Well Denny’s, I kind of agree. To a degree. You should have kept your shit nice and non-icy, but “white boy” should have been equipped for winter driving. So you both are kind of at fault. Id reccomend fixing your “shit” and letting “white boy” fix his own, since youre both kind of at fault…
its not a black and white law. there are all sorts of shades of gray/grey. if they had called the plow guy and he just couldnt get there yet, or if they were unaware of the situation (being there are no pics, then there is no proof), if the plow guy plowed the snow to a place that would melt, then run across the lot where it could refreeze and become ice, or if you admit to knowing you were putting yourself in danger (like saying "i saw it wasnt plowed and went through it anyways) then you get a shade of gray… and then the ins co doesnt pay out. unless of coarse you want to pay joes dad more money than it costs to fix your ride, but then you are going backwards.
Here’s the problem then, for the people that think Denny’s is at fault for their lot…
Had he not been running summer tires, at 10mph he wouldn’t have crashed. The lot wasn’t the root cause of the accident, the tires were.
I don’t blame you for asking. Who knows, maybe they’ll just cut you a check. I know I’ve had enough shitty service/food from Dennys that it really wouldn’t bother me to see them pay out a grand even when they are completely in the right.
Sigh.
<----------------------------------------------
what i said there wasn’t aimed at you at all, you’ve been making reasonable posts w/o being a jerk(unlike others). but thanks for calling me a dumbass anyways.
how many times does someone have to admit there faults? but you still persist. i’m not perfect, no one is. you think i’m the only one that’s running snow tires right now? hell no. in fact i bet there are quite a few people driving on tires that are worse than using my tires. i had to do what i had to do, why the fuck is it necessary to bash someone because they are unable to afford different tires at the moment. (but i will also admit, i was not sure just how bad these would be)
and for some reason this still hasn’t sunk in for some people…
I HAVE NOT ASKED DENNY’S FOR MONEY, AND WILL NOT ASK THEM FOR MONEY IN THE FUTURE. WHAT THEY DECIDE TO DO, IS WHAT THEY WILL DO, AND I’M NOT GOING TO ARGUE EITHER WAY.
[size=2]Please just close this thread already…
[/size]
i painted the car over the summer. and didn’t think it was necessary to spend the money on new tires for just 3 weeks of winter driving.
trust me, i wish i did…
from the ask a cop forum on another board, the people that posted these responses are verified law enforcement officers, forum is set up to allow replies ONLY from members that have proven they are LEO’s
If the “driver” accepts payment from two different insurance companies for the same damages (i.e., BOTH companies pay X dollars to replace and repaint the SAME parts on the car), I’d say that there’s probably some grounds there to justify fraud.
In your situation, if the owner of the parking lot or restaurant payed for the damages to the vehicle that is fine. Now if the owner of the car collected money from his insurance company also, then yes, he committed fraud.
looks like i was right … so my original statements stand
:tup:
Wait, if I stand outside Denny’s in shorts and a tee shirt and get hypothermia can I sue?
I would ask if I was standing outside bare foot and got frost bite but the no shoes no service might come in effect…
Well I didn’t think it was going to be that cold out, I just figure I could wear my shorts for a couple more weeks until I moved. 
bite me
is it even possible for everyone to stop being dicks about this? am i responding to any of this unreasonably? or are you all just bored?
I’d give you a kiss and bite your lip…
…but you don’t have one.
hahaha, well played sir.
hall of fame post …
lol. because we all know that cops have a firm grasp on every law, especially ones that they would never enforce, such as insurance fraud. A cop would not issue a summons for insurance fraud. He would arrest someone who a judge deemed guilty of such, but he is not ever going to “catch someone” commiting it… I’m sure they would be a reliable source to ask about corporate espionage as well.
by definition fraud is “a deliberate act of trickery”. Don’t let that word “deliberate” fool you.
It has nothing to do with the act being intentional. Making an accident out to be someone elses fault when it is really yours is considered fraud.
You, sir, are incorrect.
:word: Cops don’t know the law, they just enforce it.
:bloated:
Sad but true…
^^^ your walking a realy fine line with that definition
good proving that a fraud happened in this case
no i’m not, that’s the actual definition of the word. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether an incident happened intentionally or not.
Yes, driving your car into a pole intentionally is insurance fraud.
But so is lying about it when you accidentally hit the pole.
man, i just read this whole thread.
all i gotta say is.
