Talk about adding insult to injury. Five months after a Long Island, New York grandma, Anna Cedeno, was killed while walking home from a local Costco, the insurance company, PURE, of the driver had the nerve to send a letter to Cedeno's family. And get this ... the letter demanded that her family pay $6,245 in damages to repair the very car that ran her over and killed her.
Anna Cedeno, a 70-year-old cancer survivor, was walking to catch a bus home when she was hit by a passing BMW. She died two hours later from injuries sustained in the accident. The driver of the car didn't even receive a citation because Anna Cedeno was jaywalking. Apparently in Long Island, jaywalking is a more serious crime than vehicular manslaughter.
More from The Stir: 19-Month-Old Shot to Death in Crib While Mom Was Unloading Gun
Cedeno's daughter, Monica, was going to attempt to sue the driver for negligence, but before she could take action, the driver's insurer, PURE, sent its own letter. "Our investigation shows that your client was responsible for the accident. We now look to your client’s estate for payment of the damages to our policyholder’s vehicle."
This is crazy! In the first place, why would any insurance company seek damages on behalf of a driver who killed a pedestrian? Last I checked, jaywalking was not an offense punishable by death. You've got to have balls the size of Texas to ask for money after you just committed vehicular manslaughter. I say the BMW driver should consider herself lucky that she wasn't charged with manslaughter and shrink away quietly, maybe take a defensive driving course or two.
It’s not common practice for an insurance company to seek damages from victims, even when the victim is at fault, in an accident. But since then, PURE has retracted its unconscionable request.
What do you think about suing a dead victim’s family for damages done to the assailant’s weapon?
Image via marcp_dmoz/Flickr