtained the data, the specifics of the speed determination, and the basis for their reversal. Consulting with a lawyer experienced in insurance claims and bad faith litigation, especially with Virginia’s unique laws, may be essential for navigating this complicated situation.
Encouraging your friend to document everything and keep open lines of communication with her insurance company will be crucial as this unfolds. It’s a complex issue, but there are definitely avenues she can explore to protect her interests.