Re: [MV] legal case in Sacramento re camo-painted vehicles

From: NIGEL HAY (Nigelhay@tanksrus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Fri Dec 31 1999 - 01:56:55 PST


*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
In defence of olive drab and camo paint, it doesn't blend in quite well
enough to escape the eagle eyes of Traffic Wardens eager to issue parking
fines.
For several years in Canterbury here in the UK I often received tickets on
my GMC 6x6 ( As I didn't have a drive it was often discreetly parked in a
particuarly picturesque part of the ancient city) with the panel on the
ticket always made out to "101 AB" which was of course the unit making not
the vehicle registration number, despite having the vehicle registration
numbern discreetly stencilled on the winch bumper and rear bumperettes.
Doubtless this "registration mark" is still a mystery to this day.

On a more serious note, fully agreeeing with driving "a la lights on", but
I have seen several collectors in Landrovers (well it was hard to see)
driving along in vehicles totally wrapped in camo netting, with it draped on
every inch of the vehicle. These nets were also flapping loose virtually
touching the ground, running a very real risk of hooking onto roadsigns ,
pedestrians etc.

Perhaps they were trying to make themselves unrecognisable to speed cameras?

Alll the best for Y2K folks,
NIGE

----- Original Message -----
From: <MROG777@aol.com>
To: Military Vehicles List <mil-veh@uller.skylee.com>
Sent: Friday, December 31, 1999 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: [MV] legal case in Sacramento re camo-painted vehicles

> *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro*
> Okay, here is the scoop from a lawyer's perspective, which I feel I am
> qualified to give since I am one. Regarding the lawsuit in Sacramento,
there
> has been no mention as to whether or not the case is over and done with.
If
> it has been resolved via settlement or trial, there is nothing the MVPA
can
> do now. The civil legal system has a theory called res judicata which
> translaters into "you can't rehash old cases" in layman's terms. In the
> criminal field, its called double jeopardy. Same principle.
>
> Second, there has been no mention as to whether or not the owner of the
camo
> vehicle was at fault for the accident or not (ie. failed to yield the
right
> or way or whatever). If he was at fault for the accident, the camo paint
> sceme is really a non-issue as he was responsible for the plaintiff's
damages
> in the first place. Further, (and this will bother most respectible
folks),
> even if the owner of the camo vehicle was not at fault, most insurance
> companies will pay the plaintiff just to go away so they don't have to
> continue paying an attorney to defend their insured. This is called a
> "nuisance value settlement". For instance, the insurance company could
have
> paid the other driver $1,500.00 or so to drop her case. It is cheaper to
do
> this than to take the case to trial and win. From an insurance
perspective,
> even if you take the case to trial and win, you still lost because you
paid
> 10K to go through a trial and the American judicial system does not allow
the
> prevailing party to collect attorneys fees in most instances. It doesn't
> mean the other driver's case had any merit or that the paint sceme had
> anything to do with the cause of the accident. Insurance companies make
> "economic" decisions like this all the time.
>
> Regarding lawyers in general. Many are jerks. Most are really good
people
> who are trying to do the right thing by helping others. We wouldn't have
> OSHA and many of the other laws and regulations that keep us all safe if
it
> wasn't for lawyers or the plaintiff's lawyer who sued a table saw
> manufacturer for failing to put a safety guard on its machine because the
> cost outweighed what they would have to pay for the occasional finger or
hand
> that go cut-off.
>
> My 2 cents
>
> Mike Rogers
> 43 Willys MB
> San Diego, CA
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@uller.skylee.com>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to
<mil-veh-digest@uller.skylee.com>
> Send administrative queries to <mil-veh-request@uller.skylee.com>
>

===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@uller.skylee.com>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@uller.skylee.com>
Send administrative queries to <mil-veh-request@uller.skylee.com>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 05 2000 - 22:42:39 PST