4 ms·

You're overloading the word "they" here. In this sentence, > The description of the incident was their driver destroyed her parked car. "their" refers to Ama

You're overloading the word "they" here. In this sentence, > The description of the incident was their driver destroyed her parked car. "their" refers to Amazon. In the second sentence, > They determined it was totaled and sat on it for TWO months. "They" refers to Amazon's insurance company. I'm not normally one to defend Amazon's business practices, but in this case, I don't see how they did wrong by this woman. If I, acting as a private citizen, did the same thing and totaled someone else's parked car, would it be my fault if my insurance company dicked around for 2 months before paying them? No, it would not. Nor would I be liable for any amount over and above my insurance deductible, because that's the point of having insurance.

Aloha 3y ago
Amazon is probably self insured and uses commercial reinsurance to cover what they cant cover.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  The article does specifically refer to "Amazon's insurance company." Here's the reference in context (italics added by me for emphasis): > It sounds like an open-and-shut case. Dooley didn’t do anything wrong. The Amazon driver hit her car in her driveway. Amazon is responsible. And at first, it seemed like things were going to go the right way. Amazon’s insurance company paid for her rental car and later determined that the car had been totaled, so she was supposed to receive a check.
Nullabillity 3y ago
Amazon bears the responsibility here. They chose which insurance company they use to fulfil that responsibility. While you're correct that the same would also be true between two laypeople, Amazon is a far more powerful and sophisticated actor than a layperson can be expected to be.
- Paul-Craft 3y ago
  I get what you are saying. But, you seem to be making a moral argument here, whereas I'm making a legal statement. I certainly agree that Amazon should have just paid the woman at some point and dealt with the situation with their insurance company themselves. Of course, that's assuming she attempted to contact Amazon at some point (which seems likely but isn't stated in the article).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
toast0 3y ago
> Nor would I be liable for any amount over and above my insurance deductible, because that's the point of having insurance. If your insurance is dicking me around (and you seem like you've got assets), I'm going to take you to court, and if you can't get your insurance to do their job, it's on you. That said, lawsuits are a giant pain, so two months of delay isn't enough to get a lawsuit going... When possible, I also try to go through my insurance, so they can deal with your insurance, because at least my insurance has an interest in giving me timely information. Can't always do that though.

Aloha 3y ago

Amazon is probably self insured and uses commercial reinsurance to cover what they cant cover.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
The article does specifically refer to "Amazon's insurance company." Here's the reference in context (italics added by me for emphasis): > It sounds like an open-and-shut case. Dooley didn’t do anything wrong. The Amazon driver hit her car in her driveway. Amazon is responsible. And at first, it seemed like things were going to go the right way. Amazon’s insurance company paid for her rental car and later determined that the car had been totaled, so she was supposed to receive a check.

Nullabillity 3y ago

Amazon bears the responsibility here. They chose which insurance company they use to fulfil that responsibility. While you're correct that the same would also be true between two laypeople, Amazon is a far more powerful and sophisticated actor than a layperson can be expected to be.

Paul-Craft 3y ago
I get what you are saying. But, you seem to be making a moral argument here, whereas I'm making a legal statement. I certainly agree that Amazon should have just paid the woman at some point and dealt with the situation with their insurance company themselves. Of course, that's assuming she attempted to contact Amazon at some point (which seems likely but isn't stated in the article).
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

toast0 3y ago

> Nor would I be liable for any amount over and above my insurance deductible, because that's the point of having insurance. If your insurance is dicking me around (and you seem like you've got assets), I'm going to take you to court, and if you can't get your insurance to do their job, it's on you. That said, lawsuits are a giant pain, so two months of delay isn't enough to get a lawsuit going... When possible, I also try to go through my insurance, so they can deal with your insurance, because at least my insurance has an interest in giving me timely information. Can't always do that though.