Insurance Agents advice on what to do if in a car accident

When did your accident happen? I heard there have been changes in the law because of the Reform but I am unclear when all of that took place and what the changes were.

In our case the MP was not able to name  a responsable but the man who was injured had a fracture in some vertabrae, he was ambulatory but in pain and they still put him in the cell to sleep and he was crying out every time he moved. I heard him all night from accross the patio.

I cannot answer the question about the hospital but it seems to me that if a person is bedridden and was in an accident they would let them be in a regular hospital as that person is technically at the disposition of the MP since they can go and visit if they need to ..but who knows..that is a good question

He should have insisted on seeing a doctor.  Or his family should have intervened.  Until he was evaluated by a doctor, the MP couldn't come to a conclusion anyway.  People really have to advocate for themselves here.

My accident was just outside Zamora, Michoacan in the summer of 2006. The laws haven't changed about everyone going to jail. But because both of my passangers and I were injured with fractures, I didn't have to go to jail. I don't know if the other drivers were taken to jail or not. It was pretty obvious who was at fault and he had insurance, being a commercial truck, and his insurance stepped right up. But they did send someone to the ER to eavesdrop on us and our doctors by skulking around, to find out of there was some way to get out of paying. No such luck.

slaintes do not be so sure, when I get mad I get really quiet and then hell breaks loose.. My nickname at work was M & M for Murder and Mayhem.. a Chinese customer who did not keep his word gave me that nickname..

The man saw a doctor at Cruz Roja. Maybe poor Mexicans do not get the same treatment as foreigners..  just maybe..his family was not with him at night so there was no one to intervene for him and they had to get a permit to come and talk to him for 15mn just like the family of the other people.

I would hope that poor Mexicans and foreigners are treated the same. Did he see a doctor the day of the accident?

He was taken by ambulance to Cruz Roja from the accident and had X-rays and then was taken to the police dpt. I did not see how.
We were all Mexican citizens, 2 middle class and 1 poor man..and we were treated the same way.. well maybe because of my age I was allowed to keep my glasses after I refused to give them up.

How long did it take you to take your car out?

By the way the MP told my lawyer I should not have been in there but because the transito was pissed off at the other driver adjuster and had a fight with him I was lumped in ..who knows what that was about..If the law did not change why did the man who was hurt spend the night on cement and what was I there ?Or why did you spend a night in jail?

The van driver did not hit anyone he was injured and ambulatory..looks to me like you were not treated the same as he was.

Perhaps the doc at CR misread the xrays and didn't see a fracture. Otherwise, he would have not been sent to jail but to a hospital instead.

My car was totaled. My insurance paid me for my car and recovered the money from the other insurance company. They tried to get my claim processed more quickly than the other insurance would have done.

I didn't spend a night in jail. Just an afternoon lying on a bench outside the MP's office before I said, "Enough" and demanded to go back to my hospital bed.

The doctors told the lawyers and the MP he had a fracture , I was there when the doctor told us. The people involved had to go to Cruz Roja to hear about the condition of the people involved so there is no doubt everyone knew he had a fracture.
He also had diabetes, a bad heart could not breath well and was way overweight. He was in bad health altogether.
. Poor Mexicans do not get the same treatment as middleclass Mexicans or foreigners.
He was given pain killers and that was it.then his family was called so they would bring him something to eat as he had to have food because of his condition.He had a public defenser  but that is differnt from a private lawyer..
He had no insurrance for his car and I  do not know if he was with Seguro Popular. He was anxious to get out because his mother was in the hospital but was escorted by the police to jail although he and his family were the ones injured.

His car was in bad shape but he and his son are mechanics so hopefully he can fix it. The other car was also in bad shape and was not drivable, I had nothing just a few scratches.
The man was not allowed to leave when he complained about pain and was told to take pain killers, he had no option about leaving and neither did we for that matter.

It is great that your insurrance was so good.  We had very good luck with or insurrance in the past either.
Did they determined that day that you were not responsbale? The problem with us is that they were not able to make a decision although all the reports came back so they sent everyone to the drawing board saying they had to come up with a responsable party.. so I cannot wait to hear the verdict on that one..We were released because they had everything they needed but it is not over yet.. We will be ask to come back next week..

It sounds like the MP in Michoacan was in a better mood or more on the ball than here or may be you had a clear case..You were lucky everything went fine..although having surgery is not something I wish on anyone.

I was in an accident in 2001 on the carretara just past Super lake. I was T-boned, fortunately just behind the driver's seat. My seat belt saved my life. My left clavicle was severed and I had broken ribs. Was in the Red Cross for several hours after the fire fighters extricated me. Honestly, last I heard of it. When got home to Toronto it turned out I had a collapsed lung, three crushed ribs, and the rest (all on the left side) were cracked. Recuperated here for 10 days. That was it. Certainly no jail.

We were in an accident in 2010 in Joco. Both drivers were at fault. I had a broken rib and a twisted knee and was taken by ambulance to the little hospital in Joco. They didn't have an X-ray machine but I was pretty sure my rib was broken. I went into Chapla for an X-ray the next day.and it was. Both drivers had insurance, the adjusters agreed on 50/50, and no one went to jail. Has the law changed since then?

Brigitte, is it possible the old guy couldn't afford medical care so he didn't want to go to a hospital? Also, wouldn't he be charged for not having insurance? It is my understanding that a minimum $3,000,000 peso liability coverage is mandatory.

I was told by various people that the law changed and that came along wit the "reform".. I do not not is that is correct but that is what I was told.

I do not know what charges there will be. The old man was driving without insurrance, was tailgaiting me so I would imagine that would go against him. He did not hit me so not sure beside the tailgaiting and the no insurrance what they could charge him on.
The third guy hit the old man and scratch my car. He was on the left handside lane passing and hit the van so I guess he will be charge with that but I do not know yet since the MP was not able to establish who was responsable from the reports and they sent everyone back saying they had to investigate further..
I was told by someone either the police or the insurrance that the family had been in an accident sometimes recently and that they were after money.
The doctor of the cruz roja released him and I know that the insurrance and police wanted him to sign off on something so we did not have to go to the MP and he did not want to sign. Then he signed but too late.
Everything seemed to be on a time schedule...
My husband also said that our release was delayed because the family did not want to sign off a release. His wife and two kids were very bruised and the kid had a problem with his ankle . The old man was in jail with us and wanted out and signed without problems so I am not sure what the hang up was, I believe it was his wife but again I was not there so I cannot tell.
Yes it is against the law not to have liaibility insurrance
I do not know either if the old man was offered to go to the hospital and refused..
As we were held a lot of conversations went on between the insurrance and lawyers and public defenser we were not privy to.

I will know more when I get the decision of the MP from the lawyer and will ask more questions then..

Flamingo since the insurrance made a deal there was no need for jail or MP. The problem in my case is that the family did not want to settle and when they decided to settle and were negociating with the other party and his insurrance the time ran out..
Again the time schedule..
The other man insurrance and the transito got into it and the transito made it difficult for everyone, that I heard at the MP.

If everyone has insurrance and people work it out there is no need for jail. The jail is all about finding out who will pay and if one person does not agree then you end up in jail.

You have so much time to work it out and I do not know what that ime is.. The two parties were working it out but the infamous time ran out..

We know that we are  innocent until proven guilty so that changed..they could have fooled me  by the way we were  treated but that is a change. I was told  that at the point we were we had to be detained and could not post bond until the investigation was over. I understood that this part of the new law and the Reform  but I do not know if that is a fact. Everyone at the police was blaming the Reform  for all kinds of things and for making it more difficult for the police to go after criminals so..who knows.. I will ask  but at this point I know there where changes but I do not know what the changes were  for sure.

If the third party had had insurrance or would not have been difficult to deal with we probably would not have gotten to jail..
The two people with insurance agreed and signed that we would not claim anything against the other prty but the third man who did not have insurrance did not want to agree to that at first.

I have 3,000,000 peso liability with Bellon Insurance, but I am not sure it is mandatory, but that is what we chose for our policy.

It likely won't keep you out of jail if you're involved in an accident where there are injuries.

one answer..

The law about being at the disposition of the MP was always there  but as of June 1, 2016, this year you cannot post bond until the investigation is over and you have to stay for a minimum of 48h max 72h so if you end up at the MP you will be detained...get ready or negociate right away.

I asked when I could get the car and I was told it would depend on the judgement.

I was told that as of yesterday a conclusion had been reached by "Guadalajara" but we do not know what it is . My lawyer will call me on Tuesday to let me know of the decision and also of my next appointment with the MP which should be Thursday or Friday.

So I guess if you find yourself in a similar situation , this is what you can expect.

sm1mex wrote:I have 3,000,000 peso liability with Bellon Insurance, but I am not sure it is mandatory, but that is what we chose for our policy.

Yes, that is the minimum mandatory amount one must have to drive in Jalisco. Not sure about other states.

Darn! Other than attempting to make it all about you, what good are personal stories from 10, 5 and now 15 years ago? Maybe you would care to relate something that happened to you in Intercourse, Pennsylvania 20 years ago and attempt to apply that to an actual event from this week?

What the hell was that all about? BTW, we read your dribble the first time. No need to repost.

sir wrote:Darn! Other than attempting to make it all about you, what good are personal stories from 10, 5 and now 15 years ago? Maybe you would care to relate something that happened to you in Intercourse, Pennsylvania 20 years ago and attempt to apply that to an actual event from this week?

David wrote:What the hell was that all about?  BTW, we read your dribble the first time. No need to repost.

Who are you referring to? Brigitte?
As the post preceding yours was their first post on this thread.

My policy also covers a lawyer to help in an accident situation.

Scary, to say the least.

Would a passenger also be jailed/"detained?"

I heard by hearsay that in one instance, a witness was "detained" just because he said he saw what happened.

I also wonder if it's the same in a auto vs. pedestrian situation? Would the pedestrian also go to jail?

And I'm wondering what more an attorney could do than the adjusters since I'm guessing in most instances, it's really about $$$.

No one but the drivers were detained so I do not know. I had 2 passengers and the van driver 3..
There were many witnesses and no one was detained in this case.. I do not know if they detained witnesses or not..
The attorney spent 2 days between the MP and the police  the adjuster was not around.  The attorney advise me on what to sign ..not sure if the adjuster would have done the same thing. You can ask for a public defender if you do not have the money for the attorney.  It is all about liability ..and money .
I had lunch with my friend and apparently the lawyers worked hard and were at the MP and police and Guadalajara for the 2 days. so I am glad I had a lawyer rather than the adjuster .
The lawyer is also going to help me get the car out and be there when we are told about the decision.

I have legal aid as well and I am happy I do.

Given that most of the audience here doesn't speak fluent Spanish it is important that you choose an insurance company that can send out an English speaking adjuster.