Found Deceased IA - Mollie Tibbetts, 20, Poweshiek County, 19 Jul 2018 *Arrest* #44

[MsBetsy]

No. For liability to arise, you have to prove negligence. Now if you knew this was a killer and had a history of axing people then yes, you could be found liable.

The thing with auto insurance is the person who is in care custody and control. The vehicle owner and listed drivers would be the ones in care custody and control. With no DL, you can NOT be listed as a driver. No DL = no coverage. There is NO way around this.



Your broker is misinformed. Rates are not really based on this. Your comprehensive premium would be the only thing effected by this. Rates are primarily based on the severity of accidents, injuries and deaths involved in your specific make and model. For example, Ford Rangers have higher premiums because the injuries involved in accidents in those are usually very severe and have much higher claim pay outs for liability and accident benefits.

Also included are the stats for your area, age, and how far you commute/use of vehicle.

What? All these years later ( after paying the extra cost for years) they were mistaking. And they told me I was " naive " when I questioned it. Their exact reasoning was that it was considered a sports car and was the # 1 most commonly stolen vehicle. That's what was the reason my premium was an extra 4 or 5 hundred dollars. A cording to them. I thought it was because if the vehicle was stolen they would have to pay out. Which actually makes sense.

 

[MsBetsy]

Why do you think that? I know next to nothing about fake IDs except they wreak havoc on the victims.

It seems to me that, knowing he would be doing farm work, it would be a big benefit to him to have a DL. Do we know what state his fake ID is from? Maybe it's a state that issues DLs to illegal aliens? Well, even if he had a legal one issued to his fake identity, it would still not be a valid DL?

I wonder if he ever lived in the state his fake ID is from.

I was talking about him having a state ID when they hired him. He did not use a drivers license. It was in response to your asking if he used a driver's license. I was just saying he did not. As to whether he had a fake one at any time, I have no idea!

 

[Jealoushe]

Exactly. I had to pay more because I had a cabriolet, as I said before. Drove it for 13 years and even left the top down when I ran into a store. No-one ever tried to steal it but just because they "could have", I had to pay alot more insurance.

Cabriolets are not as safe, thats why. It is not because they are easier to steal. I understand there is a LOT misinformation in the world of Insurance. Your vehicles value or likeliness to be stolen only effects the Collision and comprehensive portion of the policy, which is usually the least factor in your premium.

There are several ways around the insurance issue you note with a MVA.

1) Unlicensed driver runs away. Police find abandoned wrecked vehicle. Yes they investigate, how much depends on if this was an accident with fatality or other serious crime, but with no results. No culpable driver found. Claim paid.

Police report & stolen vehicle - of course they pay this claim, its theft (only if you have comp coverage)

2) Actually unlicensed driver shows owner a fake but convincing DL. This is theft by fraud. The vehicle is actually stolen at time of MVA or Murder. Claim paid.

A charge has to be laid, and again this is only covered if a police report is filed and the owner has comp coverage. The Insurance company will then subrogate the driver and take them to court to cover the claim cost.

3) After the fact, CR looks at car. Says "I can't clean up/fix this mess. Drives car into pond. Walks home. Car reported missing/stolen. Claim paid.

Depends on who was stated as the driver when they report the claim, and again they need comp coverage. I doubt that car qualified for comp, with unrepaired damage. Liability is a different ball game.

There is always a new and marvelous way to commit fraud.

JMOO...and that of former criminal drinking buddies. Some of the stories.....

My comments in red added.

I presume the Farm’s negligence in hiring CR is your opinion? Because no such charges have been laid at this point in time.

Yes, and charges dont have to apply for liability to be applied.

I had a similar situation with a vehicle. I bought a car which was new on the lot but it was over a year old sitting on the lot and considered a used vehicle. It also had over 100 test driving miles on it. I think the car dealer may have driven it home a few times. LOL

Come to find out my insurance was higher because it was a used vehicle.

I have learned to check insurance rates on any proposed vehicle being bought It can make a world of difference in monthly payments.

This is inaccurate. Rates are not higher because the vehicle is used, the safety rating on the vehicle, use of the vehicle, area you live and your DR record, sex, marital status all appy to determining rates.

 

[MistyWaters]

This is why gun manufacturers can't be sued for a gun used in a school shooting. Unfortunately, there is no product liability, as the "gun" did exactly what it was made to do, and was then sold to a licensed intermediary, by law.

That to me is logical reasoning. If lawsuits succeeded by blaming the manufacturer of the gun (or somebody unknowingly who’s car was used to commit a crime) gives rise to slowly treading down the path of altered accountability.

Does the accused solely hold personal responsibility for his or her own actions — or does the crime become the fault of the gun maker or car owner? (Not guilty!)

 

[Jealoushe]

What? All these years later ( after paying the extra cost for years) they were mistaking. And they told me I was " naive " when I questioned it. Their exact reasoning was that it was considered a sports car and was the # 1 most commonly stolen vehicle. That's what was the reason my premium was an extra 4 or 5 hundred dollars. A cording to them. I thought it was because if the vehicle was stolen they would have to pay out. Which actually makes sense.

It would only apply to your comprehensive coverage premium. So unless your comprehensive premium was going up that much they are incorrect. A sports car however, may be worse for serious injuries statistics wise, because people may drive them carelessly. A lot of brokers and agents/companies dont even understand the insurance they are selling sadly. It is an industry that requires years and years of work and training to gain all the knowledge available.

 

[Al Hoffman]

Very good analogy! No, you are not responsible for the actions of someone who used something that belonged to you while committing a crime.

I'm not a lawyer, but that much seems to be common sense.

"Reasonable and prudent man test" - which you most certainly are. I picture you as a suspenders AND belt kind of guy. (But I do respect your opinion mucho)

You can Google the above test. Also "the borrowed servant concept", which has nothing to do with this case, but which you will find fascinating.

 

[MistyWaters]

Sometimes it’s not the money value

Sometimes it’s to stop this sort of thing from happening to the next Mollie

Civil suits are only about money.

This tragedy is already a political hotcake.

 

[1987]

That to me is logical reasoning. If lawsuits succeeded by blaming the manufacturer of the gun (or somebody unknowingly who’s car was used to commit a crime) gives rise to slowly treading down the path of altered accountability.

Does the accused solely hold personal responsibility for his or her own actions — or does the crime become the fault of the gun maker or car owner? (Not guilty!)

maybe the car manufacture is liable. if they hadn't made the car then it could not have been used.....

 

[MsBetsy]

I presume the Farm’s negligence in hiring CR is your opinion? Because no such charges have been laid at this point in time.

I hope there never will be..

 

[1987]

Civil suits are only about money.

This tragedy is already a political hotcake.

money and all of it in the whole world wont buy what they really want back...I don't think the parents will go there. moo

 

[Mominmi]

From what I understand about the way things were at the house/farm, you're using the wrong analogy. I think it would be more likely: You have tools in your tool shed for employees to use for their work, and the key to the shed is left in a place where the employees could access them as need. Lizzie is only 13 so not allowed to use any of the sharp/power/dangerous tools, but takes your ax and kills everyone in her company owned house. Are you liable because it was your ax?

We have no way (right now) to know if CR had been given permission to drive the car, at least not by the owner, and I don't remember it ever being confirmed that the car was owned by the farm. It makes sense that he would have a vehicle or two for them to use to get around at work, run errands, get groceries and supplies, etc. , but it may have been understood (and possibly even stated) that only licensed drivers were to use it/them. With what we've been told so far, I don't feel you with your ax or the farm owner with his car would be liable. MOO

Yes, my analogy is not spot on. I realized after I posted but am trying to wrap my head around why the owner of a weapon is liable for its use. I guess I am assuming Y Farms wouldn’t allow someone with no license to use it and assuming CR had a fake drivers lisence to go along with his other fake papers. I should probably remember what they say about ASSuming.

Edited to add: and thank you, Confusion, for the gentle way you expressed your thoughts about my analogy being off. I find that most WS members are quite kind and respectful when discussing a case. It makes it much easier to join in when you don’t have much experience.

 

[Al Hoffman]

That sounds like product related legal liability, which I see as different than the question of whether the owner of an object, such as a gun, is responsible for crimes committed using that object.

I'm inclined to think that it has to be proven that if, and only if, Rivera had access to that vehicle, he could commit the abduction/murder. That's simply not true. When he decided to commit the abduction/murder, he would have found a way to do it regardless of that one vehicle.

Exactly, like the Nissan being towed under LE guard...unless Bubba told his Deputy brother Bull "Since I'm all the way out here, let's pick up Mom's car like I promised last week....NOT (only for the later). JMMO

 

[Hatfield]

This is inaccurate. Rates are not higher because the vehicle is used, the safety rating on the vehicle, use of the vehicle, area you live and your DR record, sex, marital status all appy to determining rates.

Thanks. Interesting. I was going off what my insurance agent told me too as why it was higher. And Im pretty sure there was a classification on the purchase form that indicated if it was NEW or if USED, so i could have sworn it made a difference based solely on that.

I will have to make sure what im told in the future really checks out.

 

[MsBetsy]

Cabriolets are not as safe, thats why. It is not because they are easier to steal. I understand there is a LOT misinformation in the world of Insurance. Your vehicles value or likeliness to be stolen only effects the Collision and comprehensive portion of the policy, which is usually the least factor in your premium.



My comments in red added.



Yes, and charges dont have to apply for liability to be applied.



This is inaccurate. Rates are not higher because the vehicle is used, the safety rating on the vehicle, use of the vehicle, area you live and your DR record, sex, marital status all appy to determining rates.

And also your age. Unless that too is a lie. My premium went down significantly when I turned 25.

 

[MistyWaters]

maybe the car manufacture is liable. if they hadn't made the car then it could not have been used.....

Verging onto suing alcohol distributors in the case of crimes committed under the influence. That’d be quite lucrative. We don’t know, had CR been drinking that day?

 

[MsBetsy]

It would only apply to your comprehensive coverage premium. So unless your comprehensive premium was going up that much they are incorrect. A sports car however, may be worse for serious injuries statistics wise, because people may drive them carelessly. A lot of brokers and agents/companies dont even understand the insurance they are selling sadly. It is an industry that requires years and years of work and training to gain all the knowledge available.

Maybe it was more my age and the fact that it was a sports car. I was informed that until you turn 25 it is more expensive. More people between 18 and 25 get in accidents.

 

[MistyWaters]

Exactly, like the Nissan being towed under LE guard...unless Bubba told his Deputy brother Bull "Since I'm all the way out here, let's pick up Mom's car like I promised last week....NOT (only for the later). JMMO

At the time somebody made a comment about maybe a 2 for 1 deal, maybe it was you. Regardless I thought that was quite witty because I can imagine that sort of practical occurrence happening in a small community.

 

[Jealoushe]

Thanks. Interesting. I was going off what my insurance agent told me too as why it was higher. And Im pretty sure there was a classification on the purchase form that indicated if it was NEW or if USED, so i could have sworn it made a difference based solely on that.

I will have to make sure what im told in the future really checks out.

New matters because most companies offer full replacement cost from 2-5 years after purchase if you purchase brand new

And also your age. Unless that too is a lie. My premium went down significantly when I turned 25.

Age definitely applies too. Rates will increase again when you get over 70 sadly.

 

[Warwick7]

I presume the Farm’s negligence in hiring CR is your opinion? Because no such charges have been laid at this point in time.

The only thing is we just know all the charges or not charged. So much is being held close to LE "vest"

 

[The Farm]

Either way no matter who ends up suing who I think Yarrabee Farm is going to be the main deal because, well, if they had hired someone who was a legal citizen this case would not be as big and volatile as it has become. I think much of it will fall on them.
JMO of course.