In the usual grid lock on the M25 this morning, between J9 and 10, my Volvo V70 was rear end 'shunted', by a Picasso. I was stationary, and the impact was quite light.
We pulled onto hard shoulder to examine damage etc. There wasn't any! We could just about find the point of impact on his number plate, but only just. Everything else was fine, although I haven't had a detailed look under my car. (I have a tow hook, so the bumper wasn't touched). There was no damage on his car at all that we could find.
We exchanged names and addresses - and I said I would call him if I discovered any damage. Incidentally, he apologised and said his foot had slipped - we were both in suits so didn't crawl under the cars....
Now the questions: do I get the car checked in a garage? Do we need to inform insurance cos etc, even if we have noi intention of making a claim?
Frankly I don't think there is any damage, so the story closes - but do I need to do anything? (Both cars are privately owned).
Views appreciated - Andy.
|
I was going to suggest examining the tow bar mountings (to the car) but if it didn't even crack his number plate then it's hard to imagine it's done any damage.
Therefore no need for further action.
|
Some people get out and scream the place down for the slightest bump, others just grin and wave and drive on.
Obviously tilda99 and his fellow-bumpee were civil individuals somewhere between these extremes. They can be criticized only for making slightly heavy weather of a non-event.
I have often wondered what characters in the first category, the ones who run up and down claiming whiplash injury after a tiny traffic nerf, do when they run into someone. Are they cringingly apologetic? Somehow I doubt it.
A small but growing percentage of our population, including this category, belongs in cages.
|
many cars that get a tap in the back especially tow bar ones dont show the damage as the energy has been absorbed somewhere else, either in the floorpan ,or in extremes,by shallow dents in the roof.
have someone give it the once over for you
|
I was going to say something similar. Have someone who knows what they're doing give it the once over for peace of mind. I'm sure everything is fine, and if it is then that's the end of it. Far better to find out any damage now though while you have the other guy's contact information.
Cheers
DP
|
This is based on a Sierra by the way which received a light tap at a set of lights. Looked abaolutely fine, but it had bent the floorpan under the boot enough to cause geometry problems and the resulting repair bill wrote the car off. Extreme example maybe, but worth a check. This car looked absolutely perfect to the naked eye.
Cheers
DP
|
I was rear-ended a couple of times in my 91 Mazda 626 4WD when living in the UK. Both were at roundabouts at less than 5 mph. Both times the rear bumper looked fine apart from minor scratches. In one case the rear panel had been pushed in, but in both cases the internal stiffening webs (like a milk crate) on the inside of the bumper had been crushed. If the bumper hadn't been replaced, the next impact would have been transmitted straight through to the body of the car.
After the second incident I decided that the brake lights (only one pair) were not visible enough. I found that the tail lights had a place for a second pair of lamps, which had been omitted. I got a couple of bulb sockets from a breaker and wired them in parallel with the existing lights. That improved the brake lights significantly.
Lastly I wired a large diode from the brake lights to the rear fog lights. When braking, the fogs came on as well, but when using the fogs, the brake lights did not come on until needed. No problem with this at MOT time. Didn't suffer any more rear-end shunts while I had the car, which went to the breakers when i moved back to NZ. Ten year old 626s were fairly hard to sell, and it needed some minor work for an MOT.
|
Ok - thanks for the replies. Have just had really good look at the back of the car, underside, overside and inside. Can find no sign of any damage at all, and certainly no 'rippling' (or anything at all actually) as I had feared.
So incident closed as far as I am concerned. But presumably no need to tell my insurer, as there is no claim? Do I need to tell them this happened, just in case the other person does just inform his insurer?
On the roadside, he seemed keen to say we should just tell our insurers, even though there is no damage.... I said no need as probably no damage (to be confirmed), so it just never happened.... I will call him this evening.
Also - not making heavy weather of this at all Lud, but I find a lot (but not all..) of the opinion on this board informative, and was just using it to check my instincts. Thankfully, in this (non) incident, we were both similar people, one of whom had made a mistake, and he was man enough to admit it. I always leave a cars length in front of me anyway, so even if shunted, hoepfully will only have one accident. Also, if I didn't have the tow hook, I wouldn't have hit me!
Andy.
|
>>I wouldn't have hit me!
Really?
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
|
|
"hoepfully will only have one accident. Also, if I didn't have the tow hook, I wouldn't have hit me!"
sorry for the schoolboy error- to make things clear for all
delete 'hoepfully' and insert 'hopefully'.
delete second 'I' and insert 'he'.
that should make it easier to understand for all....
I will be much more careful in the future - on the road and in type!
Andy.
|
>>I wouldn't have hit me!
It made me chuckle when I first read it. All BR's all make the occasional spelling error, gramatical error or gaff. It can be fun decoding what was intended.
Glad to note you will take more care on the road and in type - hopefully not at the same time!
--
Roger
I read frequently, but only post when I have something useful to say.
|
|
|
|
|
