Cedric E. Stephens, Contributor

A dump truck overturned on my truck at a job site over 12 months ago. The cab of my truck was damaged beyond repair. The insurers of the other truck are refusing to pay my claim. I lost several weeks' revenues and had to fund the repairs of my truck. My claim amounted to nearly $1 million. After 27 visits, the third-party insurers sent me a letter saying that their customer was operating his truck in breach of his policy. I should, therefore, take up the matter directly with their customer. Before that they said my driver was at fault. He had disobeyed safety rules. An earlier excuse not to pay was that the accident happened on private property. It is now clear to me that the company never intended to pay this claim. What can I do?

- DJF, Kingston 5

The chorus of a once-popular song came to mind as I sat down to reply to your question. It was: "Shame, shame, shame, shame on you!" These words seem to be the polite way to discredit the third-party's insurers.

The pattern of behaviour of their employees over the past 15 months is a variation on one theme: Find a reason not to pay.

They seem not to care that you have finally caught on to their tune. The last reason they gave for not paying is wrong. After all of this time, nobody in the company - including the in-house attorney - has done any homework. It is as if the World Wide Web does not exist.

Cause of accident

The insurer and I agree on one thing: The key to this claim is what caused the other vehicle to overturn? The insurance company says that "the proximate cause of the mishap was the fracture of the chassis of the truck which resulted in the vehicle coming into contact with yours. The circumstances surrounding the fracture constitute a breach of our policy conditions."

My legal dictionary says that 'proximate cause' - derived from the Latin phrase causa proxima - is used interchangeably with 'direct cause'.

The latter is defined as "the active, efficient cause that sets into motion a train of events that bring about a result without the interven-tion of any other source."

The insurers decided not to pay your claim because of (undescribed events) surrounding the fracture of the chassis of the third party's vehicle. What ignorance!

The European Agency for Safety and Health at Work says that "nearly a fifth of all deaths in workplace transport accidents are due to vehicles overturning." Vehicles involved in these types of accidents, which include: "Forklift trucks, compact dumpers, tipper lorries and tractors are all especially prone to overturning."

The main reason, "their high centre of gravity."

Ground conditions and the carrying of unbalanced loads are among other risks factors.

(http://osha.europa.eu/good_practice/sector/construction/vehicle_accidents.pdf).

It is my opinion that since the third party's vehicle overturned while it was in the act of tipping its load, it seems reasonable to expect that its chassis would suffer damage. The fracturing of the chassis would appear to me - a layman - to be a symptom of the overturning, not the direct or proximate cause of that event.

Frankly, I believe that the third party's insurers are using every trick in the book to avoid paying your claim. The latest one: Use insurance-speak and legal mumbo-jumbo to try to make sense out of nonsense.

They do not have a leg to stand on. I suggest that you teach them a lesson. Prepare a full brief for your attorneys. Include my response to your question. Ask them to negotiate settlement or file a claim against the company to include interest and attorneys' fees on the amount you claimed last year.

Maybe they will learn that proximate cause operates in a world where there is a law of gravity.

Cedric E. Stephens provides free, independent information and advice about risk and insurance. Email: aegis@cwjamaica.com