Loss of Use of a Go-Kart

[fishy]

My question involves a traffic accident in the State of: Washington

I was rear-ended while towing a competition go-kart on the way to the go-kart track. These are 100 MPH, $5,000+ go-karts, not a kid's toy. The accident was 100% the other driver's fault and he was cited.

The insurance company is covering all property damage without issue. They have compensated me for the physical damage to the car, the trailer, and the kart.

However, they are unwilling to compensate me for loss of use of the go-kart. I was without it for four weeks, and I normally go once every other week. When I do go, I take a day off work, using up one of my very limited vacation days.

So in the accident, I lost a day off work that would have been spent at the track (effectively a vacation) and two days use of the kart. The track rents go-karts at $500 a day if you don't have your own. My father who lives out of state had also planned a trip to visit in which we were going to go to the track, so neither of us got to go during his visit, so in a sense there was a double loss of use.

I'm considering filing a small claims case against the driver in order to recover this loss. Do I have a legal right to recover this, or is this not something that can be compensated?

I would be requesting compensation for the wages lost for the day off work, and about $300 for each day I couldn't go to the track, given that karts rent for $500 but it costs me about $200 a day in expenses to go myself.

[Mr. Knowitall]

If I understand, you want to sue somebody because you didn't spend several hundred dollars on recreational activities and didn't take a vacation day? Economic damage claims are based upon money you have to spend, not money you keep in your pocket.

[fishy]

I DID take a vacation day but I didn't get to use it the way I wanted to, thus effectively I lost it. I spent 3 hours on the side of the road waiting for a tow instead of getting to go karting.

I think of it this way: If I had been hit on the way to work, I could not have made it to work that day, so I could file for loss of wages. Why is it different that I had already filed to use vacation instead of having to call my boss and tell him to write me down for a vacation day since I can't make it in? No matter what, the accident prevented me from using a day on which I get paid in the way I wanted to. Do you only get lost wages if you make sure your company doesn't pay you for that day instead of using a vacation day if an accident keeps you out of work?

It costs me money to drive my car every time I get in it. So if someone totals my car, why do they owe me for loss of use? By the "saved you money" definition, I should be thanking them for preventing me from driving my car and spending money.

Maybe I should get the go-kart track, tire company, and gasoline companies to sue the guy. They lost me paying them!

If I have no legal grounds, I do want to know, but I am trying to figure out why the law doesn't cover my situation.

[Mr. Knowitall]

You can't sue for lost wages under the circumstances you describe because you didn't lose any wages (or vacation pay).

[fishy]

So in the future, if I end up in an accident on the way to work and can't make it to work, I should make sure I tell the company to not pay me that day instead of using a vacation day, since if I use a vacation day there is no loss of wages?

What do you do if your company doesn't allow unpaid days if you have vacation? You just lose a vacation day with no ability to recover anything?

Oh, and another question: If I had gone to the kart track that afternoon and rented a kart for $500, would the insurance company owe me for that rental (minus the expenses I would have incurred had I been able to use my own kart)?

[LawResearcherMissy]

You didn't lose any wages. You didn't lose any vacation pay. You still got paid, so there's nothing of that nature to recover.

You can only sue to recover actual money damages. What actual money damages have you suffered beyond the property damages that the insurance company is already covering?

[fishy]

I am coming to understand that because of my actions (technically LACK of action) I didn't lose any money and thus have nothing to recover.

This is why I asked if in the future, should I NOT use a vacation day to cover a lost day of work, and should I have rented a kart at $500 so I could show a loss? If I knew I would have been reimbursed, I would have gone three times while I was without the kart, and I'd have receipts for $1,500 that I would not have had to pay if I had my kart. Thus I'd have easily demonstrable losses and I wouldn't be pissed that I lost the end of the karting season to some idiot that wasn't paying attention.

I am no longer asking about recovery for this accident- I am asking about hypotheticals so I can act more intelligently in the future if something happens.

For example: If you are on your way to go on vacation for a week and are towing your fishing boat, and someone rear ends you, and you can't go fishing and lose that whole week, you are entitled to ZERO compensation, since your company was paying you and the driver did nothing but save you money?

[jk]

This is why I asked if in the future, should I NOT use a vacation day to cover a lost day of work, and should I have rented a kart at $500 so I could show a loss?

no and no. If you hadn't taken a vacation day, you still would not have a loss and renting a kart is not a loss either.

For example: If you are on your way to go on vacation for a week and are towing your fishing boat, and someone rear ends you, and you can't go fishing and lose that whole week, you are entitled to ZERO compensation, since your company was paying you and the driver did nothing but save you money?

How have you lost that week? You still have the week. You have lost nothing by not going fishing.

you did not lose any money other than the damages that are already being paid for.

[fishy]

I'm confused. I own a $5,000 asset that I can use any time I want. Someone damages that asset and now I can't use it. Why am I not owed anything if I go out and rent a replacement? I understand that there is no loss if I don't rent, but why am I NOT allowed to rent and be reimbursed the rental fee that I would not have had to pay had the accident not occurred? That seems like the most basic definition of liability.

Why are cars considered different? Everyone gives you a rental car while your car was in the shop. Why are other assets different?

What if I had pre-paid for the karting? Say I had paid $100 for the day beforehand and then couldn't go due to the accident. Is the $100 reimbursable? It sounds like it isn't because the only reason you were going was for pleasure, and pleasure has no value, so you didn't lose the $100, since you had already spent it, and the accident didn't cause you to spend it.

[jk]

fishy;469444]
Why are cars considered different? Everyone gives you a rental car while your car was in the shop. Why are other assets different?

because the loss of use of a car IS a loss if you use it to get to work. Cars are generally essential to continue with normal day to day life.

What if I had pre-paid for the karting? Say I had paid $100 for the day beforehand and then couldn't go due to the accident. Is the $100 reimbursable?

if it wasn't refundable, possibly.