Just crashed my dad's car !need avise!
Just crashed my dad's car !need avise!
Okay so the story goes like this, I’m driving back from work in my dad's new Honda Del Sol (my father bought it two weeks ago and it still has no insurance) so I’m driving in Two-lane one-way street on the left lane and there's this guy and his wife driving in the same lane (at least 250ft in front) so I noticed that he turns on his left turn signal and begins to slow down to make a left turn so I switched to the right lane (this happened about 100ft from where he was) and then right before I passed by him he decided to turn right instead, cutting me off (with his left turn signal still blinking) I was way too close to him to be able to stop so we crashed, fortunately no one was injured. Okay so here is the problem(s) first we were both driving with a learners permit without a 21yo or older person with a valid drivers license sitting next to us, plus I have no insurance because my father just bought the car and his insurance company denied coverage for that vehicle so he threatened with withdrawing all the cars (4) from the policy and they just told us this week that they would accept it, but he hasn't had any time to take the car to insurance company. so anyway we have 4 witnesses that say that he cut me off plus the police report also places him at fault, normally this would mean that he has to pay for the damage to my car but since I have no insurance we would probably have to go to court and I could wind up in more trouble than its worth. So I did my best to come to an arrangement with him and he told me that he would think about it and that he'll call me back, but I just want to know what are my options or what could happen if he decides to go to court. My parents and my friends are all very negative saying that I am probably going to get in a lot of trouble and that I would have to pay for his car and stuff. so i seriously need some advise from someone that has been or knows someone that has been in a similar situation. i'd really Appreciate any help you guys can give me.Thanks ya'll
Seems to me that it's in his best interest to not take it to court if he was driving on a learners permit as well. Remind him that you aren't the only one with something to lose and that he should take responsibility for his stupidity and deal with things outside the legal system or you'll both pay a much dearer price, the priveledge of driving.
well I dont know for sure cause I've bever been in this situation, but since you're "not at fault," your insurance shouldnt come into the situation at all. Yes, you will most likely end up with a fine (or worse) for driving without insurance, but that doesnt change the fact that the other guy is responsible for causing the accident. His insurance is still liable for your damage and his (if he has collision-- if he doesnt, he's screwed). That's just my take on it.
Anyways, what the hell are you doing driving with no insurance and a learners permit w/ nobody else in the car??
Anyways, what the hell are you doing driving with no insurance and a learners permit w/ nobody else in the car??
-
AZhitman
- Administrator
- Posts: 54542
- Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 2:04 am
- Car: 58 L210, 63 Bluebird RHD, 64 NL320, 65 SPL310, 66 411 RHD, 67 WRL411, 68 510 SR20, 75 280Z RB25, 77 620 SR20, 79 B310, 90 Z32, 91 GTi-R, 92 Silvia Qs, 98 S14, 23 Z.
- Location: Surprise, Arizona
- Contact:
EXACTLY what he said. Allow it to go to court. Good luck.
People who think they can work out things "on the side" are stupid. Just stupid.
Take the citation for no license/no insurance (you deserve them). The other guy will be on the hook for your repairs, but if he has no insurance, you'll have to go civil claim, which is nearly impossible to enforce (if you win).
You (and Dad) need a smack in the head. People who drive w/o insurance should have their cars impounded.
People who think they can work out things "on the side" are stupid. Just stupid.
Take the citation for no license/no insurance (you deserve them). The other guy will be on the hook for your repairs, but if he has no insurance, you'll have to go civil claim, which is nearly impossible to enforce (if you win).
You (and Dad) need a smack in the head. People who drive w/o insurance should have their cars impounded.
First of all thanks for replying.so what you are saying is that aside from a ticket there is no difference whether or not i had insurance, it's still his fault. and yes i know it was stupid to drive with no isurance and a learners permit w/ nobody else in the car but today i couldn't get someone to give me a ride to work so i had to, and yea i did get a ticket for "failure to provide proof of insurance" and "learners permit violation". in other words lession learned.fiznat wrote:well I dont know for sure cause I've bever been in this situation, but since you're "not at fault," your insurance shouldnt come into the situation at all. Yes, you will most likely end up with a fine (or worse) for driving without insurance, but that doesnt change the fact that the other guy is responsible for causing the accident. His insurance is still liable for your damage and his (if he has collision-- if he doesnt, he's screwed). That's just my take on it.
Anyways, what the hell are you doing driving with no insurance and a learners permit w/ nobody else in the car??
-
Bubba1
- Moderator
- Posts: 16082
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
- Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS
Hmmmm. That's a shame. Sorry about your predicament. There's a couple of issues of here. I don't think it's as bleak as you say.
The accident itself: If the other driver admits he was at fault, and the estimate is reasonable, he may elect to pay for the damages without insurance company involvement. That's the ideal situation. I think a lot will depend on what the officers report says. If the officer says he was clearly at fault, it may not be so bad for you. I believe the fact that you were operating an uninsured vehicle without a drivers license should not affect his guilt with regard to the damages. You didn't mention if he included those facts about your lack of insurance and no license in his report.
Insurance coverage. It looks like you and your dad may lucked out here that his insurance company agreed to apply coverage to the car. Your dad may face some problems for operating a car without insurance and then allowing you to drive it. I strongly recommend that your dad get some proof that the coverage began when he first took possession of the car. He may need that to cover both his tush and yours, especially if you live in a "no fault" state.
You: I can't vouch for the trouble you're in personally with your folks for driving without a licensed driver present and driving an uninsured vehicle. You didn;t mention if the officer gave you any tickets. If he did, I'd say you may have one problem. The insurance matter can be cleared up if you dad gets an insurance cert that shows an effective date before your accident. but driving with a learner's permit without a licensed driver was pretty dumb. I'm afraid there's not much you're going to be able to do to avoid that ticket.
Good luck
The accident itself: If the other driver admits he was at fault, and the estimate is reasonable, he may elect to pay for the damages without insurance company involvement. That's the ideal situation. I think a lot will depend on what the officers report says. If the officer says he was clearly at fault, it may not be so bad for you. I believe the fact that you were operating an uninsured vehicle without a drivers license should not affect his guilt with regard to the damages. You didn't mention if he included those facts about your lack of insurance and no license in his report.
Insurance coverage. It looks like you and your dad may lucked out here that his insurance company agreed to apply coverage to the car. Your dad may face some problems for operating a car without insurance and then allowing you to drive it. I strongly recommend that your dad get some proof that the coverage began when he first took possession of the car. He may need that to cover both his tush and yours, especially if you live in a "no fault" state.
You: I can't vouch for the trouble you're in personally with your folks for driving without a licensed driver present and driving an uninsured vehicle. You didn;t mention if the officer gave you any tickets. If he did, I'd say you may have one problem. The insurance matter can be cleared up if you dad gets an insurance cert that shows an effective date before your accident. but driving with a learner's permit without a licensed driver was pretty dumb. I'm afraid there's not much you're going to be able to do to avoid that ticket.
Good luck
-
stillmatic
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2003 12:33 pm
The least they'll do to you is prohibit you from getting a driver's license until the age of 21. Driving without a license is a misdemeanor in any state. Not only that, but you'll also be fined for not having an insurance. Forget about getting money for the car because it'll most likely end up in an impound. It sucks, but you got to be responsible for your actions.
-
MasterMan
- Posts: 2849
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 11:11 am
- Car: nothing running at the moment city buses "uck here
- Contact:
why would u drive the car without insurance, that makes me angry man i got hit by someone without insurance now i have to go thru all this BS, maby next time take a bus or somthing dude, thats really not cool that you were driving without insurance..
plus the fact that you would drive by yourself with a larners permit what is wrong with you?! granted it was the other guys fault but come on man thats messed up..
plus the fact that you would drive by yourself with a larners permit what is wrong with you?! granted it was the other guys fault but come on man thats messed up..
-
BoostFab
- Posts: 3529
- Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 8:23 am
- Car: S13cp, S13fb, S14z
- Location: Nismo Land
- Contact:
don't let the guy talk you out of it--to favor himself and stay away from under the table settlement. file a claim with their insurance.
you have the police report, which identified his fault, and you have witnesses. contact his insurance ASAP don't be scared if he want to take it to court--you will guarrantee a win because you have the police report.
Word of advice: don't be stupid and driving with out insurance. i hate those people all my life, because i was a victim of non-insured driver; a dude t-boned me once without insurance and guess what, my wallet wasn't happy.
you have the police report, which identified his fault, and you have witnesses. contact his insurance ASAP don't be scared if he want to take it to court--you will guarrantee a win because you have the police report.
Word of advice: don't be stupid and driving with out insurance. i hate those people all my life, because i was a victim of non-insured driver; a dude t-boned me once without insurance and guess what, my wallet wasn't happy.
Just a quick FYI... If you had been in Pa when this had happened, you would have had to call your dad to come get you from Jail, and your car would be impounded right now. They have that thing where if you get stopped or get in an accident and dont have insurance, they call a tow truck and take your car then and there. Why didnt you drive one of the other 4, insured, cars that you mentioned?
stillmatic wrote: Forget about getting money for the car because it'll most likely end up in an impound. It sucks, but you got to be responsible for your actions.
I know i am responsible for my actions and i am not trying to simply "get out of it" even though it might sound like i am, if i have to pay for my dads car then so be it,same goes for the tickets or any penalty i get if do get one, the reason i posted is because i wanted to know what could happen because my parents and some family friends are telling me that when you rear-end someone you are the one that has to pay for the damages regardless of how it all happened or whos fault is it, even though i have heard this before many times from different people i wanted to know if it was true because it didn't make sense to me, so i decided to ask arround and do some reaserch, it seems like its a bunch of bulls*** though. and i am not going to hold my self responsible for the accident itself because i did not cause it so don't think it's fair that i have to pay for his car.
actually i misscounted, it's three because my old(84) nissan maxima was junkied last sunday due to a lot of engine problems, and the three cars i mentioned belong to my sister, mom, and father(work car) but they all work so they need them, what i ussually do is get a ride from one of them but today being saturday our shcedules did not match, and i couldn't get a ride.lookatme! wrote:why didn't you drive one of the other 4, insured, cars that you mentioned?
-
nissanrcer240
- Posts: 1657
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 5:22 am
- Car: 90 Nissan 240SX SR20DET
- Contact:
Damm man, sorry to hear about it. I know gettin a ride to work everyday is a bicth, I feel you on that one. As far as hittin someone in the back, I heard that like 90% of the time if you hit someone in the back its your fault, but since you have witnesses I dont think you have to worry about it. I wouldnt think so anyways, could be wrong though
-
Bubba1
- Moderator
- Posts: 16082
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 1:42 pm
- Car: 2003 Nissan 350z
2024 Honda HR-V
2008 Toyota Corolla S
2001 Toyota Avalon XLS
cesarmd7 wrote:I know i am responsible for my actions and i am not trying to simply "get out of it" even though it might sound like i am, if i have to pay for my dads car then so be it,same goes for the tickets or any penalty i get if do get one, the reason i posted is because i wanted to know what could happen because my parents and some family friends are telling me that when you rear-end someone you are the one that has to pay for the damages regardless of how it all happened or whos fault is it, even though i have heard this before many times from different people i wanted to know if it was true because it didn't make sense to me, so i decided to ask arround and do some reaserch, it seems like its a bunch of bulls*** though. and i am not going to hold my self responsible for the accident itself because i did not cause it so don't think it's fair that i have to pay for his car.actually i misscounted, it's three because my old(84) nissan maxima was junkied last sunday due to a lot of engine problems, and the three cars i mentioned belong to my sister, mom, and father(work car) but they all work so they need them, what i ussually do is get a ride from one of them but today being saturday our shcedules did not match, and i couldn't get a ride.
You are correct that in a rear end collision, the driver behind is traditionally responsible. But since the officer noted on his report that the other driver caused the accident, you should be okay.The lack of insurance is actually more your dad's problem than yours UNLESS you were using the car without his permission. If you had his permission to use it, then before anyone here flames you, ask them how many children ask their parents if they followed thru with getting the car added to the policy before driving it. No one. This is why I suggested that your father could face potential problems here. This could have been far worse had the officer impounded the vehicle, which he could have easily done. Sounds like the officer assumed the car WAS insured but you simply didn't have proof of it. This gives your dad a golden opportunity to repair his error before questions are raised.
Your father also faces potential problems if he gave you permission to operate that car without a licensed driver present.I recommend not fighting this ticket because in addition to being guilty, your father's actions could be brought into it. Not a good thing.
As far as insurance goes, much will depend on the state you live in. In some states, your insurance company may actually pay to get it fixed and then THEY get reimbursed by the other insurance company, taking you out of the middle. I don't know which state the accident happened or it's laws.
I say get some estimates quickly and contact the other driver. If he admits responsibility, you should fare fine whether it goes thru insurance or his wallet. If he fights you, then contact his insurance company, as you have the police report showing he caused it and you have witnesses.
I'm not going to berate you about driving without a license as you've already said you accept responsibility for your actions and that's very mature. I just don't see this situation as being as bleak as you think.
I'm agreeing wtih bubba1 on this one. Being that you are a minor, your father is resposible for your actions. His name is on the title, so he is responsible for the vehicle and it's insurance. Just hope you don't lose any driving privileges and still be able to get ur licience when ur 16. Did ur dad let you drive the vehicle to work? If so, your dad is the idiot in this situation.
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bubba1 "]The lack of insurance is actually more your dad's problem than yours UNLESS you were using the car without his permission.
Actually, it is the DRIVER'S responsibility to make sure the vehicle they are driving is 100% legal. This is true in ANY state. I could give you permission to drive my 4 wheeler down Main Street, doesn't mean it's my fault that you were stupid enough to do it. The driver is ultimately responsible for their own actions.
If you had his permission to use it, then before anyone here flames you, ask them how many children ask their parents if they followed thru with getting the car added to the policy before driving it. No one.
I did. My father went out of his way to involve me in the entire process. I sat down and went over the insurance policy with him, and listened while he was on the phone with them.
I agree that your father was SERIOUSLY out of line and should never have granted you permission to drive. That is poor parenting in my opinion. But who am I to judge? (Oh yeah... I'm the potential innocent victim when HIS irresponsible parenting leads to you killing me in an accident... that's who)
This is why I suggested that your father could face potential problems here.
I agree that there should and could be a number of things that the old man can get in trouble for. But the insurance thing "at the time of accident" is the driver's fault. Dad, however, can (in certain states) get in trouble for registering a vehicle without insurance, and as you mentioned he can get in serious s*** for giving you permission to drive.
Actually, it is the DRIVER'S responsibility to make sure the vehicle they are driving is 100% legal. This is true in ANY state. I could give you permission to drive my 4 wheeler down Main Street, doesn't mean it's my fault that you were stupid enough to do it. The driver is ultimately responsible for their own actions.
If you had his permission to use it, then before anyone here flames you, ask them how many children ask their parents if they followed thru with getting the car added to the policy before driving it. No one.
I did. My father went out of his way to involve me in the entire process. I sat down and went over the insurance policy with him, and listened while he was on the phone with them.
I agree that your father was SERIOUSLY out of line and should never have granted you permission to drive. That is poor parenting in my opinion. But who am I to judge? (Oh yeah... I'm the potential innocent victim when HIS irresponsible parenting leads to you killing me in an accident... that's who)
This is why I suggested that your father could face potential problems here.
I agree that there should and could be a number of things that the old man can get in trouble for. But the insurance thing "at the time of accident" is the driver's fault. Dad, however, can (in certain states) get in trouble for registering a vehicle without insurance, and as you mentioned he can get in serious s*** for giving you permission to drive.
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
Originally posted by Altiman94 "]Being that you are a minor, your father is resposible for your actions.
Not true. Plenty of 15 and 16 year old kids go on trial for any multitude of offenses and are held responsible.
His name is on the title, so he is responsible for the vehicle and it's insurance.
Yes dad's responsible for making sure it has insurance if it's being driven by dad. But if someone else drives it, it becomes their responsibility to make sure the vehicle is legal to drive. If he drove it... he is responsible.
Not true. Plenty of 15 and 16 year old kids go on trial for any multitude of offenses and are held responsible.
His name is on the title, so he is responsible for the vehicle and it's insurance.
Yes dad's responsible for making sure it has insurance if it's being driven by dad. But if someone else drives it, it becomes their responsibility to make sure the vehicle is legal to drive. If he drove it... he is responsible.
-
MaineExport
- Posts: 3784
- Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2002 3:27 pm
- Car: 95 Nissan 240SX FAL fans AEM intake Hot Shot header Apexi N1 dual Exhaust VLSD ABS NX 50 shot
What exactly is giving you the impression that i don't understand right from wrong, i know what i did and i understand that there are consequences for my actions, i was just asking is for advise as to what i should do, because i have never been in an accident before so i don't exactly know how to deal with the whole situation especially with the whole insurance thing.Vengeance wrote:Dude your 19 years old and you don't understand right from wrong?
Whether or not you have insurance has nothing to do with who is at fault in the accident. The other guy F'd up, his insurance is going to have to cover the cost of getting your car repaired. It's as simple as that.
With regards to your driving unlicensed and without insurance, well... that's on you. You're going to have to suck up the consiquences of that. The good news is, those consiquences have nothing to do with getting your pop's car repaired / replaced.
With regards to your driving unlicensed and without insurance, well... that's on you. You're going to have to suck up the consiquences of that. The good news is, those consiquences have nothing to do with getting your pop's car repaired / replaced.
-
C-Kwik
- Moderator
- Posts: 8070
- Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2002 9:28 pm
- Car: 2013 Chevy Volt, 1991 Honda CRX DX
Check on a couple of things. First your state's road laws. I don't know Florida laws, but in California, there is a very specific law that says a person turning right must do so from as close to the right hand edge of the road as practicable. I'd bet there is a similar law in most states. Secondly, most, if not all states should have a lane change law which would indicate that a person can not change lanes or move from the lane they are in until it is safe to do so. These two laws would be your ally in California. But don't expect this will put you 0% at fault automatically. Your speed and avoidance can factor in. If you are speeding, there is room to argue for comparitive negligence. Avoidance is not really a specific law, but is more a common sense thing where if you can safely avoid an accident, you should. Not that you were negligent in any way, anticipating possible arguments is important in any kind of a disputed case.
Secondly, it helps that the police report is on your side, but be prepared not to use it at all. It may not be admissible in court at it is technically hearsay. Hearsay is basically a term for someone else providing testimony for a witness. It will depend on the judge hearing the case, but in many cases, even if the officer shows, it won't do any good as the officer usually has not witnessed the actual accident occur. Secondly, the officer's opinion of who is at fault is just that....only an opinion. Any decisions should be based on fact. I've discounted may police reports when I argued liability as the facts the officer took and his investigation was incomplete. This happens a lot actually. Officers usually only look for one person to be at fault, but in civil cases, it's not hard to argue comparative negligence. The witnesses can be key as well. If it comes down to trial, then it may depend on whether or not the witnesses are willing to testify. And you can certainly subpeona them, but witnesses that volunteer to go and testify tend to make better witnesses. If they are forced, they may carry some resentment. A judge may take the police report as evidence, but it can be argued by the defense that they have no opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or the police officer that took the info.
As far as being on a learner's permit, it has nothing to do with liability. You can be driving on a suspended license, but that is not an argument in liability, unless a law actually says so. I doubt this will be the case. In fact, in California, there are specific vehicle codes that state that being guilty of having a suspended license, DUI, or speeding are not automatically admissable as evidence in a civil matter. In a civil case, you have to prove negligence, causation and damages. Negligence is basically what the person did wrong. Causation is they did something wrong that actually caused the damages. And damages, you have to prove that damages occured and to what extent. Causation is usually the key. For example, a drunk driver stops at a red light. He is sitting there for 5 seconds when someone comes along and rear ends him. He is found guilty by the Police for DUI. The Negligence is he was DUI. But the DUI did not cause the accident. Therefore he is not at fault. But the other driver's negligence may have been failure to look out, or driving too fast for conditions(condition being there is a car stopped in front of him) or following too closely. One of these three will likely have caused the accident so he is liable. Damages are generally easy to prove.
Lastly, I didn't see anywhere if the other person had insurance or not. In any comparative liabilty state, the negligent person's insurance is required to pay. I don't know what the liability laws in Florida are. And I know very little about no-fault liability. You may want to see about reporting a claim under the other person's insurance. Unless the driver is specifically excluded from the policy, there will probably be coverage for him. Having no license or a permit is usually not something an insurance policy excludes for. It's certainly wirth a shot and can save you a lot of hassle. And if they deny coverage or even liability, you're still no worse off.
And if you do go to court, go prepared. Make diagrams. Take photos of the scene and your car. Don't assume you can walk in with a police report and expect to win. If he has liability coverage, and they denied liability, either all or in part, they may go with him to court to help him argue the case. They may not let the insurance company speak, but in any legal matter, a party is entitled to counsel and can have them on hand to help present a case. If you want to have an attorney, you will end up paying a percentage to the attorney from your settlement, if any. If you had made a claim against the other carrier first and they denied liabilty, ask them why. Argue the liability even if it seems pointless as they will likely tell you what evidence they based their decision on. This will help you anticipate what their arguments will be in court.
I'm probably being a bit overly analytical here, but I just tend to try and be thorough. However, if this other person has insurance and if Florida is a Comparative liabilty state, it probably won't need to go court at all.
Secondly, it helps that the police report is on your side, but be prepared not to use it at all. It may not be admissible in court at it is technically hearsay. Hearsay is basically a term for someone else providing testimony for a witness. It will depend on the judge hearing the case, but in many cases, even if the officer shows, it won't do any good as the officer usually has not witnessed the actual accident occur. Secondly, the officer's opinion of who is at fault is just that....only an opinion. Any decisions should be based on fact. I've discounted may police reports when I argued liability as the facts the officer took and his investigation was incomplete. This happens a lot actually. Officers usually only look for one person to be at fault, but in civil cases, it's not hard to argue comparative negligence. The witnesses can be key as well. If it comes down to trial, then it may depend on whether or not the witnesses are willing to testify. And you can certainly subpeona them, but witnesses that volunteer to go and testify tend to make better witnesses. If they are forced, they may carry some resentment. A judge may take the police report as evidence, but it can be argued by the defense that they have no opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or the police officer that took the info.
As far as being on a learner's permit, it has nothing to do with liability. You can be driving on a suspended license, but that is not an argument in liability, unless a law actually says so. I doubt this will be the case. In fact, in California, there are specific vehicle codes that state that being guilty of having a suspended license, DUI, or speeding are not automatically admissable as evidence in a civil matter. In a civil case, you have to prove negligence, causation and damages. Negligence is basically what the person did wrong. Causation is they did something wrong that actually caused the damages. And damages, you have to prove that damages occured and to what extent. Causation is usually the key. For example, a drunk driver stops at a red light. He is sitting there for 5 seconds when someone comes along and rear ends him. He is found guilty by the Police for DUI. The Negligence is he was DUI. But the DUI did not cause the accident. Therefore he is not at fault. But the other driver's negligence may have been failure to look out, or driving too fast for conditions(condition being there is a car stopped in front of him) or following too closely. One of these three will likely have caused the accident so he is liable. Damages are generally easy to prove.
Lastly, I didn't see anywhere if the other person had insurance or not. In any comparative liabilty state, the negligent person's insurance is required to pay. I don't know what the liability laws in Florida are. And I know very little about no-fault liability. You may want to see about reporting a claim under the other person's insurance. Unless the driver is specifically excluded from the policy, there will probably be coverage for him. Having no license or a permit is usually not something an insurance policy excludes for. It's certainly wirth a shot and can save you a lot of hassle. And if they deny coverage or even liability, you're still no worse off.
And if you do go to court, go prepared. Make diagrams. Take photos of the scene and your car. Don't assume you can walk in with a police report and expect to win. If he has liability coverage, and they denied liability, either all or in part, they may go with him to court to help him argue the case. They may not let the insurance company speak, but in any legal matter, a party is entitled to counsel and can have them on hand to help present a case. If you want to have an attorney, you will end up paying a percentage to the attorney from your settlement, if any. If you had made a claim against the other carrier first and they denied liabilty, ask them why. Argue the liability even if it seems pointless as they will likely tell you what evidence they based their decision on. This will help you anticipate what their arguments will be in court.
I'm probably being a bit overly analytical here, but I just tend to try and be thorough. However, if this other person has insurance and if Florida is a Comparative liabilty state, it probably won't need to go court at all.