I am not a happy bunny. There I was, pootling along to work, enjoying the first sunny morning in manchester for a while, when up ahead is a traffic light going from green to amber. Quick check of the mirror, and I begin my slow and I come to a stop and put the hand brake on.
I don't understand, therefore, how the woman who drove her big white van into the back of my car managed to not see me.
To further complicate things, her English wasn't as good as her Spanish and she had to get someone at the end of the phone to give me the insurance details.
What a great start to the weekend.
|
|
I think I know why she did it now. She hadn't spotted the red light in time, saw the red light camera, and decided that the only way not to get a fine and points was to use me to stop her.
|
|
|
|
I was nearly written off last night too - luckily that the drivers 6th sense saved me. Three lane roundabout with lights. I approach and my set is on red, see other set just changing to amber and prepare for mine to change. One car goes through on amber closely followed by another who goes through as it turns red. Ours are now on green, but something told me to look right - sure enough old white Volvo estate coming round roundabout in lane 2 sails through red - I am just on roundabout in lane 1 - good blast of horn, but the stupid 60+ driver is too busy chatting to her passenger to notice she had done anything wrong!
|
...And the fact that I always perform a 'lifesaver' over my right shoulder when joining from a slip road saved me last night too. Coming out of IKEA Brent Park, and joining the North Circular clockwise, for the first time ever I had a green light. Yippee. This meant that all other traffic on the North Circular at this junction, clockwise, was stationary, right?
Wrong!
As I started to merge down the slip from IKEA, I looked over my right shoulder to see a beat up old design Transit van tanking up the inside of all the waiting traffic, straight over his red light and about to occupy the same piece of road that I was. Yes, straight over the red light that I had already checked everybody was waiting at when I could see it out of the front windscreen before I started my lefthand sweep & merge down the separate slip (think of a cross roads with separate filter lane from bottom to left).
Anyhow, we missed, but if I had only relied on my mirror, I am sure we would have hit.
|
|
I think people simply ignoring red lights, rather than just jumping them a bit, is on the increase. Likewise ignoring double white lines, or driving on the right hand side of traffic bollards.
|
|
It's the London influence, I'm afraid. I always have to remember when in London to go through amber lights - and when not in London, not to!
|
|
Good point, SjB: the "lifesaver" look. Moving your head to look directly at what's around you is, I believe, heartily encouraged by the advanced-driving trainers. I'm glad I had to do it before I had mirrors on my Vespa in the 1960s, and I've never lost the habit.
|
A while back, I was approaching a light at a T-junction as it changed. I slowed down to stop, but saw in the rearview mirror a bloke nailing down the road, and trying desperately to stop. I gunned the car, and shot across to the hard shoulder, and he came to a halt next to me, tyres smoking... While all this was going on, the camera was flashing away much better!
A quick cal to the local traffic biys the next day pre-empted the dreaded envelop, I thought .... BUT two weeks later, it arrives, with pics of me AND smoky joe, plus a polite note informing me that, under the circumstances, I would not be prosecuted, but the pictures are sent out as a matter of course.
|
|
|
Good point, SjB: the "lifesaver" look. Moving your head to look directly at what's around you is, I believe, heartily encouraged by the advanced-driving trainers. I'm glad I had to do it before I had mirrors on my Vespa in the 1960s, and I've never lost the habit.
Yes - the lifesaver look, but then the quick look back in front of you because the nice-person in front of you has bottled it half onto the roundabout and screeched to a halt...... crunch....
|
|
|
|
Red lights are an "instruction" to stop according to the Highway Code.
In big towns they are a "recommendation"
In London, they appear to be a "suggestion"
|
Red lights are an "instruction" to stop according to the Highway Code. In big towns they are a "recommendation" In London, they appear to be a "suggestion"
In southern Italy they are just a decoration
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
|
|
|
|
|
" people simply ignoring red lights is on the increase" - this is seriously bad news. I had assumed this was just about the only rule of the road everyone observed, if only for self-preservation.
|
Worst red light incident I ever saw - a few years ago. Light is red at cross-road junction. Two or three cars waiting. Vauxhall Cavalier comes up behind queue, slows, changes mind and pulls out to overtake queue on wrong side of road, goes through red light (making right turn) causing crossing traffic to from both sides to make emergency stop. Defies belief!
Cheers, SS
|
|
|
|
|
|
The same thing happened to me 5 years ago actually. Golf was 10 days new, I was at a red light, and I was hit from behind.
Guess whos insurance co paid out? Mine, because the other person contested the account of events, and as they were disabled my insurance co were not prepared to go to court, as they would look bad.
Am waiting to see how ASA deal with this, and whether I will some how get the blame this time.
Am impressed that they had DriveAssist call me within 90 mins and they offered me a mondeo 1.8 or vectra 2.0. I took the vectra, on account of the fact the mondeo didn't come with a brown bag. ;-)
Wouldn't put it past GMP to send me a fine & points as the collision shunted me through the red light, and there was a camera.
|
That 'lifesaver' has certainly saved me a couple of times (even if it has nearly given me a heart attack), most recently early last Saturday morning when I thought I was on an empty motorway, hadn't paid sufficient attention, and there was something tiny ( Nova, or suchlike) hiding in my blind spot. Indicated, started to move, glancing over right shoulder, heart attack.
Mentioned here by way of penitent confession, seeking to do better in future.
|
The 'Lifesaver' was something I was taught while I learned to drive and thought that everyone was taught this as a matter of course. Obviously not. It comes as second nature to do it and can give you a better indication of the traffic than your mirror sometimes. If only EVERYONE learned to do it, ALL of the time.
Agree with Mapmaker, it can make you jump.
|
On the other hand:
My instructor said he could pick out ex cyclist because they tend to look over their shoulder: "don't do that and take your eyes of forward vision but make sure you use the mirrors to know where everything is behind you": if it was there a moment ago but not now, it's in your blind spot!
|
|
|
|
That neck of yours must be hurting real bad, you did remember to rub it and groan and moan about neck pain at the time didnt you?
Actually I may be joking but its no laughing matter, I got shunted, fairly hard but not dramatic, and my neck ached for a while despite a good head retraint correctly adjusted.
The shunt wasnt hard - say about 20 mph, but it rippled the boot floor and nearly wrote the car off (Comment from repairers - 5mph harder and it would have taken the ripples past the rear suspension mounts and we would have written it off. - Vaux Cavalier BTW)
|
It isn't my neck that is hurting, but bizarrely my wrists and a forearm! Remarkable that my insurers solicitor called a while back offering their services and asking if I had any injuries, aches or pains. I told the woman that about the wrist and she specifically asked about the neck. I told her that I didn't believe in claims for the sake of it and she told me to get in touch if anything does develop.
Overall I've been pretty impressed. Replacement vehicle company called first, but not been yet, and their phone lines are now temporarily out of order according to the BT message.
The car has been taken away already.
The only potential problem is that they say there is a problem with my policy, as it doesn't mention the SP30 that I declared this morning. I did actually mention it when I took the policy out, but was told it didn't matter.
|
|
One wet, dark, night on the motorway I overtook a car in the middle lane which was doing about 55 mph. When I was past it, doing 70 or so, I expected to see it in my mirror. When it hadn't come into sight after a minute or two I didn't dare pull over so I asked my passenger could he see where it had gone to. He replied that it was keeping pace with me just behind on my nearside. It was in my blind spot. Thank goodness I asked. The only safe thing I could do was to pull back and get behind it again.
|
One wet, dark, night on the motorway I overtook a car in the middle lane which was doing about 55 mph. When I was past it, doing 70 or so, I expected to see it in my mirror. When it hadn't come into sight after a minute or two I didn't dare pull over so I asked my passenger could he see where it had gone to. He replied that it was keeping pace with me just behind on my nearside. It was in my blind spot. Thank goodness I asked. The only safe thing I could do was to pull back and get behind it again.
Can I suggest that you adjust your mirrors pronto. Whilst the driving of the party you overtook was reprehensible, there is no excuse for a blind spot to your near-side on a modern car with well adjusted mirrors. Those spots not covered by the mirrors should be easily viewed by looking over your left shoulder.
If there is still a blindspot large enough to hide a car there are plenty of "blindspot eliminator" mirrors available as an aftermarket addition to your car.
HTH
|
|
|
"One wet, dark, night on the motorway I overtook a car in the middle lane which was doing about 55 mph. When I was past it, doing 70 or so"
On a wet dark night this may not have been wise!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well the garage say that the car isn't written off, but that they are now preparing the estimate for repair for the insurers. I will be gutted if they refuse to repair it, as it's the best car I've ever had.
So what will my options be? After all, I was sitting stationary at a red light and someone hit me. Common sense says it will be their insurers who have to pay, so would I not be able to demand a repair? An added complication is that I am tied into a 3 year service, maintainance and tyres contract, which has 1 year to go, at a cost of £600, and if I was to get a similar replacement car, with 40k on the clock, I wouldn't be able to take up such a plan and would be worse off, as I get through at least 6 expensive tyres a year, without 2 services on top.
How does an insurer decide whether it's more economical to make a payment rather than a repair?
|
You need to make sure all the repairs go through the third party's insurance not your own. This way you avoid having to pay your excess and claim it back. Their insurance company should accept full blame and should pay out to repair the car and get it back to how it was before.
You're the aggrieved party so you can insist on being put back into the exact position you were before the accident. If their insurance company start getting difficult then tell them you'll want an identical vehicle, with one year maintenance included and they'll have to go find it for you. In the meantime you'll be having a courtesy car, at great expense, paid for by them.
When someone drove into the side of me 6 months ago their insurance company wrote to me saying they would be accepting full blame and that I should contact them to arrange an inspection of the car and to offer quotes for repair if I didn't want to go to an approved repairer. I did that and they ok'd it a day after they came out to inspect the car. It was relatively painless.
Doing it that way is much easier than claiming on your own insurance and having to claim things back again. I have done it that way twice and it was a pain in the rear. This way of making the third party insurance company pay up, up front is much better. It also means you don't have a claim hanging over you either where you can get your ncd held back if they haven't resolved the issue.
The writing off point of a car is about at 2/3 of its book value. If you are the aggrieved party then you can insist on a repair not a write off.I don't think other incidental costs go into the calculation. You could also start the whiplash card if they aren't cooperative.
teabelly
|
Forget "Courtesy" car and point out that to be put into the position you were in before the accident you expect them to provide you with a car of similar class and engine size for the duration of the repair.
If I were rear-ended and was told I was having a Micra for a week I would be straight down to Hertz to hire a Mondeo at the guitly party's expense.
|
>>>I would be straight down to Hertz to hire a Mondeo
Ah! The opportunity for a week's reliable motoring... I bet you would!
|
|
|
If I were rear-ended and was told I was having a Micra for a week I would be straight down to Hertz to hire a Mondeo at the guitly party's expense.
Good plan ND, that way you get a car that's big enough, but you still really look forward to getting your good car back ;)
|
|
|
>>you expect them to provide you with a car of similar class and engine size for the duration of the repair.
It doesn't work like that. You have a duty to minimise your losses. Essentially that would mean, in the extreme, that if you didn't need your car, or buses/taxis were cheaper, then you would be expected to take that route.
So, unless you're doing long motorway journeys, unless you carry a lot of people, unless you carry a lot of goods, etc. etc. and could show that you needed a bigger/better/different car then you would be stuck with the Micra.
|
So, unless you're doing long motorway journeys, unless you carry a lot of people, unless you carry a lot of goods, etc. etc. and could show that you needed a bigger/better/different car then you would be stuck with the Micra.
Bingo. I can demonstrate the need, what with 150-220 miles per day.
|
As for minimising loss, I can accept that to a point, but when I am inconvenienced by another person's failings then I don't expect them to ask that I drive something inappropriate for my needs.
I'm sure if it came down to it you would find a way to get loaned a 4x4 (or you'd hand them back a very tired and muddy Micra)
|
|
|
|
|
I got a 2.2 Vaxhall Signum diesel from drive assist.
Teabelly, having left my insurance company to deal with this, are you now saying that I can't insist on a repair if they wish to write it off?
Am a bit thick when it comes to this sort of thing, but I assumed that I would inform my insurance company and they would then make a claim on my behalf against the other person. Have I got it wrong? Thinking about it, it was my insurance company that arranged the hire car, the collection of my car, and the inspection. Does this mean that I am claiming against my own policy rather than the third parties? My insurance co did take their insurance details as given to me by the third party.
|
Don't panic PDC. What will happen in this instance is that your insurer will get on with the job of putting you back in the position you would have been in and will ask you to pay the excess when you collect your repaired car. They will usually then continue to pursue the third party's insurers for recovery of all their costs and will also seek the return of your excess. In some cases it is left to you to pursue the excess, but if you have legal expenses cover or just a comprehensive "comprehensive" policy it will usually be handled by your insurers.
In any case you are required to notify your insurers, even if you don't involve them in the claim.
Make sure you stay in touch with your claims people to make sure that there are no attempts by the third party to duck their liability.
|
>>but if you have legal expenses(1) cover or just a comprehensive "comprehensive" (2) policy it will usually be handled by your insurers.
(1) yes, but make sure they pursue it properly
(2) frequently not.
|
|
|
|
I don't know but I would have thought you could insist on a repair.
I'm sure Mark(RLBS) will know where you stand exactly :-)
teabelly
|
>>I don't know but I would have thought you could insist on a repair.
No, you cannot. Although there are more options than repair or write-off. You can take the money and repair it yourself (second hand bits etc) and usually with an inspection your insurer will reinsure it.
|
|
|
|
>>are you now saying that I can't insist on a repair if they wish to write it off?
Whilst they would have to make a reasonable decision, what you state is essentially correct.
As to whether or not you are claiming via your own policy, that really depends.
Assuming that you have no loss recovery service/insurance - then your company will repair the car. You will then be resonsible for first paying, and then recovering, your excess.
Your insurer will take proof of uninsured loss recovery as justification that it is a non-fault accident. They will make the own arrangments (usually none) around recovering their own money.
Uninsured losses would cover any of the following presuming that they are not covered by your own insurance - temporary car, excess, loss of earnings, additional expenses, etc. etc.
If you do have an unisured loss recovery service, then they will do some or all of the pursuit and recovery for you. But keep a weather eye on it because sometimes they don't try very hard.
|
Sounds to me that I would have been better off contacting the other party's insurer direct then? So this now counts as a claim against my own policy, whereas I would have had no claim had I contacted the other party.
No one ever explained that to me! :-(
|
Nonononono.
No.
You would be required by the terms of your insurance to notify them of the accident regardless of whether you got them involved. If you hadn't involved them you would still have needed to satisfy your insurers that you were not to blame by showing that the other insurers had accepted full responsibility. If you get this (i.e. you get your excess back), your claims record continues unsullied.
|
No Dosh is correct. However do remember the word "if" in the following lines;
"If you get this (i.e. you get your excess back), your claims record continues unsullied. "
|
Ooo, missed this bit.
"If you hadn't involved them you would still have needed to satisfy your insurers that you were not to blame by showing that the other insurers had accepted full responsibility."
It is a no claims discount, not a no blame discount. You would, perhaps, need to show or undertake that they would not receive a claim for the incident, but not that you were not to blame for it.
|
And of course, even if you satisfy them that there is no blame AND no claim, they'll still charge you extra for your next years insurance for having been in an accident at all.
They get you going, and they get you coming back...
|
|
Well i took up a 3 year policy and was told that if I had 10 claims it wouldnt affect my premium until the end of 3rd year. Am only just about 1/2 way thru the policy.
|
|
Good deal, if it is as you say. Sadly all too often what they mean is that it won't affect your bonus level, but the base premium will get loaded out of sight.
|
|
|
|
|
