In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
El Monkey, I am trying to be as plain as I can be here. The State was handing out licenses to any spanish person who showed up with two dollars and a utilty bill with a name and address on it. No written test, no driving test, nothing. How they chose to work the insurance I don't know and don't care. When I got insurance all they asked me for was my driver's license and some money. I did sue them for the maximum the state would allow which was half of 25,000 minus the lawyers fees and the state mandated mediator's fee. In NC a child is presumed to be half responsible for any accident they are involved in once the child is 7 years old. They call it the age of contributory negligence. The insurance company insured a guy with a valid state license. The car dealer leased a car to a guy with valid insurance and a valid license.The lawyer who sent the letter was following standard company policy. The driver owned no property, didn't even own the truck technically and disappeared from the face of the earth after the trooper let him go. So who exactly is it I am supposed to sue and for what.
Insurance policies are contracts and the provisions of the policies govern the rights and duties of the parties. Deason v. J. King Harrison Co., 127 N.C. App. 514, ---, 491 S.E.2d 666, 668 (1997). Exclusions from coverage must be strictly construed. Id. In this case, the insurance policy in question provides that liability coverage is not extended to "any person . . . sing a vehicle without a reasonable belief that that person is entitled to do so."
THIS is the guy that is responsible for General Motors policy of leasing GM vehicles to illegal immigrants AND giving them insurance under INTEGON...GM's conspiracy to get some illegal alien money:
""In May, Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005, which prohibits illegal immigrants from getting drivers' licenses. It voids state policies, including a North Carolina law, that allow the issuance of drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants.""
The Real ID Act makes it illegal for the State of North Carolina to issue a drivers license to an illegal alien.
Any illegal alien in possession of a North Carolina Drivers License actually has no valid drivers license or identification.
Integon Insurance KNOWS these illegal immigrants have illegal drivers licenses and thus they never have to pay out a claim. They just collect all that money from them and if they skip country with that vehicle they pay off the vehicle because of their close affiliation with GMAC.
General Motors is 100% responsible for bigdaddy's injured daughter because they are targeting illegal aliens to lease their vehicles and give them insurance coverage with Integon.
quote: The Real ID Act makes it illegal for the State of North Carolina to issue a drivers license to an illegal alien.
Any illegal alien in possession of a North Carolina Drivers License actually has no valid drivers license or identification.
Integon Insurance KNOWS these illegal immigrants have illegal drivers licenses and thus they never have to pay out a claim. They just collect all that money from them and if they skip country with that vehicle they pay off the vehicle because of their close affiliation with GMAC.
General Motors is 100% responsible for bigdaddy's injured daughter because they are targeting illegal aliens to lease their vehicles and give them insurance coverage with Integon.
... like I said, most folks around here don't have a clue.
you people Zipper, Red and Bigdaddy are some lowlife characters to use an alleged accident to push your unAmerican agenda of promoting the national ID(Mark of the Beast) program and attack Gemeral Motors, you truely are part of the problem!
BTW this National ID will eventually be used to give everybody in North and South America a drivers licenses, keep the ID at the state level.
quote:HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 9, 2005
HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform
Mr. Speaker:
I rise in strong opposition to HR 418, the REAL ID Act. This bill purports to make us safer from terrorists who may sneak into the United States, and from other illegal immigrants. While I agree that these issues are of vital importance, this bill will do very little to make us more secure. It will not address our real vulnerabilities. It will, however, make us much less free. In reality, this bill is a Trojan horse. It pretends to offer desperately needed border control in order to stampede Americans into sacrificing what is uniquely American: our constitutionally protected liberty.
What is wrong with this bill?
The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver's licenses. It contains no limits on the government's power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.
Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary.
Republican Party talking points on this bill, which claim that this is not a national ID card, nevertheless endorse the idea that "the federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver's licenses." So they admit that they want a national ID but at the same time pretend that this is not a national ID.
This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the "Drivers License Agreement," this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!
This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines "terrorism" in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person's exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person's appearance on a registry of firearms owners.
This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver's licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.
There are no limits on what happens to the database of sensitive information on Americans once it leaves the United States for Canada and Mexico - or perhaps other countries. Who is to stop a corrupt foreign government official from selling or giving this information to human traffickers or even terrorists? Will this uncertainty make us feel safer?
What will all of this mean for us? When this new program is implemented, every time we are required to show our driver's license we will, in fact, be showing a national identification card. We will be handing over a card that includes our personal and likely biometric information, information which is connected to a national and international database.
H.R. 418 does nothing to solve the growing threat to national security posed by people who are already in the U.S. illegally. Instead, H.R. 418 states what we already know: that certain people here illegally are "deportable." But it does nothing to mandate deportation.
Although Congress funded an additional 2,000 border guards last year, the administration has announced that it will only ask for an additional 210 guards. Why are we not pursuing these avenues as a way of safeguarding our country? Why are we punishing Americans by taking away their freedoms instead of making life more difficult for those who would enter our country illegally?
H.R. 418 does what legislation restricting firearm ownership does. It punishes law-abiding citizens. Criminals will ignore it. H.R. 418 offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.
California radio stations is where I first heard of GM's sales practice on illegals. All an illegal needs is a couple references and 2 pieces of paper like utility bills that show an address and GM will lease them vehicles.
I had a legal Mexican working for me in California that broke out laughing listening to the shop radio on one of them Spanish stations. He explained the above and couldn't believe America was stupid enough to do that.
Corporate America targeting illegals for more sales? I believe it.
""Oddly enough, the Federal Reserve regulates vehicle leases and all lease transactions that last more than four months. ""
I can't believe that ANY state has an "automatic" 50% liability. In MI, a child under 7 is INCAPABLE of any negligence, and a child under 18 is held to the standard of a child of like age.
Contributory negligence is just that, contributory. Most states nowadays say that if you are 50% or more responsible for the accident, you get nothing. I dont' know what your daughter was doing for your attorney to tell you to jump at 50% of the policy.
Also, I dont' know of any state that limits recover on auto cases to the mandatory minimum. Realistically, you will be limited to the policy (the whole blood from a stone business), but that is a different matter.
Did you have underinsured insurance? Did you have health insurance that covered the child?
I don't like to * other attorneys, especially in another jurisdiction and without me seeing the file, but this doesn't make sense to me.
Comments
You have no email in your profile so please email me a name, address, and a description of the truck of the guilty party.
For no particular reason. I'm just curious...yeah that's it....curious...about those SOB's that hit your kid and are trying to sue you.[:(!][:(!]
http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/coa/opinions/1998/970089-1.htm
Insurance policies are contracts and the provisions of the policies govern the rights and duties of the parties. Deason v. J. King Harrison Co., 127 N.C. App. 514, ---, 491 S.E.2d 666, 668 (1997). Exclusions from coverage must be strictly construed. Id. In this case, the insurance policy in question provides that liability coverage is not extended to "any person . . . sing a vehicle without a reasonable belief that that person is entitled to do so."
THIS is the guy that is responsible for General Motors policy of leasing GM vehicles to illegal immigrants AND giving them insurance under INTEGON...GM's conspiracy to get some illegal alien money:
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2001/02/12/13771.htm
General Motors is responsible as THEIR policy of supporting illegals is why they are on the downfall and Americans are the ones suffering.
Read the last paragraph on this link:
http://www.gmac123.com/help/privacy.html
""In May, Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005, which prohibits illegal immigrants from getting drivers' licenses. It voids state policies, including a North Carolina law, that allow the issuance of drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants.""
http://www.medillnewsdc.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=3&t=000312
SUE THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA under the REAL ID Act of 2005.
Immediately contact Virginia Foxx, a Congresswomen for North Carolina about your situation:
http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000753.html
the problem on the political end is in DC, they are allowing these corporations to have these policies
Any illegal alien in possession of a North Carolina Drivers License actually has no valid drivers license or identification.
Integon Insurance KNOWS these illegal immigrants have illegal drivers licenses and thus they never have to pay out a claim. They just collect all that money from them and if they skip country with that vehicle they pay off the vehicle because of their close affiliation with GMAC.
General Motors is 100% responsible for bigdaddy's injured daughter because they are targeting illegal aliens to lease their vehicles and give them insurance coverage with Integon.
May GM burn in he!!.
Any illegal alien in possession of a North Carolina Drivers License actually has no valid drivers license or identification.
Integon Insurance KNOWS these illegal immigrants have illegal drivers licenses and thus they never have to pay out a claim. They just collect all that money from them and if they skip country with that vehicle they pay off the vehicle because of their close affiliation with GMAC.
General Motors is 100% responsible for bigdaddy's injured daughter because they are targeting illegal aliens to lease their vehicles and give them insurance coverage with Integon.
... like I said, most folks around here don't have a clue.
Nailed it Red![:D]
BTW this National ID will eventually be used to give everybody in North and South America a drivers licenses, keep the ID at the state level.
quote:HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 9, 2005
HR 418- A National ID Bill Masquerading as Immigration Reform
Mr. Speaker:
I rise in strong opposition to HR 418, the REAL ID Act. This bill purports to make us safer from terrorists who may sneak into the United States, and from other illegal immigrants. While I agree that these issues are of vital importance, this bill will do very little to make us more secure. It will not address our real vulnerabilities. It will, however, make us much less free. In reality, this bill is a Trojan horse. It pretends to offer desperately needed border control in order to stampede Americans into sacrificing what is uniquely American: our constitutionally protected liberty.
What is wrong with this bill?
The REAL ID Act establishes a national ID card by mandating that states include certain minimum identification standards on driver's licenses. It contains no limits on the government's power to impose additional standards. Indeed, it gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to unilaterally add requirements as he sees fit.
Supporters claim it is not a national ID because it is voluntary. However, any state that opts out will automatically make non-persons out of its citizens. The citizens of that state will be unable to have any dealings with the federal government because their ID will not be accepted. They will not be able to fly or to take a train. In essence, in the eyes of the federal government they will cease to exist. It is absurd to call this voluntary.
Republican Party talking points on this bill, which claim that this is not a national ID card, nevertheless endorse the idea that "the federal government should set standards for the issuance of birth certificates and sources of identification such as driver's licenses." So they admit that they want a national ID but at the same time pretend that this is not a national ID.
This bill establishes a massive, centrally-coordinated database of highly personal information about American citizens: at a minimum their name, date of birth, place of residence, Social Security number, and physical and possibly other characteristics. What is even more disturbing is that, by mandating that states participate in the "Drivers License Agreement," this bill creates a massive database of sensitive information on American citizens that will be shared with Canada and Mexico!
This bill could have a chilling effect on the exercise of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. It re-defines "terrorism" in broad new terms that could well include members of firearms rights and anti-abortion groups, or other such groups as determined by whoever is in power at the time. There are no prohibitions against including such information in the database as information about a person's exercise of First Amendment rights or about a person's appearance on a registry of firearms owners.
This legislation gives authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to expand required information on driver's licenses, potentially including such biometric information as retina scans, finger prints, DNA information, and even Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) radio tracking technology. Including such technology as RFID would mean that the federal government, as well as the governments of Canada and Mexico, would know where Americans are at all time of the day and night.
There are no limits on what happens to the database of sensitive information on Americans once it leaves the United States for Canada and Mexico - or perhaps other countries. Who is to stop a corrupt foreign government official from selling or giving this information to human traffickers or even terrorists? Will this uncertainty make us feel safer?
What will all of this mean for us? When this new program is implemented, every time we are required to show our driver's license we will, in fact, be showing a national identification card. We will be handing over a card that includes our personal and likely biometric information, information which is connected to a national and international database.
H.R. 418 does nothing to solve the growing threat to national security posed by people who are already in the U.S. illegally. Instead, H.R. 418 states what we already know: that certain people here illegally are "deportable." But it does nothing to mandate deportation.
Although Congress funded an additional 2,000 border guards last year, the administration has announced that it will only ask for an additional 210 guards. Why are we not pursuing these avenues as a way of safeguarding our country? Why are we punishing Americans by taking away their freedoms instead of making life more difficult for those who would enter our country illegally?
H.R. 418 does what legislation restricting firearm ownership does. It punishes law-abiding citizens. Criminals will ignore it. H.R. 418 offers us a false sense of greater security at the cost of taking a gigantic step toward making America a police state.
California radio stations is where I first heard of GM's sales practice on illegals. All an illegal needs is a couple references and 2 pieces of paper like utility bills that show an address and GM will lease them vehicles.
I had a legal Mexican working for me in California that broke out laughing listening to the shop radio on one of them Spanish stations. He explained the above and couldn't believe America was stupid enough to do that.
Corporate America targeting illegals for more sales? I believe it.
""Oddly enough, the Federal Reserve regulates vehicle leases and all lease transactions that last more than four months. ""
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Business/story?id=1814524&page=2
Not only can illegal immigrants lease cars with the Govt.'s approval.....they can get home loans also:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/08/news/economy/illegal_immigrants/
Yeah...I ain't gotta clue do I.
Contributory negligence is just that, contributory. Most states nowadays say that if you are 50% or more responsible for the accident, you get nothing. I dont' know what your daughter was doing for your attorney to tell you to jump at 50% of the policy.
Also, I dont' know of any state that limits recover on auto cases to the mandatory minimum. Realistically, you will be limited to the policy (the whole blood from a stone business), but that is a different matter.
Did you have underinsured insurance? Did you have health insurance that covered the child?
I don't like to * other attorneys, especially in another jurisdiction and without me seeing the file, but this doesn't make sense to me.