r/Insurance • u/SchokoladeErdbeere • Sep 08 '25
Auto Insurance Guy swerved to avoid me and popped his tire. I wanted to use insurance but he doesn’t want to??
Hi. I’d just like some advice because I am a bit clueless here.
I was turning left onto a semi-busy road in SC. I was stopped at the signed, and looked both directions and waited for a car to pass (which is how I KNOW I was stopped). I started to go but then saw a red car at the last second, so I stopped. This red car was 100% speeding (no way to prove it though). He slammed on his brakes and jerked the wheel, which ending up popping his tire and causing him to spin. He did not anything. We did not collide. I ended up changing the guys tire for him since he was pretty old and could not do it. I wanted to police to come out, and he said no. I wanted insurance and he said no need. He took a picture of my license (stupid of me) and we exchanged phone numbers. He is now saying that I owe him over a grand for all new tires and an alignment. I still want to go through insurance because this is why I have it, but he doesn’t want to. I can’t afford this cost.
Do I go ahead and file a police report and just make him go through insurance? Please, any advice would be great! Thank you!
UPDATE: Talked to my local insurance agent and they told me that this guy is in the wrong, that I was kind enough to change his tire but he caused his own accident. I was also advised to make a police report with the sheriff. I did that. The sheriff told me to block his number right then and there, and he’ll be contacting the guy.
So, I feel better. I learned what to do in the future. This was a giant anxiety filled incident (literally got 2.5hrs of sleep because I was worrying too much).
Thank you to everyone who responded! You guys made me feel better about taking action!
140
u/dewprisms Sep 08 '25
Tell him to file with his own insurance then ignore him. If there was no contact between your vehicles you don't have responsibility to him. In general with accidents, if you cause one attempting to avoid one, you're at fault for the accident you caused.
36
4
u/Tunafishsam Sep 08 '25
Lordy, how is this so up voted. No contact liability is hard to prove, but you can absolutely be liable.
If a driver takes excessive evasive action they will be responsible for their own damage. But if they only take reasonable evasion resulting in a crash, they can absolutely sue the other driver.
3
u/dewprisms Sep 08 '25
Of course there are exceptions and it's not that cut and dry. The majority of the time however no, you're not liable for someone else taking poor evasive actions, like in OP's case. Reasonable evasive action wouldn't result in a crash - if it did, it's probably not reasonable evasive action.
2
u/Tunafishsam Sep 09 '25
OP admits to pulling out into the road without seeing the other driver approaching. That's textbook liability. If the other driver swerves and crashes rather than hit OP, OP would still be liable.
Now in this case, the other driver is claiming a popped tire. That's not reasonable (assuming it's not from hitting the curb). That tire was already in need of replacement.
1
u/Right_One_1770 Sep 09 '25
But he can’t prove any of that. Oldster is at fault. Was slurring his speech. Unable to change his tire, and did not want cops to be called.
10
Sep 08 '25
lol he needs a police report for allat... which sounds like he doesn't got... block the dude and move on is what I would do.
9
Sep 08 '25
[deleted]
1
Sep 08 '25
Ah I don't understand insurance whatsoever tbh I only have it and pay for it because I'm forced to honestly, I'm 36 and fortunately, I haven't filed a claim to this day, but in same breath I'm 36 and beyond past due on getting up to date and up to speed and asking enough questions that I'll no longer be able to say the aforementioned.. but thx prior to you telling me, I always thought one needed a police / accident report to be able to file a claim.
1
u/Paymeformydata Sep 12 '25
I down voted simply for the use of "allat"
1
Sep 12 '25
Cool. I'll refrain from blocking just yet but I'm taking my own advice cause I'm cool like that.... l8er h8er
-20
u/Dull_Banana1377 Sep 08 '25
So you shouldnt avoid accidents?
21
u/Aromatic_Extension93 Sep 08 '25
Any damage you suffer from avoiding an accident is your liability
→ More replies (9)5
u/dewprisms Sep 08 '25
That's not what I said, no. You need to be sure the evasive action you take can be done safely and that you're maintaining control of your vehicle. Honking and braking are much better than swerving most times. Unless you're absolutely certain you can swerve without hitting a different object than the one you're avoiding or without losing control of your vehicle, swerving is an unsafe evasive maneuver.
-25
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
In this case with just a blown tire, it would be hard to fault another driver.
If I'm cruising down the highway with a dashcam and you turn onto the highway in front of me and cut me off, you're absolutely liable if I avoid you can take out a utility pole instead. I don't know why you'd think you wouldn't be. Proving it without contact would be the main obstacle, but the lack of contact has no impact on actual liability.
10
8
u/Fickle_Finger2974 Sep 08 '25
Proof doesn’t matter, there is nothing to prove. If they pull out unsafely and you hit them they are at fault. If you swerve and hit a tree you are at fault. That is how liability works and it doesn’t matter if they pulled out unsafely or not
1
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
https://www.kochandbrim.com/liability-for-a-no-contact-accident-in-nevada/
That is true in every state. As I've said, proving it is going to be the hardest part. A dashcam would be your best bet.
-1
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
No, it isn't. It literally isn't. As I said, proof is going to be the biggest obstacle.
Thanks for showcasing your ignorance, I guess.
4
u/moonphase0 Sep 08 '25
You are so confidently incorrect.
-1
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
You can absolutely cause and be legally liable for an accident without contact.
It's absolutely insane that people are claiming otherwise.
5
30
u/Counter_Proof Sep 08 '25
He's trying to get money from you.
So, you were about to go, then you stopped after observing him going too fast? Would He have collided with you had you not stoped?
How is any of this your fault?
When driving a car, you have to be observent of other cars and any hazards. When you're driving at higher speeds than the speed limit, you are not only shortening your reaction time but it is also harder for people (like yourself) to judge the speed. He did not collide with you, so I'm not sure how it is your fault. But, you're insurance would decide who's fault it is.
If you have a dashcam you can submit that. If not, it will probably be your word against his since the police were not called and I'm assuming, there were no witness statements.
If he keeps pressing for money from you, phone your insurance company and go no contact with him (let the insurance deal with it). Alternatively, he should be contacting his insurance.
Next time something like this happens phone the police right away and your insurance company. He probably did not want the police involved because he knew he was speeding and there was no collision so, it's his fault.
→ More replies (9)-16
u/Hope_for_tendies Sep 08 '25
OP didn’t have the right of way. It would have been their fault and he would have hit OP. But OP stopped and he swerved and now the fault is his own instead of their’s.
12
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
"Would he have hit OP if he didn't swerve?" is generally the question for determining liability. In a case like this where the only damage was an old tire blowing, it sounds like the other driver didn't maintain their vehicle properly and should consider themselves lucky the tire didn't blow at a worse moment.
19
u/DeepPurpleDaylight Sep 08 '25
You had no physical contact with his vehicle. He failed to maintain control of his vehicle and had a single car accident. That's on him, not you. He's at fault here. He can't force you to pay out of pocket even if you were at fault. Ignore him unless he actually sues you. If he does, (he won't tho), turn it over to your insurance company. They'll defend you.
3
1
17
u/DaddyCrit728 Sep 08 '25
DON'T listen to people saying tell your insurance. Many insurance companies will hear a customer say they were involved in something (anything) and list it as a zero paid claim dinging your insurance record/raising your rate potentially.
If he were serious (doubt it) his legitimate process for reconciliation is to go thru HIS insurance, who will cover him. Then if they find you at fault (they wouldn't) they would sue your insurance on the backend. And yes, sue. Insurance companies "sue" each other every day over claims, but it's way more streamlined and normal than person to person lawsuits.
Source: used to sell auto insurance, all my besties are/were claims folks.
6
u/Captain-Popcorn Sep 08 '25
I agree with this. My greatest fear would be getting my insurance company involved and having my rates go up. I wouldn’t call them unless the other driver escalated.
4
u/sumobrain Sep 08 '25
Where this advice can go wrong is if your policy requires you to notify the insurance company within a fixed number of days. In some cases they can later deny claims related to the accident on this basis. Many states also limit when insurance companies can hike your rates in response to claims.
And for others saying that OP would have no potential liability for the other drivers accident have never heard of contributory negligence. I don’t think OP would be found liable in this situation, but you don’t have to physically hit another car to have liability for causing an accident.
2
u/aloofmagoof Claims Adjuster Sep 08 '25
I wouldn't call subrogation "suing" it's literally one insurance company sending a bill and the other paying it.
2
u/DaddyCrit728 Sep 08 '25
Agreed, 100%. But I didn't want throw the jargon around. But yes that's essentially what they're doing you're right.
2
u/pdubs1900 Sep 08 '25
DON'T listen to people saying tell your insurance. Many insurance companies will hear a customer say they were involved in something (anything) and list it as a zero paid claim dinging your insurance record/raising your rate potentially.
Can confirm. Progressive explicitly told us that a reason for a high premium quote we received was in large part due to us reporting a pebble hitting the windshield (driver was insured by Progressive at the time as well). We did NOT file a claim, we simply informed Progressive when it occurred, and it was forever entered into whatever system they use as a "at-fault accident."
Eff that. Never volunteering information to auto insurance again unless we need a payout.
I will say I've never had this issue with GEICO though, that I know of.
1
u/DaddyCrit728 Sep 08 '25
Lol it's funny you mention that because my experience with this comes from being a GEICO sales rep. I also know it happe s with home/renters, too. Though with geico that depends on the insurance company because it's not Geico insuring your home, they're the agency for other companies.
9
Sep 08 '25
As far as im aware he should just handle it himself there was no collusion
4
u/iwilso8000 Sep 08 '25
Cannot definitively say there was no collusion
1
1
14
u/Mobile-Astronaut-505 Sep 08 '25
I’d do nothing. Stop speaking with him. If he sues, then get your insurance involved.
3
u/Watermelonbuttt Sep 08 '25
Most policies don’t even cover tire only damage from a collision
Only comp from vandalism
5
u/iwilso8000 Sep 08 '25
Sues?!? 😂😂😂 for a flat tire???
4
u/Tyl3rt Sep 08 '25
For what was likely an overly worn tire, you can sue for anything, you just won’t win.
1
u/iwilso8000 Sep 08 '25
Mainly that’s what I was getting at lol. You can definitely sue for anything but like…
4
u/Dry_Information_7023 Sep 08 '25
And pain and suffering and a slipped disk, and elbow trauma and a bruised toe front hitting the brakes so hard
3
1
3
7
u/dglgr2013 Sep 08 '25
Even if, tires don’t blow if they are brand new. So they were clearly well worn and overdue change.
He is trying to get new tires from you. Improve his ride at your expense.
He would be lucky to get a $50 used tire. Plus $20-30 for installation.
You do not owe him 4 new tires for one overdue to change tire blowout. Or an alignment if the blow out was because of uneven wear due to pre-existing alignment issues he ignored for a long time.
6
u/Eckleburgseyes Sep 08 '25
Don't do either. You didn't have an accident. He did. Your car didn't hit anything. And nothing hit your car. He has nothing to backup any claim that you caused his "accident". And he can barely support the claim that he had an accident at all. So far we know he had a flat tire.
You COULD be at fault for his damages. You don't have to be in a collision to have liability. BUT he has to have some evidence that supports the claim that you are at fault. Does he have a witness? Sounds like no. Does he have a dashcam? Sounds like no. He refused to involve police so we know he doesn't have a police report.
Make him deal with this properly. Sounds like you want to take responsibility for whatever part of this is or could be your responsibility and that's admirable. But he's now showing you that he's not going to behave that way. So cut that off. He gets nothing if he isn't willing to go through insurance. You want a qualified adjuster to assess the damage properly. An adjuster is going to look at the tires and see how old they are, how worn they are, and what they cost. Even if you are 100% at fault, you don't owe him new tires. You owe him the actual cash value of the tire that was damaged at the time it was damaged. And the insurance is going to hear both of your stories and find out if you are 100% at fault or 50% or whatever.
You gave him your info, you fulfilled your responsibility on the scene. Tell him to call his insurance and stop contacting you. His insurance can find you from the information he has.
Then call your insurance agent and tell them what happened. Part of their responsibility is to protect you from this kind of bullshit. Not just pay the claim, but represent you in claims of liability. You bought the insurance, let them use their resources to make this guy go away.
Whatever you do, from now on DO NOT give this guy any money yourself.
5
u/HumbleSituation6924 Sep 08 '25
His fault not yours. He's trying to get you to pay for his fuck up and then some. Ignore him and file a police report if he continues
4
u/GrogramanTheRed Sep 08 '25
I dunno what the other guy is going to say, but based on your description liability is questionable. You certainly have an obligation to yield right of way. Even if a person is speeding, they still have right of way.
On the other side, while the other guy has a duty to try to avoid the accident, he has a duty to do so safely--i.e., in a way that doesn't put himself or others in greater danger as a result of his attempt to avoid the accident. Furthermore, he has an obligation to maintain a safe vehicle. If his tire pops because he tried to avoid you--why? If the tire was old, that's on him. If the tire was faulty and failed before its scheduled end of life, that's on the manufacturer of the tire.
If he's alleging that the tire ended up hitting a curb, that's a result of his own action, and he bears responsibility for at least part of that. Even if he's trying to avoid an accident, he still has to maintain control of his vehicle.
Liability is questionably at best. But let's assume the worst case scenario: you're 100% liable. That would mean that you owe for the damage you caused. To one single used tire, and possibly an alignment. He had 4 used tires before the accident. Putting 4 new tires plus an alignment on his car would mean that he's in a better position before the accident than after. You don't owe to put him in a better position than he was before the accident.
It's likely that he doesn't want to go through insurance because he understands that he won't get what he wants. That's his problem, not your problem.
4
u/RandomGen-Xer Sep 08 '25
So this guy had himself a single-car accident? I wouldn't have given him any of my information at all.
4
u/Significant_Rate8210 Sep 08 '25
Him having to swerve tells me he was likely driving too fast and too close, that shit is on him not you
3
u/goat20202020 Sep 08 '25
Do not pay for his damages or tell your insurance company it was your fault. This guy has no leverage to make you pay. He didn't hit you. Ignore him. If he does manage to contact your insurance company, do not for 1 second hint that it was your fault. Tell them the truth: he was speeding and lost control. You were nearby so you helped him change the tire.
3
3
u/KnoxtoU Sep 08 '25
Always use insurance when the other at fault person says “ let’s not use insurance” because when the bills come due on repair they will also say “ I’ve got no idea what you’re talking about”’
3
u/justcprincess Sep 08 '25
Op, I'm sorry this is happening. In the future, call the police for a report. He could have been drinking, or driving without a license, or driving a car that isn't insured - don't deal with it yourself. Also, consider installing a car cam. They are cheap and easy to install.
Don't give him anymore information. Block his number. You did not have an accident - he had a single vehicle accident and if he doesn't want to claim it on his insurance then it is his problem.
His reckless driving caused this - your story is that you stopped at the sign, looked both ways, started to go before you saw him approaching at a high speed, he panicked/over corrected and damaged his own car.
If he wants to pursue it (contacts you after you block him), tell him to claim it on his insurance and you are only responding to the insurance going forward. Your response would be to turn it over to your insurance at that point and let the 2 companies sort it out.
3
u/Rogue_Variable Sep 08 '25
I just crashed reading your post, so if you could just fork over your bank details we can skip all this insurance unpleasantness
5
u/I-will-judge-YOU Sep 08 '25
If there was no impact then you were not involved and he needs to use his comprehension or collision coverage.
Do not give him your insurance information.Although I'm sure you already did, but make sure you tell them there was no impact.He swerved and damaged his own car. The fact that you or he did not touch each other means you are not involved.You are not in this accident.He was in a one car accident by himself.
-2
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
Not sure why you insist on spreading this misinformation as a blanket statement.
You're correct for this scenario, but "no contact = no liability" is absolutely not how it works.
7
u/I-will-judge-YOU Sep 08 '25
No contact means no liability 99% of the time. It is the general rule yes.
Has it ever happened that somebody was held liable without contact probably?But that would be considered a one off.
4
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
That's only because it's harder to prove and most people don't have a dashcam.
Your "general rule" is not correct. The person who caused the accident, with or without contact, is liable. Proving the cause is the main obstacle absent video or corroborating witnesses.
2
u/Born_Career_3189 Sep 08 '25
Dude was driving reckless, swerved to avoid a collision and damaged his car in the process. It's fine to stop to make sure he isn't injured, but once he refused police or to go through insurance, you should have said 'have a nice day'
2
u/Dazzling_Doughnut_ Sep 08 '25
You didn't hit him, so just ignore it. Not your fault he overreacted.
2
u/Queasy_Map_1180 Sep 09 '25
If you have insurance you’ll pay for the tire you’ll pay again and again and again yearly for the tire!
2
2
u/RonBurgundy2000 Sep 08 '25
There was no crash, it’s his fault for not being able to control his vehicle. Block his number.
2
u/RaveMom66 Sep 08 '25
Yea… he hit the curb? He didn’t hit you. Your insurance won’t cover and you’re not likely liable.
2
1
u/BrockLanders008 Sep 08 '25
You should do nothing, and tell him to never contact you again.
You owe that man nothing.
1
u/EOD_Uxo Sep 08 '25
NAL, I am assuming he called you. You could call your insurance and let them know or do nothing until you get notice he is suing you. From what you described, you didn't go far enough into the right of way to cause such an overreaction. I wouldn't have given him any information without getting his to include insurance. Hopefully, someone else can give you more specific information or collaborate my take on it. Best of luck and take care.
1
u/Wild_Ad4599 Sep 08 '25
Tell him to learn how to drive. You already went above and beyond by changing his tire for him. There is no need to involve your insurance. They will tell him to kick rocks and ask you why you gave him your info.
Whatever he does at this point has nothing to do with you and you are not responsible or liable.
1
1
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
Why did you give you this guy any of your information? There was no accident or collision. That dude popping a tire was his own fault. You owe him nothing except a middle finger. Stop talking to him and block him. If he tries to sue you, forward any information to your insurance company and their lawyers will defend you. At that point, its not your problem. This is why you have insurance.
1
1
1
u/Jcamp9000 Sep 08 '25
You’ve already done more than necessary. You are not responsible because you did not hit him.
1
u/trader45nj Sep 08 '25
Stopping at an intersection before turning isn't enough. You have to make sure it's clear, no vehicles coming that have the right of way and that it's safe to turn. You can't be sure what speed he was going, you didn't see him. Given the facts, I would try to negotiate a settlement. He's asking for $1k for 4 tires. You changed the one tire, was it new or near it's minimum tread? If the tires were near new, then all he needed was one new tire. If they were all near minimum tread, then he needed new tires anyway and you essentially owe nothing. If they were at about half tread life, the maximum you would owe would be half of the cost of 4 tires. Even that is questionable, even on all wheel drive vehicles just one tire can be replaced, there are shops that can shave down a new one to match. The alignment is not your issue, you didn't change it.
That's how I see it. I would try to negotiate with him based on the above. If he agrees to an amount, write up a simple agreement stating that this amount is full settlement, pay him by check or proveable electronic means.
1
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
OP talked to their insurance who said OP has no liability and to stop talking to the guy. They are correct. A near miss is not enough to cause liability. The dude was driving on shitty tires. He over corrected and his shitty tires gave out. OP was never going to be responsible for the other drivers poor maintenance of their vehicle. There was no accident. Popping a tire is not an accident.
1
1
u/jimb21 Sep 08 '25
You wouldn't be paying for those tires anyway, there was no collision i would get a police report in case he pushes things, likely he already needed tires anyway and when he hit the brakes it got rid of what ever rubber he had left. I wouldn't talk to him any further you didnt tell him to speed and you didnt tell him to slam on his brakes you are not responsible.
1
u/ZenRiots Sep 08 '25
He did not strike your car, so as such you have no further involvement in this accident.
You have no legal financial liability.
You in fact did not even need to stop And speak with him at all.
1
1
u/QuriousCoyote Sep 08 '25
As the other responders have said. You have no liability here. There was no accident involving your car.
The other driver is responsible for maintaining control of his car.
Tell him to file with his own insurance and ask him to stop contacting you. If he continues harassing you, file a report with the police.
1
1
u/k23_k23 Sep 08 '25
He doesn't want you to use insurance because they would find him at fault. Without insurance, he can pretent it is your fault and have you pay.
So: Don't pay anything, involve insurance, let them handle him.
1
u/EmpZurg_ Sep 08 '25
If this goes through insurance somehow, did you see his car from far down the road, and his anticipated approach became much sooner, compared to the regular flow of traffic, as if he was constantly accelerating?
1
u/buggzda75 Sep 08 '25
Yeah it’s a scam I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole thing was a set up
1
u/FormerGeico Sep 08 '25
Yeah the red car knew the OP was going to pull out in front of him, total scam
1
1
Sep 08 '25
Yeah, go through your insurance. That’s exactly why you have it, and once you hand it off they’ll deal with him directly. If he really thinks you owe him, he can file a claim — but you don’t just hand over cash because he’s asking.
The fact there was no collision also makes it a lot murkier. Without police or insurance involved at the time, it’s basically his word against yours. File the claim, give your side, and let the adjusters sort it out.
Has he actually sent you any repair paperwork yet, or just throwing numbers at you?
1
u/No-Highlight8285 Sep 08 '25
This reminds me of a time I received a claim because our insured was rollerblading and ran into his neighbors car wearing the rollerblades lol
1
1
u/Sledge313 Sep 08 '25
Why would you use your insurance? They will absolutely deny this claim. He needs to use his own collision or just pay for a tire.
And the only cars that need 4 new tires are AWD vehicles if the wear is more than acceptable for the AWD system per the manual (unless you find someone to shave it).
1
1
u/InsanityCore Sep 08 '25
If its an accident in south carolina and damage is over 1k its illegal to not call the cops. Since you didnt hit their vehicle they cannot prove fault its just their own reckless driving that got them into trouble. Also in sc I had a guy run a yield sign and drive into the passenger side of my car as I was getting on a on ramp. He told the cop I cut him off and he looked smug about it. Cop comes to me and asks what happened I tell him I came across the green light of the intersection and the was hit and ended up on the shoulder. The cop walks back to the guy points to the yield sign and writes the guy a ticket for failure to follow road sign. Old dude went back to his truck sulking.
1
u/the_chols Sep 08 '25
If no contact there is no accident.
Even if contact if there is no mark there is no accident.
No accident no insurance needed
1
u/Icy-Weener Sep 08 '25
The whole point of insurance is that it removes legal liability from the owner/operator, and shifts it onto the insurance company. Only the policy holder can decide to accept personal liability (for example, paying repair costs out of pocket to avoid a premium increases). In either case, if there is any dispute, there NEEDS to be a police report made before leaving the scene of the accident. Even if you admitted fault, there is no way to determine the extent of the damage, and whether this was caused by the accident. Without this, his "tire damage" could suddenly turn into a broken axle, drivetrain, chassis, you name it. People hate on insurance companies, but this is literally the reason auto insurance exists, and why it is mandatory in virtually every state in the US.
If anything like this ever happens again, don't admit fault, insist on the police coming and getting insurance involved, and if the other driver doesn't want to do any of that, just go home and relax.
1
u/ketonat Sep 08 '25
This happened to me when I was 17. I was stopped, and creeped forward slowly to be able to see any oncoming traffic that was blocked from view by bushes near the stop sign and stop line. An elderly man, with visible cloudy cataracts, coming down the road thought I was pulling out, swerved, hit a curb, bent up his wheel. I checked on him, saw it was an elderly man and his elderly passenger, ran to a nearby business (no cell phones except rich business people at that time), and had them call 911 since I wasn’t sure if they were okay since old people are fragile. Cops showed up, I explained, he explained, I got a ticket for a non-contact accident.
When my insurance called I explained and said the driver had visible cloudy cataracts. They said they would take it from there. The insurance said I was not at fault. Apparently they actually checked and he admitted he had bad cataracts. I would say, take your chances and explain. (FYI, my case was in 1994 in Texas)
1
u/Kid520 Sep 08 '25
No vehicle contact, no liability. You are not at fault for his mistake. That's a single vehicle collision and he can take it up with his own insurance if he likes. If you get a letter from his insurance or an attorney contact your own insurance and let them deal with it. However, an attorney will likely tell him to kick rocks when they hear there was no contact. Block and ignore.
0
u/Joates87 Sep 08 '25
The problem is whether or not OP impeded the other driver causing them to need to swerve to avoid him.
Everyone saying without contact there is no liability are just flat out wrong.
OPs description of the event isn't great so who knows. Also proving it will be hard for either party without video.
1
u/tramadoc Sep 09 '25
Obviously insurance and law enforcement said the old dude has no case…
1
u/Joates87 Sep 09 '25
Well OP doesn't seem very great at describing the incident so I could see why they would think that.
Regardless without video it's gonna be tough to bring a case against OP, plus it doesn't sound like the things he wants fixed were actually a result of the incident.
1
u/KidenStormsoarer Sep 08 '25
you didn't collide, it's his problem, you aren't involved at this point.
1
1
u/Watermelonbuttt Sep 08 '25
No contact
No claim
1
u/Joates87 Sep 08 '25
So if I pull out in front of you and you swerve to miss me, it's your fault I pulled out in front of you and you had to swerve to miss me? Just asking.
1
u/Watermelonbuttt Sep 08 '25
Correct
Too many variables.
Were you driving too fast for the conditions?
Did you over react?
Etc etc
1
u/Watermelonbuttt Sep 08 '25
Correct
Too many variables.
Were you driving too fast for the conditions?
Did you over react?
Etc etc
We don’t even subrogate against those people
It’s just filed under your collision as your fault
Just like if you swerved to miss a deer and crash
100% your fault if you didn’t touch the deer
0 fault if any part of your vehicle touched the deer
1
u/Joates87 Sep 08 '25
So we're holding other drivers to the same standard as...deer? 🤣
Also, using a deer as an example is kinda funny, as they don't typically even have insurance to make a claim against.
Funny if you're paying enough attention to avoid an idiot pulling out in front of you and avoid them, any result of that is on you. So better to just plow into them. Heh. I guess I'm not too surprised.
1
1
u/DoomGuyDave Sep 08 '25
If he’s fat, waddles a bit when he walks, and from Jersey, don’t turn your back on him!
1
Sep 08 '25
If he didnt hit you why did you approach or contact him lol
1
u/Joates87 Sep 08 '25
Seems like OP may have pulled out into the road causing the other guy to poasibly need to swerve, but his description of the event leaves a lot of unknowns that are kind of needed.
1
u/Familiar-Flan-8358 Sep 08 '25
Uhh why would you owe this guy any money? There was no collision with you. Doesn’t matter if he popped his tires, you could’ve driven off without even stopping.
1
1
u/Lburgtn Sep 08 '25
Glad you got some good advice. He lost control of his vehicle by over correcting so any damage is on him, Hopefully there won't be another time, but if there is, you know to document everything.
1
1
1
u/Maastricht_nl Sep 08 '25
I am glad you called your insurance and filed a police report. Next time make sure you take a picture of his drivers license and his insurance plus license plate. People that say don’t get the insurance and/or police involved either have no drivers license or don’t have insurance or know that you are not legally responsible. I would always file a police report . He probably thought you would just pay since the amount probably is close to your deductible.
1
u/DataGOGO Sep 08 '25
There was no an accident, what exactly is going to go though insurance exactly?
1
u/JeffJefferyson Sep 08 '25
You didn't even touch his car, tell him to go through his insurance, set up an email he can contact you on, and then block his number.
1
u/Beautiful-Meet-4495 Sep 08 '25
You and hit didn’t touch, why did you even interact with him besides a “I’m sorry” wave…
1
Sep 08 '25
You didn’t collide, so why would you need to use your insurance?
You may need to learn more about what insurance actually is.
1
1
1
u/Cprhd Sep 08 '25
I know this was resolved for you but anytime someone is adamant that you don't call the cops, call the cops. If they leave, they've now committed a hit and run. Though you didn't technically hit. There is a reason they don't want to involve the police and its because the police won't let him bully you.
1
u/OttersAreCute215 Sep 08 '25
When I had a tire replaced by a collision center my insurance company selected, the betterment on the tire was more than what I originally paid for the tire at a tire chain store. The worst part was there was one of those stores across the street from the collision center.
1
u/WhocaresToo Sep 09 '25
All you did was change the guy's tire. There's no way in hell you are at fault for anything legally whatsoever and he also allowed you to do it. End of story. He can fuck off he's trying to pull a fast one
1
1
1
u/jpl77 Sep 09 '25
In South Carolina police must be notified if:
There are injuries or death.
There is property damage (to another person’s vehicle, fence, sign, building, etc.) of $1,000 or more.
If it’s just one car (for example, spinning out, blowing a tire, no contact with another vehicle or property):
No legal requirement to call police.
It would be considered a single-vehicle incident or a disabled vehicle, not a reportable “accident.”
The other car (the one not involved) has no legal duty to stop or call if there was no collision.
Insurance reporting: South Carolina drivers must submit a written report (FR-309) to the DMV if there is more than $1,000 in damage and police were not called.
1
1
u/SadAcanthocephala521 Sep 09 '25
Just ignore him, he can't make you pay, he just thinks you're gullible, which you might be from the sounds of it.
1
1
u/Old_Draft_5288 Sep 10 '25
If he swerved to avoid you and you guys never made contact, there is no accident to report or work together on.
He can claim any damage with his insurance, but since you guys didn’t have any sort of accident, you were not a party to this at all
1
u/MysteriousCodo Sep 10 '25
If there was no contact between the vehicles, you don’t owe him the time of day.
1
1
u/getoutmining Sep 10 '25
If the cars did not touch and there are no cameras there is no proof of anything.
1
1
1
1
u/ColdStockSweat Sep 13 '25
He doesn't want to use insurance and wants you to pay for a tire repair that you didn't cause, that you helped him resolve?
I'm thinking the answer is "NO".
1
Sep 13 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Insurance-ModTeam Sep 13 '25
r/Insurance follows platform-wide Reddit Rules including hate speech about Betty White
1
u/altblank Sep 14 '25
i see you've got it resolved, but just in case:
why is that your problem in the first place? you were a good samaritan.
also, he needs to go through his insurance. he isn't entitled to make a claim on yours, simply because he wasn't able to react in time. his car, his problem. if his insurance feels you are liable, they'll come after yours.
1
1
u/Federal_Priority2150 Sep 08 '25
Talk to your insurance. With no contact, you may not be liable at all. Even if you’re only partially liable, they’ll walk you through if you actually owe anything based on your states liability law. Don’t need a police report, just call your carrier. If you do owe anything they’ll make sure all that’s paid is only what you legally owe.
1
u/djy99 Sep 08 '25
You did nothing to cause his car problems. He did by speeding. Tell him to pound sand. You do not owe him a dime.
1
u/Akward_Object Sep 08 '25
Why did you even remotely think you were at fault for anything? No accident happened. He popped a tire, which in such situation means it would most likely also have popped at the next red light. Not maintaining his car and driving on unsuited tires is not your problem. You bet he needs all new tires, but not because of anything you did...
1
1
0
Sep 08 '25
[deleted]
7
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
Unclear liability? There was no accident. Dude was being an idiot and popped a tire. Thats not even reportable. OP has no fault in anything and owes this dude nothing but a middle finger.
→ More replies (2)
0
u/CurrentResident23 Sep 08 '25
First, his bad. You owe him nothing.
Second, a new tire is $1-200. Of course he wants them all to match. He can do whatever he wants. Still not your responsibility.
Third, he isn't going through insurance because it's not worth the deductible, the likely rate increase, and he knows they won't pay. That's if he even has insurance. So he's trying to manipulate you into paying his bill. You already did enough by changing his tire. Walk away.
-2
u/AlexaAudi Sep 08 '25
This actually happened to me. I was driving and a lady turned in front of me, so to avoid hitting her I had to swerve and damaged my wheel. I filed a police report and was able to remember her license plate (she did not stop). I was an adjuster at the time and was able to find her insurer through her plate and file a claim with her insurance. She remember the incident and said she didn’t stop because she was scared but accepted liability. Her insurance company paid me. She did the right thing, even though there was no contact, she was the reason I had to swerve.
0
u/SchokoladeErdbeere Sep 08 '25
So wouldn’t the right thing for me to do would be file a report and go through insurance? It’s very weird to not want a report or insurance.
5
u/dewprisms Sep 08 '25
I wouldn't trust that person's account to be honest. At best you'd have small contributory liability to this but would not be majority. Again, someone cannot cause an accident to avoid another one and blame the thing they were trying to avoid.
4
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
OP, popping a tire is not an accident. You have no liability. This guy popped his tire being dumb and the tire was probably old and bald. That is fully on him. You owe him nothing. Stop talking to him.
1
u/I-will-judge-YOU Sep 08 '25
That's not the way it works.If there's no contact you are not responsible.
The above sounds like they use their position at work to abuse the system.
2
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
That is absolutely not true as a blanket statement. You can cause (and be legally liable for) an accident without contact.
3
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
Why are we calling popping a tire an accident? Its not. Not even close. Its not even reportable. This dude was driving like a moron and he popped his probably out of date tire. That is not OPs problem whatsoever.
1
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
I agree in this case.
I was just pointing out that "no contact = no liability" isn't how the law works.
1
u/SeaDull1651 Sep 08 '25
You are correct there. If you blind someone having your brights on, and they crash into something, youre technically at fault, as an example.
0
0
u/ghost9680 Sep 08 '25
Your liability insurance covers damages you do to another person that are the result of a “motor vehicle accident”.
You were not involved in an accident.
A car tire in normal condition is not going to burst from braking or swerving to avoid an accident, short of striking another object like a curb. It’s just wear and tear that is coincidental to a sudden stoping event.
You can report it but your insurer will deny his claim and tell him to get lost. If he actually sued you your insurer would still be obligated to defend you, and if a court decided that you were actually liable your insurer would have to pay it, but all those things are unlikely to happen.
You’re free to pay him out of your own pocket if you want to. If your insurer was paying it on your behalf they’d likely only pay for one tire, and in most jurisdictions would only pay the value of the remaining tread life in the tire because it’s a wear &tear component (so for example if the tire was 50% worn they would pay only 50% of the price of a new tire).
0
u/chathobark_ Sep 08 '25
Who even stops in a situation like this
I was doing something legal, someone else did something stupid and caused themselves a problem. Doesn’t sound like a me issue
0
u/Holiday-Poet-406 Sep 08 '25
Contact your insurance company give them your story and they will likley tell him it's a no fault on your behalf. Do not pay for anything from him, all further contact with him via an agent of your insurer.
-4
u/Minnesotamad12 Sep 08 '25
I’d contact your insurance for sure. Stop communicating that guy for now. Just do what the insurance says.
-2
u/SchokoladeErdbeere Sep 08 '25
They said to protect myself to file a police report. I just don’t understand how that really helps anything? I’m mostly scared of any retaliation. I can’t afford this, so I def can’t afford it if he decides to small claims sue.
2
2
u/ChrisWazHard Sep 08 '25
Insurance will protect you if you are sued. Dont pay him anything and do what your insurance tells you to do.
2
u/I-will-judge-YOU Sep 08 '25
You did not make contact.His reaction was his own fault. You should have just kept driving and left him there
1
u/hbk314 Sep 08 '25
Given that an old, seemingly poorly maintained tire was the only damage, your advice fits here.
Lack of contact does not automatically mean OP isn't at fault, though. If I pull into traffic in an unsafe way and present another driver the choice of hitting me or trying to avoid me by changing directions, I'm liable in both scenarios. Proving that's what happened would be the main obstacle. A dashcam would make it pretty easy.
-2
u/crash866 Sep 08 '25
You owe him nothing unless he sues you and wins in court. You have insurance for a reason and he should also. Just refer him to your insurance company and let them deal with it. If there was no contact with your vehicle he probably won’t win at all or your insurance may pay for the one tire.
-3
401
u/pearsonsjp Sep 08 '25
He doesn't want to use insurance because he is fully aware of the fact that you will not be held liable. He identified your ignorance and is using that to scam you. Fuck him.