Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
peenie

Mike Birbiglia's Car Accident

Recommended Posts

Last night I watched a stand-up of comedian Mike Birbiglia. One of the memorable moments was his discussion about a car accident where a drunk driver smashed into his car. The long of the short of the story is that due to the way the police report was written, he was forced to pay for the other car's repairs at a cost of $12K.

The story has been really bothering me. How is it possible that this happened to him?? Was he driving without insurance? Like, why did he even have to deal with this on his own. I feel he was really dealt a bad hand in this instance and feel it was unfair.

Anyone got a take on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking that if this had happened to me I would have spun the situation so many different ways in order to cope with my misfortune. Mike just had to deal and that I think I don't realize that sometimes bad things just happen and it isn't always because of your race, gender, social class or economic status. Life sucks sometimes and there doesn't have to be some sort of excuse or reason.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im gonna guess because the law says just because the other guy was drunk, it doesn't give the other side carte blanche to do whatever they want under the premise of "well he was drunk so he shouldn't have been on the road anyway"

Lots of states have shared liabality

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, peenie said:

Last night I watched a stand-up of comedian Mike Birbiglia. One of the memorable moments was his discussion about a car accident where a drunk driver smashed into his car. The long of the short of the story is that due to the way the police report was written, he was forced to pay for the other car's repairs at a cost of $12K.

The story has been really bothering me. How is it possible that this happened to him?? Was he driving without insurance? Like, why did he even have to deal with this on his own. I feel he was really dealt a bad hand in this instance and feel it was unfair.

Anyone got a take on this?

Even though the other guy was drunk Mike could have been at fault in the accident. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bert said:

Even though the other guy was drunk Mike could have been at fault in the accident. 

Oh....hmm....good point. Like maybe he ran a stop sign or some such. I didn't think about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judge should have sentence him to be the drunk guys butler. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, peenie said:

Life sucks sometimes and there doesn't have to be some sort of excuse or reason.

 

Bad luck, I guess. It floats around. It's got to land on somebody. It was my turn, that's all. I was in the path of the tornado. I just didn't expect the storm would last as long as it has.  ~ Andy Dufresne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is that he's exaggerating the story for effect and/or trying to shift blame and become the victim - in order to tell/sell a story.   There is a 0% chance that a police report being written a certain way caused Birbiglia to pay that much money.  If the report was written incorrectly, then Birbiglia could/should have gone to his insurance company and told them about it.  The insurance company would then have had their lawyers argue his case on his behalf, at NO COST to him.

 

It's my belief that every state has an insurance requirement.  If he didn't have insurance, then that's the reason he's on the hook for the $12k, because he then would be at the mercy of a civil lawsuit by the other driver... which is most likely what happened.

 

Another possibility is that Birbiglia is lying and he was the drunk driver.  He figures that if he switched roles with the other driver, then he'll get sympathy and as a result possibly sell more tickets, make more money, and look like the good guy.  I think this is the least likely scenario though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peenie,

  I don't know the guy and I don't know his story.  But, my policy is not to just form an opinion based upon one side of the story.  Do you suppose the other guy from the accident might have a different spin on the same event?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what? The story (not the version I saw in his stand-up but the same guy) is on YouTube. If anyone wants to listen, please view below:

I'm going to watch it now just to see if I missed something.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I hear what wasn't said in the stand-up. The police officer said that he made a wrong turn. From the police report alone that he showed, it appears the other guy was totally in the wrong. I mean, wouldn't they have gone to court?? Oh well, he paid it so nvm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, peenie said:

Now, I hear what wasn't said in the stand-up. The police officer said that he made a wrong turn. I feel better now.

Birbiglia says the P-1 and V-1 are both him.  That's not true.  P-1 is Birbiglia as a person.  V-1 is the Vehicle of the other driver.  He says that to make a joke that he crashed into himself, but that's not what the report says.  For that reason, the report is written correctly on that front.  If the office checked off the wrong box that Birbiglia was at fault, that would have EASILY been remedied.  His insurance company would have fought it and the description in the report (P-1/V-1 part), being inconsistent with the sketch of the scene... that is also in that report, that he doesn't show you.

 

There's NO WAY, that happened that way.  There's a LOT of creative license in that joke, all to get to the punchline of, "I've given up on the idea of being right."

 

If Birbiglia did actually have to pay the $12k, it's because he was driving without insurance and did actually cause the accident.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Birbiglia says the P-1 and V-1 are both him.  That's not true.  P-1 is Birbiglia as a person.  V-1 is the Vehicle of the other driver.  He says that to make a joke that he crashed into himself, but that's not what the report says.  For that reason, the report is written correctly on that front.  If the office checked off the wrong box that Birbiglia was at fault, that would have EASILY been remedied.  His insurance company would have fought it and the description in the report (P-1/V-1 part), being inconsistent with the sketch of the scene... that is also in that report, that he doesn't show you.

 

There's NO WAY, that happened that way.  There's a LOT of creative license in that joke, all to get to the punchline of, "I've given up on the idea of being right."

 

If Birbiglia did actually have to pay the $12k, it's because he was driving without insurance and did actually cause the accident.

Thank you so much TBay!! I was wondering why he even handled any of this by himself. He must've been driving without insurance. Thanks for listening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, peenie said:

Thank you so much TBay!! I was wondering why he even handled any of this by himself. He must've been driving without insurance. Thanks for listening.

I actually like some of his material, so I didn't mind listening.  Also, my brother is a cop (retired now), I've heard TONS of these stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, peenie said:

Thank you so much TBay!! I was wondering why he even handled any of this by himself. He must've been driving without insurance. Thanks for listening.

Unless it was a long time ago before he was well known, I highly doubt birbiglia would be driving without insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Unless it was a long time ago before he was well known, I highly doubt birbiglia would be driving without insurance.

It's why I think he's altering the true events to make a joke.  As I said, if he had insurance (and I'm thinking he did), then their lawyers would have fought the case for him and would have paid the money, if necessary.  His insurance would have skyrocketed because of it, but he wouldn't have paid for it.  OR, what he's not telling us is that the insurance company was the one who paid the money and not him.  Either way, I don't think his story is totally honest.  There's certainly information he's purposely leaving out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×