ODOT Covering Bill For Fatal Crash | ...

ODOT Covering Bill For Fatal Crash | Ohio News Network (ONN)

There are 16 comments on the 10TV WBNS story from Nov 12, 2010, titled ODOT Covering Bill For Fatal Crash | Ohio News Network (ONN). In it, 10TV WBNS reports that:

Mitchell Mathis died in March of 2010 after crashing into a guardrail in Brook Park.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at 10TV WBNS.

2 cents

Elmhurst, IL

#1 Nov 12, 2010
Typical government inefficiency. What I'd like for them to answer is how were the parents responsible for that damn bill to begin with? The son was over 18 and last time I checked your no longer your parents responsibilty at that age. Those letters would never have stopped if this hadn't come out in the news! Maybe now at least they can grieve without ODOT adding more stress to their lives!
Ray

Zanesville, OH

#2 Nov 13, 2010
Just another example of inept government agencies are.
Two Dogs

United States

#3 Nov 13, 2010
ONN, rushing to the aid of uninsured drivers everywhere, will the living uninsured also be entitled? Lucky the taxpayers are always ready willing and able to foot the bill. Why do they put those telephone poles and guard rails right next to the road where they present such a danger to folks with limited driving skills? Had he killed a pedestrian on his way to eternity, would ONN have paused to make him a post mortem hero/victim? How dare the state think it is entitled to reimbursement of damages suffered at the hands of a negligent driver.
So sad

Westerville, OH

#4 Nov 13, 2010
2 cents wrote:
Typical government inefficiency. What I'd like for them to answer is how were the parents responsible for that damn bill to begin with? The son was over 18 and last time I checked your no longer your parents responsibilty at that age. Those letters would never have stopped if this hadn't come out in the news! Maybe now at least they can grieve without ODOT adding more stress to their lives!
Agree with it or not, the state could legally go after the estate of the victim. I do not know who received the monies and belongings of the victim. It is quite possible that it may have been his parents.

Sempre Fi
Seriously

Mount Gilead, OH

#5 Nov 13, 2010
2 cents wrote:
Typical government inefficiency. What I'd like for them to answer is how were the parents responsible for that damn bill to begin with? The son was over 18 and last time I checked your no longer your parents responsibilty at that age. Those letters would never have stopped if this hadn't come out in the news! Maybe now at least they can grieve without ODOT adding more stress to their lives!
Likely because his parents were the beneficiaries of his estate, which also means they can be liable for any debts he incurred. It was generous of ODOT to waive this bill as it is their legal right to seek payment for damage to their property. It's no different than if this gentleman had driven into someone else's car or home. Those people should be compensated for the damage.
Hell no

Columbus, OH

#6 Nov 13, 2010
I bet this had something to do with the media getting involved. Why else would they back off?
Check the Public Records

Columbus, OH

#7 Nov 13, 2010
Hell no wrote:
I bet this had something to do with the media getting involved. Why else would they back off?
Because of anyone checks the public records on reimbursement for damanges to guardrail, etc when a fatal has occurred, you will find that ODOT did not charge families or insurance companies for damages. Afterall isn't the loss of life more than the cost of guardrail? There are contracts already been bid and paid to pay for such damages as well as highway workers are paid to replace guardrail. No matter what the circumstances, as life was lost! ODOT has plenty of money already funded to pay for these costs and replaces guardrail and other parts of our infrastructure that is not warranted.It is time you folks learn how state and federal dollars are being spent. Educate yourself
Wilhelm

Elyria, OH

#8 Nov 14, 2010
Good that ODOT is taking care of this and recognizing that elderly parents of an adult child are not financially responsible for his debts.
A shame it took publicity to get ODOT's attention.
This should have been corrected immediately on the parents' first contacting ODOT.
Caniglietti

Delaware, OH

#9 Nov 14, 2010
It's normal for damage to public property to be paid for just like damage to private property - by the at fault driver (or their insurance, usually)

In the case of an accident where the at-fault driver died the damage is still done and still needs to be paid for. That would normally come out of the insurance, or the estate of the at-fault driver.

The thing I don't understand is how ODOT would think that the dead man's debt would be owed by his parents. They should have made that claim against his estate before it was disbursed, if there is one. If no estate exists then they're out of luck.

The police report lists this as a single vehicle accident. The report states he exited 71 N/B onto the 480 ramp headed east and didn't make it around the curve. Speed and alcohol were listed as factors. Based upon this, it appears that the accident was entirely the fault of the deceased and no other person is on the hook for the damages. There is no insurance listed so it would be paid out of his estate, if there even was one.
gunnr

Naperville, IL

#10 Nov 14, 2010
Seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
Likely because his parents were the beneficiaries of his estate, which also means they can be liable for any debts he incurred. It was generous of ODOT to waive this bill as it is their legal right to seek payment for damage to their property. It's no different than if this gentleman had driven into someone else's car or home. Those people should be compensated for the damage.
More accurately, they could seek reimbursement from the estate, but if there wasn't anything left in the estate after other debts were paid, then the parents would have no legal responsibility to pay the debt, even if they were the beneficiaries of a life insurance policy.
What was the problem

Columbus, OH

#11 Nov 14, 2010
If the accident was there son's fault the bill should be sent regaurdless of his death why should it be the tax payers responsibilty
Caniglietti

Delaware, OH

#12 Nov 14, 2010
What was the problem wrote:
If the accident was there son's fault the bill should be sent regaurdless of his death why should it be the tax payers responsibilty
Just as your relatives are not responsible for your debts, neither are they responsible for your tort.
2 cents

Elmhurst, IL

#13 Nov 15, 2010
Seriously wrote:
<quoted text>
Likely because his parents were the beneficiaries of his estate, which also means they can be liable for any debts he incurred. It was generous of ODOT to waive this bill as it is their legal right to seek payment for damage to their property. It's no different than if this gentleman had driven into someone else's car or home. Those people should be compensated for the damage.
Point made about the estate. From what I gather from the story it sounds like ODOT was trying to put the squeeze on them. If there was any money in the estate so be pay the bill. BUT if I'm not mistaken the guy was living with his parents, not too much estate there I'm guessing! Anyhow good to see the parents won't have to pony up.
L Clark

United States

#14 Nov 16, 2010
Last winter during the nast weather, I hit black ice. My vehicle was thrown into a guardrail and I rolled it 5 times down an embakment. I too was handed a bill after being charged with "failure to control" for $1400.00. The 3 other people who hit the same patch of ice were not charged. Apparently, you only face charges if you hit damage property. I always wondered if I should have tried to sue the city for "failure to maintain safe streets". I feel bad that the parents had to go through this.
Gill Bates

Grove City, OH

#15 Nov 16, 2010
So much stupid here.
2 cents

Elmhurst, IL

#16 Nov 16, 2010
What was the problem wrote:
If the accident was there son's fault the bill should be sent regaurdless of his death why should it be the tax payers responsibilty
So, why are we paying for you?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brook Park Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Obama Campaign Taps Springsteen, Freeman (Oct '12) May 17 Russell Crowe 64
Review: Patient First - John Kavlich MD (May '09) Apr 27 Yep 68
racial profiling in Rocky River (Mar '06) Apr '17 Chris 7
Friend? Mar '17 WestVee 1
News Physician Somnath Roy is accused of sex crimes (Nov '07) Feb '17 No name 69
News Maple Heights drug dealer sold fatal heroin dos... Jan '17 Rochelle anthony 2
News Cleveland Clinic doc who sought Libertarian Par... (Jul '16) Jul '16 Poker Paul 1

Brook Park Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Brook Park Mortgages