LACR lawsuit

DanDunes818
Posts
6979
Joined
10/11/2008
Location
Portland, OR US
5/29/2024 11:41pm Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 7:36am

If 1/2 of this is true, I’m blown away. This sport has given that family a lot, but I guess it wasn’t enough so they stole a bag?  I lost my childhood second home / playground Indian Dunes as a kid to shitbags filing lawsuits after they did stupid shit. This is pretty dirty if true 

20
1
Ramrod
Posts
4956
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Ontario CA
5/30/2024 4:19am

Lots of good info to go off here. 

It's because anytime somebody mentions Cooksey, dudes go off the rails and freak out. But if the facts he displayed in his videos is correct, then...

It's because anytime somebody mentions Cooksey, dudes go off the rails and freak out. But if the facts he displayed in his videos is correct, then he's right. Every one that owns EKS goggles should take them straight to the trash can

Bad publicity for Eks Brand.

 

So the video is basically saying that PulpMx, RacerX and other media know about this but have not talked about it.  Cooksey is really throwing it out there.  Crazy story!

15
1
sandman768
Posts
7931
Joined
3/21/2014
Location
Saratoga Springs, NY US
5/30/2024 5:11am

Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I would support this goggle company….

 

11
5/30/2024 5:34am

It seems inconceivable that in a world as small as ours RT or someone from EKS wouldn't have heard about this thread on Vital.  This topic has to be extremely damaging to his brand.  I'm an EKS brand user, and until I hear a rebuttal from EKS or RT, I'll never wear my goggles again.  If this information is false, I would expect RT or someone who knows him to come on here and set the record straight.  We all know the risks we are taking when we get on a track.  If you're dumb enough to be racing without medical coverage, I don't feel sorry for you when that six figure bill shows up in the mail following a crash.  I got hurt at a track over 10 years ago, and just the bill for the helicopter ride was $50,000.  I don't know if this is still the case, but Mammoth used to require racers to have medical coverage in order to race.  It is easy to understand why.

8
1

The Shop

APLMAN99
Posts
12187
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
5/30/2024 5:36am
sandman768 wrote:
Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I...

Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I would support this goggle company….

 

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more. 


 

9
4
ElliotB16
Posts
1122
Joined
6/10/2019
Location
Cairo, GA US
5/30/2024 5:39am

Cookseys credibility is so low I would wait to hear the other side of the story 

7
8
5/30/2024 5:42am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 5:42am
sandman768 wrote:
Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I...

Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I would support this goggle company….

 

APLMAN99 wrote:
My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey...

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more. 


 

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

4
5/30/2024 5:45am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 7:15pm

Ill leave it to ML512 Michael to get correct info. Ill hold judgment. 

5
4
GrapeApe
Posts
8748
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX US
5/30/2024 5:52am
sandman768 wrote:
Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I...

Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I would support this goggle company….

 

APLMAN99 wrote:
My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey...

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more. 


 

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt...

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

There is definitely a lawsuit, he is right about that. The other stuff he is saying doesn't make much legal or logical sense.

1
APLMAN99
Posts
12187
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
5/30/2024 5:54am
sandman768 wrote:
Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I...

Wow! If true this is very disappointing. Why would US media outlets not mention this? Is the Bro code that deep? No way in hell I would support this goggle company….

 

APLMAN99 wrote:
My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey...

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more. 


 

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt...

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it work.  Certainly nothing that an attorney would take on a contingent basis.  You could spend $100K but collect nothing, and half the people wouldn't hear about the verdict anyway.  

4
DonM
Posts
8309
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
Fantasy
5/30/2024 5:55am

Typical Kooksey...put out half truths just to get the asylum riled up and create clicks... 

7
9
5/30/2024 6:01am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 6:02am
APLMAN99 wrote:
My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey...

My guess is that they don’t have all the details and they aren’t going to ‘fill in the blanks’ without that knowledge the way that Kooksey tends to do. His entire schtick is nothing but hot takes, nothing more. 


 

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt...

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

APLMAN99 wrote:
It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it...

It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it work.  Certainly nothing that an attorney would take on a contingent basis.  You could spend $100K but collect nothing, and half the people wouldn't hear about the verdict anyway.  

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to set the record straight.  This will certainly affect EKS sales.  I know I'm not buying anything more from them until I hear something from RT or EKS disputing this claim.

2
1
APLMAN99
Posts
12187
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
5/30/2024 6:13am
He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt...

He's either pretty sure about what happened in this case or he's a complete nut job, because if this information isn't true, Cooksey will no doubt end up in court over it.

APLMAN99 wrote:
It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it...

It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it work.  Certainly nothing that an attorney would take on a contingent basis.  You could spend $100K but collect nothing, and half the people wouldn't hear about the verdict anyway.  

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to...

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to set the record straight.  This will certainly affect EKS sales.  I know I'm not buying anything more from them until I hear something from RT or EKS disputing this claim.

I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If it isn't, he's going to wrestle around with a pig in the mud and only convince a small percentage that the salacious part isn't true.  

One thing to think about is that it sounds like the son turned 18 before the accident.  If that is the case, then it would be him listed as the plaintiff in the lawsuit not Rich, correct?  So it would be the son suing LACR, not Rich?  Is the son an owner of EKS?

1
GrapeApe
Posts
8748
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX US
5/30/2024 6:19am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 6:21am
APLMAN99 wrote:
It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it...

It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it work.  Certainly nothing that an attorney would take on a contingent basis.  You could spend $100K but collect nothing, and half the people wouldn't hear about the verdict anyway.  

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to...

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to set the record straight.  This will certainly affect EKS sales.  I know I'm not buying anything more from them until I hear something from RT or EKS disputing this claim.

APLMAN99 wrote:
I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If...

I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If it isn't, he's going to wrestle around with a pig in the mud and only convince a small percentage that the salacious part isn't true.  

One thing to think about is that it sounds like the son turned 18 before the accident.  If that is the case, then it would be him listed as the plaintiff in the lawsuit not Rich, correct?  So it would be the son suing LACR, not Rich?  Is the son an owner of EKS?

"ZACHARY PRICE TAYLOR, a minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, RICHARD TAYLOR"

That is the style of the case. Regardless, I'm sure this is a subrogation case and the insurance company is directing the litigation not Taylor.

 

7
5/30/2024 6:25am
APLMAN99 wrote:
It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it...

It would be a civil suit, and my guess is that there is very little that could be recovered from Kooksey in order to make it work.  Certainly nothing that an attorney would take on a contingent basis.  You could spend $100K but collect nothing, and half the people wouldn't hear about the verdict anyway.  

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to...

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to set the record straight.  This will certainly affect EKS sales.  I know I'm not buying anything more from them until I hear something from RT or EKS disputing this claim.

APLMAN99 wrote:
I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If...

I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If it isn't, he's going to wrestle around with a pig in the mud and only convince a small percentage that the salacious part isn't true.  

One thing to think about is that it sounds like the son turned 18 before the accident.  If that is the case, then it would be him listed as the plaintiff in the lawsuit not Rich, correct?  So it would be the son suing LACR, not Rich?  Is the son an owner of EKS?

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified.  So the reason he won the lawsuit is supposedly that the son never signed the waiver because Rich was cheating and riding as his son.  If the kid is only 18 or so, I'm confident that dad is paying the bills for racing.  If this the case, Rich allowed his son to be racing without insurance and went so far as to cheat and ride as his son to get him qualified.  This certainly makes Rich at least partially responsible for what happened if this is true.  I've know Rich for a long time, and I hope he comes on here or issues a press release stating that this whole report by Cooksey is completely fabricated.  Even if it isn't fabricated, he could at least explain what happened from his perspective.

2
GrapeApe
Posts
8748
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX US
5/30/2024 6:41am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 7:44am
Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to...

Regardless, if the information Cooksey reported is incorrect, I would expect RT or someone from the company to post here or issue a press release to set the record straight.  This will certainly affect EKS sales.  I know I'm not buying anything more from them until I hear something from RT or EKS disputing this claim.

APLMAN99 wrote:
I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If...

I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If it isn't, he's going to wrestle around with a pig in the mud and only convince a small percentage that the salacious part isn't true.  

One thing to think about is that it sounds like the son turned 18 before the accident.  If that is the case, then it would be him listed as the plaintiff in the lawsuit not Rich, correct?  So it would be the son suing LACR, not Rich?  Is the son an owner of EKS?

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified. ...

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified.  So the reason he won the lawsuit is supposedly that the son never signed the waiver because Rich was cheating and riding as his son.  If the kid is only 18 or so, I'm confident that dad is paying the bills for racing.  If this the case, Rich allowed his son to be racing without insurance and went so far as to cheat and ride as his son to get him qualified.  This certainly makes Rich at least partially responsible for what happened if this is true.  I've know Rich for a long time, and I hope he comes on here or issues a press release stating that this whole report by Cooksey is completely fabricated.  Even if it isn't fabricated, he could at least explain what happened from his perspective.

A couple of things:

Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that may have come from the other LACR case being discussed in this thread. If that was mentioned in Cooksey's video I missed it.

The allegation that Rich raced as the son relates to the area qualifier. The accident that prompted the lawsuit was during the regional qualifier. The only reason a waiver and release from the area qualifier would be relevant to the regional qualifier would be either (1) to add an ugly allegation to the public story to attack Rich's character or (2) the purported waiver and release was intended to cover two separate races. I think the former is more likely than the latter.

Edit: After checking the archives I do not see that LACR hosted a regional qualifier in the '15-'17 time frame. It's always fun to unravel truth and fiction from a Cooksey story.

 

4
5/30/2024 6:59am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 7:22am
APLMAN99 wrote:
I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If...

I don't disagree.  Either way, Taylor is in a bind.  If what Kooksey said is exactly true, then the MX world will turn against him.  If it isn't, he's going to wrestle around with a pig in the mud and only convince a small percentage that the salacious part isn't true.  

One thing to think about is that it sounds like the son turned 18 before the accident.  If that is the case, then it would be him listed as the plaintiff in the lawsuit not Rich, correct?  So it would be the son suing LACR, not Rich?  Is the son an owner of EKS?

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified. ...

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified.  So the reason he won the lawsuit is supposedly that the son never signed the waiver because Rich was cheating and riding as his son.  If the kid is only 18 or so, I'm confident that dad is paying the bills for racing.  If this the case, Rich allowed his son to be racing without insurance and went so far as to cheat and ride as his son to get him qualified.  This certainly makes Rich at least partially responsible for what happened if this is true.  I've know Rich for a long time, and I hope he comes on here or issues a press release stating that this whole report by Cooksey is completely fabricated.  Even if it isn't fabricated, he could at least explain what happened from his perspective.

GrapeApe wrote:
A couple of things: Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that...

A couple of things:

Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that may have come from the other LACR case being discussed in this thread. If that was mentioned in Cooksey's video I missed it.

The allegation that Rich raced as the son relates to the area qualifier. The accident that prompted the lawsuit was during the regional qualifier. The only reason a waiver and release from the area qualifier would be relevant to the regional qualifier would be either (1) to add an ugly allegation to the public story to attack Rich's character or (2) the purported waiver and release was intended to cover two separate races. I think the former is more likely than the latter.

Edit: After checking the archives I do not see that LACR hosted a regional qualifier in the '15-'17 time frame. It's always fun to unravel truth and fiction from a Cooksey story.

 

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and no insurance to cover it.  I can't imagine he would be suing just as a money grab. 

The AMA has an annual waiver form for minors now.  Most AMA tracks (like Red Bud for instance) require these annual waiver forms for minors to race now.  Just speculation, but that could be why another waiver wasn't signed at the subsequent event.

1
SoCalMX70
Posts
3456
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Thousand Oaks, CA US
5/30/2024 7:00am Edited Date/Time 5/30/2024 7:02am

I didn't hear anything about Rich racing as his son... But, I will say a lot of people around here threw away their Eks Brand goggles over a year ago when LACR shut down for that short period.

7
2
SEEMEFIRST
Posts
13511
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX US
5/30/2024 7:12am

I'm evidently confused.

What difference does it make to the suit if Dad signed and raced as his son after the race where the son was hurt and had signed his own waiver?

GrapeApe
Posts
8748
Joined
6/7/2010
Location
Mc Kinney, TX US
5/30/2024 7:16am
No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified. ...

No, but according to the the story, the kid's claim is that his dad entered a Loretta's Qualifier as his son to get his son qualified.  So the reason he won the lawsuit is supposedly that the son never signed the waiver because Rich was cheating and riding as his son.  If the kid is only 18 or so, I'm confident that dad is paying the bills for racing.  If this the case, Rich allowed his son to be racing without insurance and went so far as to cheat and ride as his son to get him qualified.  This certainly makes Rich at least partially responsible for what happened if this is true.  I've know Rich for a long time, and I hope he comes on here or issues a press release stating that this whole report by Cooksey is completely fabricated.  Even if it isn't fabricated, he could at least explain what happened from his perspective.

GrapeApe wrote:
A couple of things: Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that...

A couple of things:

Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that may have come from the other LACR case being discussed in this thread. If that was mentioned in Cooksey's video I missed it.

The allegation that Rich raced as the son relates to the area qualifier. The accident that prompted the lawsuit was during the regional qualifier. The only reason a waiver and release from the area qualifier would be relevant to the regional qualifier would be either (1) to add an ugly allegation to the public story to attack Rich's character or (2) the purported waiver and release was intended to cover two separate races. I think the former is more likely than the latter.

Edit: After checking the archives I do not see that LACR hosted a regional qualifier in the '15-'17 time frame. It's always fun to unravel truth and fiction from a Cooksey story.

 

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and...

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and no insurance to cover it.  I can't imagine he would be suing just as a money grab. 

The AMA has an annual waiver form for minors now.  Most AMA tracks (like Red Bud for instance) require these annual waiver forms for minors to race now.  Just speculation, but that could be why another waiver wasn't signed at the subsequent event.

It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is a clause in your insurance policy that says you agree to subrogate your right to sue and recover damages if the injury was the fault of a third party. If you refuse to cooperate the insurance company won't pay the claim.

I don't know for certain but there are some hints in the case that this is a subrogation claim.

9
5/30/2024 7:23am
GrapeApe wrote:
A couple of things: Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that...

A couple of things:

Where are you seeing that he didn't have health insurance? That has been mentioned a couple of times but I think that may have come from the other LACR case being discussed in this thread. If that was mentioned in Cooksey's video I missed it.

The allegation that Rich raced as the son relates to the area qualifier. The accident that prompted the lawsuit was during the regional qualifier. The only reason a waiver and release from the area qualifier would be relevant to the regional qualifier would be either (1) to add an ugly allegation to the public story to attack Rich's character or (2) the purported waiver and release was intended to cover two separate races. I think the former is more likely than the latter.

Edit: After checking the archives I do not see that LACR hosted a regional qualifier in the '15-'17 time frame. It's always fun to unravel truth and fiction from a Cooksey story.

 

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and...

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and no insurance to cover it.  I can't imagine he would be suing just as a money grab. 

The AMA has an annual waiver form for minors now.  Most AMA tracks (like Red Bud for instance) require these annual waiver forms for minors to race now.  Just speculation, but that could be why another waiver wasn't signed at the subsequent event.

GrapeApe wrote:
It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is...

It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is a clause in your insurance policy that says you agree to subrogate your right to sue and recover damages if the injury was the fault of a third party. If you refuse to cooperate the insurance company won't pay the claim.

I don't know for certain but there are some hints in the case that this is a subrogation claim.

I hope you're right and Rich lets us know that's what happened.

APLMAN99
Posts
12187
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR US
Fantasy
5/30/2024 7:37am
I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and...

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that the reason this lawsuit was filed is because the kid got hurt, had massive medical bills, and no insurance to cover it.  I can't imagine he would be suing just as a money grab. 

The AMA has an annual waiver form for minors now.  Most AMA tracks (like Red Bud for instance) require these annual waiver forms for minors to race now.  Just speculation, but that could be why another waiver wasn't signed at the subsequent event.

GrapeApe wrote:
It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is...

It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is a clause in your insurance policy that says you agree to subrogate your right to sue and recover damages if the injury was the fault of a third party. If you refuse to cooperate the insurance company won't pay the claim.

I don't know for certain but there are some hints in the case that this is a subrogation claim.

I hope you're right and Rich lets us know that's what happened.

If he did, the insurance company would/probably could interpret that as him not cooperating I'd bet.  

2
1
avidchimp
Posts
5697
Joined
7/9/2008
Location
EGL, MN US
5/30/2024 7:39am
GrapeApe wrote:
It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is...

It is possible they did have insurance and this case was brought by the insurance company to recover the medical expenses it paid out. There is a clause in your insurance policy that says you agree to subrogate your right to sue and recover damages if the injury was the fault of a third party. If you refuse to cooperate the insurance company won't pay the claim.

I don't know for certain but there are some hints in the case that this is a subrogation claim.

I hope you're right and Rich lets us know that's what happened.

APLMAN99 wrote:

If he did, the insurance company would/probably could interpret that as him not cooperating I'd bet.  

Exactly. 

Coach529
Posts
396
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Coeur d'Alene, ID US
5/30/2024 7:39am

I am just here for the public lynching before we know the whole truth. 

15
1
NicNak
Posts
998
Joined
2/18/2019
Location
Palm Desert, CA US
5/30/2024 7:40am

LACR didn’t have a qualifier for Loretta’s or Mammoth so let’s get some facts going please 

3
disbanded
Posts
6867
Joined
8/26/2007
Location
Evergreen, CO US
5/30/2024 7:47am

ESQUIRE

2
adastramx
Posts
148
Joined
1/20/2013
Location
St. Louis, MO US
5/30/2024 7:50am
Coach529 wrote:

I am just here for the public lynching before we know the whole truth. 

But he saw it on the internet!

5
Steve Austin
Posts
155
Joined
4/21/2023
Location
Hell Yeah, CA US
5/30/2024 7:51am

For the record, I had an injury earlier this year that led to 2 ER visits, CT scans, Ortho and PT referrals, and now a few months later I am having minor lingering pain/numbness issues which my Ortho wants to investigate with a few more tests.

I received a letter from my insurance earlier this week questioning if anyone else was at fault(work-related, private property, etc...) and saying they were refusing any more services until I called and answered their questions to see if they could find it to be someone's fault so they could sue for reimbursement. 

It's pretty much a "If you don't help us find someone else to sue we won't provide any more coverage for you" letter...  

11
5/30/2024 7:51am

That's unfortunate, but neither of those events are LACR's fault. I don't care how much they owe in medical bills, this is shady AF.

Boomslang wrote:
I've never being wealthy in my life, I'm a blue collar hard worker just scraping to make ends meet BUT the one thing I've never gone...

I've never being wealthy in my life, I'm a blue collar hard worker just scraping to make ends meet BUT the one thing I've never gone without in my life is a fucking great medical Aid / cover. 

I raced for 20 yrs and never paid a dime for three bad crashes....I've been hurt plenty.

The way I live my life dictates that I have to have good medical cover.

It is a sin to ride or race without covering yourself.

scott_nz wrote:
im lucky enough to live in a country that has this sort of insurance as govt policy,  but if i travel overseas to ride, i make...

im lucky enough to live in a country that has this sort of insurance as govt policy,  but if i travel overseas to ride, i make sure i have the insurance to cover it, and repatriation costs,   and its never cheap, 

Exactly. Every time that I travel to the USA, I typically stay for 5 months, I have a initial guaranteed cover of $750.000. It costs every month but if I ride and get hurt / car accident or whatever I need not to worry.

1
1
5/30/2024 7:56am

Furthermore, It's really shit that people sue for the most dumbest things in the USA...I blame the c$nt lawyers who are always looking for a quick buck.

Riding at ANY track / venue will always present a risk...we need to except that fact to keep the venue / sport alive.

3

Post a reply to: LACR lawsuit

The Latest