Originally Posted by Seamless
That's known in some states of the US as the "last clear chance" doctrine. It doesn't apply in many jurisdictions, but apparently we are to believe from posts such as yours that insurance companies don't need to base their decisions on the laws of the jurisdiction in which a claim can be made. That's nonsense, frankly, and is another illustration of why you shouldn't be giving legal advice such as the above quote. An earlier post by DCCommuter noted that in Texas, for example, it would not be a defense unless the claimant was more than 50% responsible.
Why the OP would rely on legal advice posted online in an international forum is another question.
Once again, I'm not giving legal advice. I also don't know where you get the idea that "insurance companies don't need to base their decisions on the laws of the jurisdiction in which a claim can be made". You need to click the link DC provided, and actually read what's there. It's regarding subrogation, and the right to recover, and it clearly states that the information is not comprehensive in any way. Either you are confused, or AIG is clearly in violation of the law. Care to hazard a guess on which one it is?
And what does it matter that this is an international forum?