minor accident - i am being stiched up

neilmcl

savingsp wrote: »

Who are you to keep critisizing he hasnt had an accident or fine in 12 years of driving

To thoses who gave advice THANK YOU i will ring my insurance and speak to them tomorrow

You asked for opinions.

savingsp wrote: »

Can i have peoples opinions on this? Has anyone been in this stiuation before? Can i disagree with her claim?

And you got one.

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

It's you husbands fault if he ran into the back of her, end of.

Just because it didn't give you the answer you wanted to hear doesn't make it any less relevant.

arcon5

savingsp wrote: »

Who are you to keep critisizing he hasnt had an accident or fine in 12 years of driving

To thoses who gave advice THANK YOU i will ring my insurance and speak to them tomorrow

By the sounds of it op you are being stitched up... but the simple fact is you should keep a distance from the car in front that is sufficient to ensure you can stop safely in an emergency. If this had in fact been something more sinister, like a kids running in the road or something the results would have been the same -- your husband rear ending somebody.

I think the correct distance apart is 2 seconds (4 seconds when wet or hazardous), although ideally you should keep a larger gap so in an emergency you have more time to stop, thus reducing the risk of injury to your passengers.

The fact he hasn't had an accident in 12 years is not really relevant and doesn't transfer fault. It could mean he has become complacent.

But the truth is he will not be able to defend this claim very easily. You may not like this, but that's life.

This might be an interesting read: http://technology-assoc.com/articles/whiplash-during-low-speed-impact-fact-or-fraud.html

SLITHER99

Opinion as an objective outside - I'm no expert or know all the rules of the road or in the biz - I just hold a license same as you. I worked at Ford Insure for a bit, but can't claim any expertise from the experience.

ANyway, your husband went into the back of her, it's his fault. Depending on the age of the car, that may well be enough to write it off! You are not able to conclude the car is roadworthy, unless you're going to tell me that you've been a crash repairer or road forensics type person for your entire career.

Don't give yourself the headache, stick it on your insurance and plead your case that way; sadly I doubt you'll win.

However, if you want some piece of mind, go buy a dash camera! They're about £50 on eBay (though I paid £120 for mine).

Literally three days after I installed my investment it came in useful - I was following a colleague by pure coincidence on my route to work - she lives on one of the roads I drive past on my commute. Let's just say my dash camera footage which I provided to her is proving invaluable to an incident which would have otherwise been her fault by proxy, which is the standard fare of poor defenseless cyclist with big cute eyes and a little hat with a feather in it VS dangerous, obviously speeding, must be on drugs BMW driver who eats small children and hates animals. Or at least, that's how the cyclist painted it up...

But I won't say much here as it's an ongoing thing!

DUTR

savingsp wrote: »

Ok strange story behind it so stick with me -

On the 13th of this month my husband was involved in a car accident in my car, the accident occured as follows

I was driving my parents car to the garage for its MOT and my husband was following behind in my car. We both knew where we were going, as it was early morning there was the usual extra traffic on the road and a car came between us. I slowed to go around a vehicle that was turning but i didnt stop, i remained looking in my mirrors and could see the other persons car, i then heard a bang and immediatly stopped. My husband braked the car locked up and slide into the car infront.

There was a little damage to the persons bumper but more damage to the car my husband was driving.

The lady in the car got out looked phyically fine and was speaking ok if a little shocked at what had happened although so was my husband. Details were exchanged and we just managed to get a photo of the damage to her car before she drove off quickly.

Today we recieved a letter from her solicitor saying she suffered whiplash, she has neck and back pain, headaches and dizziness , also an anxiety to drive.

We had a witness to the accident to say she braked suddenly and it wasnt my husbands fault. I know being at the back he will get the blame by law however i feel she has done this on purpose in order to claim for whiplash.

I have told my insurance company that i think this and feel that she knew what she was doing and that i am being stiched up.

The letter stated she hasnt been able to work since and that she needs some form of rehabillitation to return to work.

She clains she was stationary and my husband failed to brake but he did apply the brakes and i cant understand why she was stationary as there was no reason for this.

Can i have peoples opinions on this? Has anyone been in this stiuation before? Can i disagree with her claim?

Help Please:mad:

A claim is a claim, I don't think you are being stitched up, few years ago, someone ran up the back of me on a roundabout, was hours later before any symptoms occured. Last year a guy ran into the side of my car whilst he was texting and slowly coming off the drive, the 2nd accident has caused me greater discomfort, the neck pain was gone within a couple of weeks, but I do now have frozen shoulder. However I have not persued a claim, that said the victim has probably been nagged and nagged to make a claim, the details from the insurance company are passed on, I still get calls from the accident claims company. The companies get around £750 for each lead to the solicitor, the solicitors will get their costs and the victim may get a couple hundred quid.
But your claim whether it was £50 against the policy or £50,000 , it is still an at fault claim. SO let the insurance deal with it, that's what part of your policy fee covers.

gilbert_and_sullivan

Its standard fare in wimp Britain where the slightest knock or graze means someone must be held to blame and a claim for free money must follow, what a nation of losers we have become.

Unfortunately for the chap who hit the car it is his fault, unless he can prove that the driver of the car hit deliberately provoked the accident, which is going to be extremely difficult, seeing as most crash for cash scams feature several passengers and or at least two vehicles to give some semblance of reason for heavy braking.

What the OP saw from the rearview mirror could well be misleading, things do look different.

Put it down to and expensive experience, its going to go down as an at fault for the OP husband, the claimant has a nice little earner coming, kerching.

z1a

As regards slight damage to bumper, that's what I thought my car had when a parked car rolled back into mine. Only obvious damage was a puncture through the plastic where the towbar had hit, total repair bill was £2172 + £2500 for 5 weeks car hire!
Best bit was, my car was only worth £1800 tops at the time.

Paradigm

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

Its standard fare in wimp Britain where the slightest knock or graze means someone must be held to blame and a claim for free money must follow, what a nation of losers we have become.

Very true sadly.

I was rear ended (oo'er matron) 12 months ago, took the car into the local repairer for an estimate & within minutes the receptionist was telling me that they could also handle "my personal injury claim"....

patman99

Standard practice to claim for whiplash. It cannot be proved whether you do or do not have it, so the insurance companies simply pay-out.
Good job this is changing soon with the abolishion of whiplash as an injury. The scammers will have to cliam for something else instead.

artbaron

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

Its standard fare in wimp Britain where the slightest knock or graze means someone must be held to blame and a claim for free money must follow, what a nation of losers we have become.

It's this compensation culture that's to blame and of course the parasites take advantage. Medically there is no such thing as whiplash, there are only different flavours and severity of neck injury. I've had one of these neck injuries (from a 40mph collision, not some piddly knock at walking pace) and whilst the next day it was unpleasant, like a bad hangover, I never even thought of claiming compensation. The day following it had gone anyway, so what precisely is this compensation for? A sore neck? It's absurd. Hopefully the law will change soon so that only evidential, consequential injuries are taken into account and all our insurance premiums will plummet as a result.

Bravehearted_2

How do you know your husband stopped in time when you were two cars ahead.

You might want to take emotion out of this and consider for a sec that your husband was indeed nose-tailing her.

The simple fact is at the 17mph that you claim, if she stopped on purpose, the your husband should have had enough time to stop IF he wasn't tailing.

At such a slow speed, you only hit the car in front if you are not paying attention or tailing the car.

This is an easy one even if its not what you want to hear.