Am I liable to replace a tree I hit with my car?

So I got into a car accident (fell asleep at the wheel) and totaled my car and ran into a tree on someone else's property. I'm okay, but now I've got a whole mess to deal with the insurance.

This are the details:

The tree owner has already paid for having the tree pulled out,
repairing the fence, and replacing the mailbox. These total: $1,432.20.

Now the tree owner wants to replace the tree. Their estimate is $14,000 installed.

This would place total damages at $15,432.20.

My insurance coverage is only 10,000, and that means I would have to pay the difference, which I totally cannot afford being the poor college student that I am.

Am I legally liable to replace that tree?

Yes.

The applicable tort would be tresspass. A person is not liable for negligent or even reckless tresspass, unless there is damage to the land. Here, there is damage to the land, and you admit to at least negligence: Falling asleep behind the wheel.

As for the remedy. You are liable for damages required to bring the plantiff back to the position they were in, but for your wrongfull conduct.

The best you can do, is challange the amount of the damages, claiming it would be 10,000 or less.

As for getting an attorney, before you spend any money on one, read your policy, and talk to your insurance company. If the insurance company has a duty to defend, they can't simply pay the 10K and walk away, they have to fight it. On the other hand, your policy, may limit this duty, and if they do have a duty, they will almost certainly have the right to control the litigation. But they can certainly help with a settlement. Settlements equal to the coverage limit are typical, since neither side typically wants a law suit.

I am not advising you not to see an attorney, just talk to your insurnance company and see if they can settle the matter for you first. That's what you pay them for.

You need a lawyer bigtime..... just go see one and see what they have to say.

The $1,432 is OK but if it was this huge wonderful mature tree it would cost far more than that to remove it. If they were trying to sue you or whatnot it would be far more minus the mailbox and fence.

14K for a tree? That is bull. You cannot replace a mature tree. You can replace it with a young expensive tree but 14K is out of bounds.

You are liable but something sounds hinky.

I would consult an attorney. Generally you can get a free initial consult for free or a very reasonable fee and provide the details of the matter.

I can't decide either way. Technically to replace the tree as it was could cost that much especially if it was mature. But common sense tells me that to replace it with a smaller tree would be appropriate.

Definitely consult an attorney. In my unprof'l opinion since it is your fault, you are responsible for property damage, which (sad to say) would include a tree owned by the victim. However, maybe a loophole could be that the condition of the tree was such that it should have been removed giving the responsibility and choice to the owner only.

a tree costing $14,000?!!

you're lucky it wasn't another car you ran into.

This is why lawyers were created. You need one. If it goes to court and the property owner has a lawyer and you don't You will almost certainly be held liable for replacing a mature tree in place of the one you destroyed. If you hire a good lawyer for a couple thousand $$$ chances are the property owner will settle for a young tree at 30% or less of the cost of a mature one as a replacement, and settle out of court. Your lawyer will point out the advantages of a young tree including the chioce of species.......the lesser maintanence costs of a young healthy tree. The lesser probability of liability to the property owner of a younger tree failing in a storm and damaging neighboring property ect. Yes, in any case you probably going to have to replace a tree. But a good lawyer should be able to convince the property owner that a younger cheaper tree would be in his best interest.

It is very unclear. It seems that a car would be unable to kill a full grown tree. What did the tree look like after you hit it? If the tree looked ugly but was still alive, I don't know that you'd be responsible for replacing it. You might be responsible for trimming the tree or for paying for half the cost of the tree. The people could then buy a smaller tree or pay for the other half. You want to find out what kind of tree it was. Various trees live for various amounts of time. These people might overestimate the age of the tree thinking they will get more money because it is larger. However, if it only had a few years to go, the insurance company or the court could depreciate the tree or they could order that a smaller, younger tree would be comparable. You could also ask a real estate appraiser what the value of the tree was to the property and offer that amount of money. You'll need to get a tree that is guaranteed. If your insurance company cuts a check for $8,000 to these people with no strings attached, one would think they'd pocket $7,500 of it and just buy a medium-sized tree. Not forcing them to produce a receipt for the tree purchase and giving them cash instead might do the trick. Otherwise you might want to jump in the fray and locate a garden center than can order a mature tree for less than $10,000.