Thank you for your question. Please permit me to assist you with your concerns.Going purely by your facts, you may have 3 separate grounds for suit (which I welcome you to further research or ask me for additional clarification).1. You are pursuing a traditional negligence claim on basis that the party had a duty to inform of how the gate worked, they failed in that duty, and due to that failure you suffered injury. It is not a bad claim and your facts do support it. I cannot tell you if the judge will agree that they are negligent but I do agree that this is enough for a 'prima facie' claim (meaning you have enough to file suit and make a good case for it).2. You also have a potential case under a lesser known claim for 'res ipsa loquitur' which in Latin means that 'the thing speaks for itself'. It is essentially a claim that as you did not contribute in any way to the injury but were operating the vehicle correctly, damage took place from the defendant. You do not know what broke or why, but you are pointing to the damage and your lack of liability as a claim that he is responsible.3. There is also a lesser claim here for potential products liability. It may be that the issue is with the gate, and therefore it may be something where you could claim or show that the gate malfunctioned and pursue the manufacturer for the defect and damages.Good luck.
To continue this saga, I purchased my motor home (MH) in June 2010 and obtained MH insurance coverage with Progressive Insurance Company. A year later I filed a claim with Progressive for severe damage to the roof that was attributed to my negligence when I backed into a garage door with a low ceiling. The roof had to be replaced at a cost of $10,420 minus my deductible. As you can imagine my premium was raised by $122. When this second incident occurred, I had less than 3 years of insurance coverage with Progressive. Because it was the second incident during the first 3 years, my premium rate was increased by $595, whether or not I was considered to be at fault – it didn’t matter. The premium rate will not be reduced until the 3 year “incident forgiveness” period has expired and before I can be reinstated in good standing with Progressive at the same premium rate that I had after the first incident. I have now discontinued my coverage with Progressive as I can no longer afford the increase in premiums. To my detriment, I have had to obtain insurance coverage with an inferior insurance company with a questionable reputation. There’s no doubt in my mind that should there be an incident or accident occurring with this company, my welfare and financial interest will not be protected and the outcome could be a economic travesty. My question is, do I have grounds to sue the owner of the storage facility for the $21,420 increase in premiums that I would have to pay over the next 3 years to be reinstated and returned to my normal status with Progressive Insurance, or is there some other type of compensation that I should be pursuing?
Thank you for your follow-up, Herman.To answer directly, you can potentially sue for any and all 'direct' and foreseeable losses stemming from this accident. In other words if you can show that you were exposed to additional costs that 'but for' the accident you did not see, then it is a very real damage that likewise ends up being the responsibility of the party who damaged you. Therefore the increase in premiums, as it stems from the accident, is a very real loss for which you can demand recourse. These are called 'foreseeable damages'Good luck.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).