Adam got some envelope in the mail earlier today, and upon opening it, seemed rather... apprehensive. I just thought to read it, seeing as it's apparently quite important, because Mom told him to leave it with the rest of Dad's stuff, so he could look at it when he gets back.
To sum it up, one "Jeffrey Bourdeau" is trying to claim exactly six-thousand, one-hundred twenty-one dollars (and two cents) from Adam because of some sort of accident he was in a while ago. From what he said of it, he was on his way home from work, and a guy in a truck hit him and knocked him off his bike.
However, Mr. Bourdeau's story is as follows:
- On or about July 20, 2006, Jeff was heading southbound on Merritt Street after stopping at the three way stop sign at King Street, Jeff proceeded through the intersection when suddenly and without warning the defendant struck the front of his truck causing damage.
- As a result of the impact, the speaker box with amplifier that was located in the backseat flew forward ripping the cable wiring out. The wires smoldered in the back seat of the cab and caused a fire.
- The aforementioned damages included damage to the front upper bumper, the front grille, hood panel, front fender, name plate fender, flare wheel opening, decal front door, mirror, front door shell, front door handle, seatbelt buckle and rear seat cushion.
- Jeff paid his deductible of $1,000.00 to the Dominion to have his truck repaired from the damage caused by the accident.
And then it just gets into more technical stuff.
So first of all, the blatantly obvious contradiction (playing Phoenix Wright is finally coming in handy). "Fire" is mentioned in #2, and yet in #3, nothing is said about fire damage at all. Skimming over the rest of the sheets, they don't mention anything about fire (at least not directly) either. There's "Hazardous Waste Removal", but beside that is "Non-OEM Parts", so I doubt that's related.
AND ALSO, read #3 thoroughly, then go back and do the same with #1. Adam had to be going *damn* fast (sorry about the language once again) to cause THAT much damage. How the hell do you damage a SEATBELT BUCKLE by running into a truck on your BIKE? It doesn't add up. I'm sorry, but right now it looks like Mr. Bourdeau has decided he can get away with saying Adam caused damage he really didn't, and thus get it fixed more or less for free.
I was EXTREMELY close to trying to find his email, so I could send him something along the lines of "Just where do you get off doing this?", but I'd be getting myself into a whole lot of hot water were I to do so, and I don't want that.
According to Adam, it's not related, but there's one more interesting (possible) contradiction I just realized. The papers clearly state the defendant (Adam) struck THE FRONT OF HIS TRUCK. Then they go on to talk about how Adam was negligent and such and basically saying he wasn't fit to ride a bike. HOWEVER, Adam hit the front of the truck. You CANNOT expect me to believe Mr. Bourdeau didn't see him coming. Just... no.
And yet one last problem. As you can see by reading #1, the accident happened on or around July 20th, 2006. So just WHY has it taken the guy almost an entire year to decide to do this. Yes, the whole legal system thing could have some place in it too, but that's about the ONLY thing I can see.
Mom said something about how, should it come to it, whatever insurance we / they have should take care of some of it, but still. I *know* Adam doesn't have that kind of money. I've only got ~$4,700 myself (at least I hope), and should it come to it, I'd be willing to chip in $1,000 or so, but still, this whole thing just reeks of the guy trying to take advantage of the accident.