On Monday, March 10, my son was traveling on a highway in Indiana when he hit a pothole. The front, driver's side rim was damaged and had to be replaced.
I took a lot of pictures, filled out a tort claim form and mailed it in to get reimbursed for the cost of the rim.
A few days later I received a letter from the Indiana Attorney General's office notifying me that my Tort Claim had been received and that they will investigate it and notify me in writing within 90 days if my claim is approved.
When it was getting close to the 90 day deadline, I decided to call the Indiana Attorney General's office and see if I could get any info about my claim. I talked to a claims investigator who explained that he was waiting for INDOT (Indiana Department of Transportation) to respond back to their office regarding my claim. Just out of curiosity, I asked what they looked at when deciding for or against a pothole claim. He explained that if INDOT knew about this particular pothole and hadn't got around to fixing it yet, then more than likely I would be reimbursed. But, if it was a pothole that they did not know about, I would not get reimbursed. I asked the claim's investigator why don't INDOT just claim ignorance on all pothole claims. He explained that they would not do that because it would not be the truthful and honest thing to do. He told me that he would personally look into my claim and I would get a response before the 90 days were up.
About a week later I received this letter from the Tort Claims investigator:
Please be advised, we have completed out investigation of your claim, in which you indicate that your vehicle was damaged by a roadway deficiency/chuckhole on a state maintained roadway.
Under Indiana law, any person, including the State of Indiana, can only be liable for damages to another if he is negligent and fails to use reasonable care in his action. With respect to roadway deficiencies, in order for the State to be liable, the State, through its employees, must have: 1) prior knowledge of the deficiency, and, 2) a reasonable period of time to remove or repair the deficiency. The two conditions MUST be met before the State can be liable or negligent.
As part of our investigation, our office contacted the local Sub-District of the Indiana Department of Transportation which has charge of the maintenance of the state highways involved in this case. Our investigation revealed that the Indiana Department of Transportation did not have prior knowledge of the deficiency, and/or sufficient time to remove or repair the deficiency that caused damage to your vehicle. Thus, the State was not negligent in this matter.
Therefore, this letter will serve to inform you that the State of Indiana denies your claim.
I found out that, if denied, I could file a lawsuit. My feeling is that obtaining a lawyer would cost more than what I was trying to get reimbursed for. So I'm passing on that.
I am not making a claim of fraud, scam or corruption on the government's part.
But, to me, it seems pretty easy to claim ignorance and deny any negligence. I also feel that knowing one's only recourse (if denied) is to file a lawsuit carries some weight on deciding a claim.
0 comments