Advice please - damaged my car on a speed hump :(

Daniel_san

FiremanDave wrote: »

Well this is true, but he's informing his insurance tomorrow and asking for legal advice. For the next five years he will have to tell the insurance companies about the fault claim all for a small knock on a six year old motor.

FiremanDave wrote: »

Did I say claim?

Errr yes, you did lool

Daniel_san

FiremanDave wrote: »

So you wouldn't need to reverse 400 metres. At any other point n the road two cars could pass had you reversed 10 feet or waited it wouldn't have happened

So hang on, it's ok to use the additional road width anywhere else apart from where the hump is? Either it is ok to use the "pedestrian" area of the road, or it's not. I mean we all know now that using it where the hump is caused damage but I had no reason to know that at the time.

pitkin2020

FiremanDave wrote: »

You can see it so why didn't the driver?

Saying it clearly sags will meet a response of well why did you drive into it?

Claims are won on negligence not stupidity.

big difference though from clearly seeing from a picture taken at angle to purposely showing the dip to being behind the wheel looking ahead watching for people, other cars etc

FiremanDave

Daniel_san wrote: »

Errr yes, you did lool

Ok it should be incident. Speak to them and you'll have to declare it.

JustinR1979

FiremanDave wrote: »

Highlight claim for me.

Highlighted.

FiremanDave

Daniel_san wrote: »

So hang on, it's ok to use the additional road width anywhere else apart from where the hump is? Either it is ok to use the "pedestrian" area of the road, or it's not. I mean we all know now that using it where the hump is caused damage but I had no reason to know that at the time.

Well clearly as it wouldn't result in damage.

pitkin2020

FiremanDave wrote: »

Well clearly as it wouldn't result in damage.

your saying two different things though, its not acceptable to cross the white at all but its ok to cross it anywhere other than the speedhump, it can't be both??
Its either ok or its not lol

Daniel_san

pitkin2020 wrote: »

big difference though from clearly seeing from a picture taken at angle to purposely showing the dip to being behind the wheel looking ahead watching for people, other cars etc

Exactly! Being able to spot that the road is 20mm (for example) lower on the exit side of the hump, would be impressive IMO.

Daniel_san

pitkin2020 wrote: »

your saying two different things though, its not acceptable to cross the white at all but its ok to cross it anywhere other than the speedhump, it can't be both??
Its either ok or its not lol

I tell you what, I am glad a few people "get it". It's all too easy to pass judgement based on knowledge of the end result.

Daniel_san

I'd like to thank everyone for their input. I don't agree with all of it but I am grateful for your time and differing opinions. The damage isn't too bad (but annoying as I am sure most of you can appreciate) and I hope won't cost loads to fix.

I shall now sit back and enjoy the F1