Sexist Car insurance

Graham_Devon

Gorgeous_George wrote:

From the brief details available, I would so the male caused the accident. I assume he was on the wrong side of the road and was driving recklessly.

The reason that he was overtaking would have been to get past a doddery old man/woman but that is no excuse. To enjoy accident free motoring we all need to learn to share the roads with other users (of all ages and abilities).

My view is that EVERY accident should carry a fixed penalty. I had a speeding ticket that awarded me 3 points and a £60 fine. When the old lady drove into the back of my wife's car (writing it off and causing neck injuries to my wife), the same old lady did not get fined or points awarded.



GG

Yes, it went down as the male drivers fault.

Now the full story.

We were in a tailback due to a old biddy in a suzuki swift, people were passing when they could, she was doing around 25mph on a NSL road.

This guy in a ford mondeo then got the chance to pass, so he did, which I would. Women who he was going to hit then pulls out of a small junction (actually not even a junction, more like a gap inbetween fields) on mobile phone.

Man overtaking hit's the front end of the women on the mobile phone sending him into a spin. This all happened very quickly.

Old dear in Suzuki Swift carries on inncoently not having a clue what is happening around her, never did know what happened to her.

Overtaking driver get's the blame.

Now, we have a case here of old dear driving less than half the speed limit on a good road. We have a case of women pulling out of dangerous turning on mobile phone. And we have a case of the male driver, who's probably the most aware of the situation waiting ofor a safe place to pass, which he did.

Another statistic for the 'lunatic' and 'competive' male driver crashing.

2 women at fault, 1 male at fault. Male get's hit with the actual blame.

So it's true, you can't judge WHY an accident happened. You can only lay blame. I would not have said the bloke driving the modeo was a wreckless driver he was doing what about 4 drivers had succesfully done, passing an insanely slow driver.

So, the granny, who had no idea what was happening carried on regardless. Women on phone lays blame on overtaking bloke. Overtaking bloke gets the 'speed kills' line thrown at him.

mrcow

Graham_Devon wrote:

Overtaking bloke gets the 'speed kills' line thrown at him.

Yes, especially when you are driving without actually looking where you are going (which is what he did given the details in your story).

Just because four other drivers had overtaken before him doesn't mean to say that he shouldn't have checked the road for obstacles before he started his overtaking manouvre. He's lucky that he didn't injure anyone!

Tim_L

The highway code would suggest that you should overtake only when it is safe to do so. If there was a junction there will have been a warning sign. It was clearly unsafe to overtake because the driver hit someone. Probably if the woman could be proved to be on a mobile phone the insurance companies would apportion blame to some degree - as a rule if there is any sniff of being able to make a claim against someone else they will do it.

It's beyond ridiculous to blame someone in front of an accident for it in any way. Everyone in the world has been held up by another driver - the classic scenario is not the "old dear" but a tractor on a country road or a couple of cyclists. If you can't control your temper long enough to realise that going at 25 miles an hour rather than 50 for the 10 minutes these delays generally take costs you precisely 4 miles less distance then you shouldn't be in charge of a ton of highly powered machinery, frankly. I have lost count of the number of cars I've seen doing extraordinarily dangerous overtaking manoeuvres to pass lorries and such that I've pulled alongside at the next set of lights. And funnily enough, the drivers are very rarely women.

Hitting a bicycle or a motorbike coming out of this junction would have resulted in a fatal accident. It's pretty pathetic that this lethally dangerous example of poor driving is being trotted out to support an argument against an incontrovertible fact: women make fewer insurance claims than men and therefore can benefit from lower insurance premiums. Just as women live longer and get lower annuity rates. Insurance is a numbers game.

chodges84

Yes, especially when you are driving without actually looking where you are going (which is what he did given the details in your story).

Hmm, don't really agree with that but still.

If she was on a mobile phone she should have been penalised anyway. No doubt she thought she was above the law

I also think that people should be re tested at a certain age, maybe 60. Not a complete test, but definately a refresher to see if they are fit enough to drive. As people get older reactions get slower and eyesight gets worse etc.

Anyway, quite a funny rendition of the 'Sheilas Wheels' theme tune here: http://www.amateurtransplants.com/

I'm only posting the link because I think its funny and not because I agree or disagree with it.

exel1966

Would not driving at 25mph on a route carrying the NSL be tantamount to driving "without due care and attention" to other road users. Sounds to me that all three parties were the cause of this accident.
Accidents do not occur because of one event, but because of a serious of events.

chodges84

tractor on a country road or a couple of cyclists

Which reminds me, why is it not mandatory for Cyclists or Horses to ahve insurance. Horses can be very dangerous on the road and can become uncontrollable at a moments notice.

I have nothing against either (Except when cyclists ride side by side, as not only is it illegal it is also bloody stupid), but see that it is unfair.

If a cyclist lost control and flew in to your car, he would be at fault but you would be left with the bill.

Gorgeous_George

I know a lady who pulled out of a field. She was hit by a car that must have been speeding - it wsn't there when she started to pull out. As she was on his side of the road, it's her fault - regardless of the speed that he was doing.

Accidents don't just happen, they're caused. Usually there is more than one person that could have prevented the accident but,l to keep things black and white, only one person is at fault in the eyes of the law and, more importantly, the insurers.



GG

Gorgeous_George

[QUOTE=chodges84If_a_cyclist_lost_control_and_flew_in_to_your_car,_he_would_be_at_fault_but_you_would_be_left_with_the_bill.[/QUOTE]

Not necessarily true.

Any comments on this story.



GG

Graham_Devon

Tim_L wrote:

The highway code would suggest that you should overtake only when it is safe to do so. If there was a junction there will have been a warning sign. It was clearly unsafe to overtake because the driver hit someone. Probably if the woman could be proved to be on a mobile phone the insurance companies would apportion blame to some degree - as a rule if there is any sniff of being able to make a claim against someone else they will do it.

It's beyond ridiculous to blame someone in front of an accident for it in any way. Everyone in the world has been held up by another driver - the classic scenario is not the "old dear" but a tractor on a country road or a couple of cyclists. If you can't control your temper long enough to realise that going at 25 miles an hour rather than 50 for the 10 minutes these delays generally take costs you precisely 4 miles less distance then you shouldn't be in charge of a ton of highly powered machinery, frankly. I have lost count of the number of cars I've seen doing extraordinarily dangerous overtaking manoeuvres to pass lorries and such that I've pulled alongside at the next set of lights. And funnily enough, the drivers are very rarely women.

Hitting a bicycle or a motorbike coming out of this junction would have resulted in a fatal accident. It's pretty pathetic that this lethally dangerous example of poor driving is being trotted out to support an argument against an incontrovertible fact: women make fewer insurance claims than men and therefore can benefit from lower insurance premiums. Just as women live longer and get lower annuity rates. Insurance is a numbers game.

I said explicitally that it wasn't a junction in my first post which I have not edited. I said it was between 2 fields, a dirt track at most, she was probably a farmer or a relation of some sort to the farmer. She was in a land rover and was not hurt, the man overtaking was, had to be cut out.

People saying things like 'driving without due care and attention' like you have said about this man make me sick.

The ONLY person driving WITH due care and attention here was the man overtaking. Hard to believe I know.

But women on mobile phone pulling out between 2 hedges, yes, lots of due care and attention and someone who doesnt even recognise that there is a massive smash next to her and continues on her merry way.

I'm sorry, but people with these kinda thoughts wind me up, will always look at the 'typical' fault, won't take into account the surrounding factors. PC Brigade comes to mind.

mrcow

Graham_Devon wrote:

The ONLY person driving WITH due care and attention here was the man overtaking. Hard to believe I know.

Amazing that you can say this when you didn't even witness the accident :rolleyes:

I hope:

a. that the guy who was cut out of his car was okay
b. that he was subsequently put on a driver training course to teach him the importance of paying attention to the road before you perform a dangerous manouvre such as overtaking

Arriving at your destination a little later than anticipated is better than never arriving at all.............