Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Programmer
    • By Programmer 4th Jul 18, 3:24 PM
    • 26Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Programmer
    Son's motor accident - how to settle
    • #1
    • 4th Jul 18, 3:24 PM
    Son's motor accident - how to settle 4th Jul 18 at 3:24 PM
    I've just had a phone call from my 25 year old son. He was turning right on to a main road in fairly slow moving traffic. Somebody let him in but he had to nose forward slowly as visibility was impeded by a lorry. A motorcyclist hit the car and the rider came off. Police and ambulance were called. Brief facts:


    * no damage to car apart from minor paint scuffing
    * some damage to bike; some instruments a bit loose and handles slightly out of alignment, but rideable
    * rider not seriously hurt but paramedic said he could possibly have a sprained ankle; rider was happy to continue his journey to work (on the bike)
    * after speaking to a witness, policeman said no obvious offence had been committed and said police would take no further action; invited son and rider to sort it out between themselves or with insurers
    * my son remembered his Dad's previous advice and did not offer any apologies or admit blame (that's my boy! )



    My son said there was no hostility and they shook hands. On the question of blame, he was unsure. He thought the rider was going too fast, considering he was approaching traffic lights. and the bike hit him, he didn't hit the bike. ...but was my son nudging forward too quickly? Hard to say.



    In the post-accident conversation the rider said the damage to the bike would be £300 max (bike value £1000) and invited my son to pay the garage bill, in which case (he said) he would make no insurance claim, either for the bike or his ankle. My son invited him to let him know the cost but made no commitment. The insurers already know about this offer, by the way. The black box in my son's car registered the impact and they were on the phone immediately. The insurer's initial advice is for my son to pay the garage bill, in which case (they say) the incident will be treated as a non-event and have no impact on future premiums.



    My son now wants my advice. My first thought was he should pay this garage bill and keep the whole matter out of the hands of the insurers. But I'm having second thoughts. This bike rider SAYS he will not take further action if his bike repair costs are met, but what is to stop him settling in front of the TV in the afternoon, watching an ad put out by some firm of ambulance-chasing solicitors, and immediately rushing out to buy a walking frame, neck brace, crutches and other where-there's-a-blame-there's-a-claim requisites, then phoning the 0800 number, pound signs flashing in his revolving eyeballs? And if my son pays this bill, could that be taken as an admission of responsibility is some future compensation claim?


    By the way, the £300 approx would be easily affordable and not a problem.
Page 2
    • Programmer
    • By Programmer 4th Jul 18, 8:00 PM
    • 26 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Programmer
    ...I wanted to post a picture from Google Street View to show the precise situation but this forum doesn't seem to have the facility for inserting images from a file.


    However, if anyone is able to access Street View....search on Brooke Street Cleckheaton and take position at west end of Brooke Street facing the A638. You should see two lanes of traffic approaching the (amber) lights and facing left; Mercedes in adjacent lane and small truck towing a large yellow mower in the middle lane; there is only one lane in the opposite direction. My son was turning right into this lane, and the bike that hit him was in the van-and-mower lane. The lights were red at the time.
    • AndyMc.....
    • By AndyMc..... 4th Jul 18, 8:21 PM
    • 2,553 Posts
    • 1,572 Thanks
    AndyMc.....
    Use tinypic.
    Hi there! We’ve had to remove your signature. Please check the Forum Rules if you’re unsure why it’s been removed and, if still unsure, email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
    • neilmcl
    • By neilmcl 4th Jul 18, 8:54 PM
    • 12,013 Posts
    • 8,754 Thanks
    neilmcl
    ...I wanted to post a picture from Google Street View to show the precise situation but this forum doesn't seem to have the facility for inserting images from a file.


    However, if anyone is able to access Street View....search on Brooke Street Cleckheaton and take position at west end of Brooke Street facing the A638. You should see two lanes of traffic approaching the (amber) lights and facing left; Mercedes in adjacent lane and small truck towing a large yellow mower in the middle lane; there is only one lane in the opposite direction. My son was turning right into this lane, and the bike that hit him was in the van-and-mower lane. The lights were red at the time.
    Originally posted by Programmer
    So the car that let him in and left a gap was in the nearest lane? Looks entirely your son's fault tbh as he was crossing 2 lanes but failed to take care when crossing the path of the 2nd lane.
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 4th Jul 18, 9:34 PM
    • 639 Posts
    • 418 Thanks
    debtdebt
    Lack of criminal prosecution doesn!!!8217;t absolve your son of civil liveability. Based on the accident circumstances, he will be held to be at fault for the accident.

    He claims that the motorcyclist was speeding. How did he judge the approaching speed of the motorcycle if his sight was restricted? In any event, once again, this is not enough to absolve him of civil liability.

    Let the insurance company deal with it. The third party will almost certainly present a claim for personal injury if his ankle was damaged. He may have been able to ride away as there would have been no weight put on the ankle but things may change when he got home.
    • Programmer
    • By Programmer 4th Jul 18, 10:11 PM
    • 26 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Programmer
    So the car that let him in and left a gap was in the nearest lane? Looks entirely your son's fault tbh as he was crossing 2 lanes but failed to take care when crossing the path of the 2nd lane.
    Originally posted by neilmcl

    Yes, that vehicle was in the nearest lane. But see posts above. I wasn't there to witness the accident but my son may have been creeping forward to get a clear view to the right, which I think is permitted; imagine trying to turn right from your own property when a lorry has parked so as to obscure your view to the right. There is no option but to move forward (slowly) until you have a clear view.
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 4th Jul 18, 10:13 PM
    • 17,873 Posts
    • 10,900 Thanks
    motorguy
    Yes, that vehicle was in the nearest lane. But see posts above. I wasn't there to witness the accident but my son may have been creeping forward to get a clear view to the right, which I think is permitted; imagine trying to turn right from your own property when a lorry has parked so as to obscure your view to the right. There is no option but to move forward (slowly) until you have a clear view.
    Originally posted by Programmer
    Sounds like hes been unlucky but i do think it will end up being deemed his fault.
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • neilmcl
    • By neilmcl 5th Jul 18, 8:53 AM
    • 12,013 Posts
    • 8,754 Thanks
    neilmcl
    Yes, that vehicle was in the nearest lane. But see posts above. I wasn't there to witness the accident but my son may have been creeping forward to get a clear view to the right, which I think is permitted; imagine trying to turn right from your own property when a lorry has parked so as to obscure your view to the right. There is no option but to move forward (slowly) until you have a clear view.
    Originally posted by Programmer
    I've done this many times but creeping out in traffic is one thing, proceeding when your visibility is hampered is something entirely different. The correct thing to do was to wait until the lorry had passed and then attempt to cross.
    • caprikid1
    • By caprikid1 5th Jul 18, 9:11 AM
    • 678 Posts
    • 650 Thanks
    caprikid1
    Creeping out breaks the principle of , do not proceed unless it is clear and safe to do so. Doing it slowly does not make it safe merely reduces the risk and you will always still be at fault.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 5th Jul 18, 11:02 AM
    • 3,523 Posts
    • 2,162 Thanks
    Car 54
    I'm pretty sure that it says either in the Highway Code or that book 'Driving' published by the old Ministry of Transport, that when you do not have a clear view of a lane you are turning in to, it is permissible to move your car forward until you can see round any obstruction. After all, what else can you do? The obstruction might be a parked car. You can't sit and wait for the owner to return and drive it away. The bike wasn't speeding, but may have been going too fast considering adjacent traffic lights....will be clearer when I have made my next post.....
    Originally posted by Programmer

    Agreed, but the law requires that you don't do so "in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident."
    • spadoosh
    • By spadoosh 5th Jul 18, 11:27 AM
    • 5,748 Posts
    • 7,894 Thanks
    spadoosh
    I dont see the point in paying for insurance so that when you need it you decide not to use it.

    The risk to your son by not using the insurance is a a future claim of an undetermined amount. This could be 50p or £50k. To give some perspective the maximum claim for a fractured foot that heals completely is £4,300. If it doesnt heal completely its bigger, if thers loss of earnings as a result its even more.

    The risk to your son for going through the insurance is paying a few hundred pounds more a year for a few year on insurance.

    To give some perspective. My OH had an accident with no one else involved, skidded on ice and ended up ploughing through a private estate and tearing up the grass. The claim from the other party was in the thousands, OH car was clost ot being a write off, but was repaired for £4k. When she renewed she added me to her policy (had 3 points, and 2 accidents, 1 fault 1 non fault to be reported) im male and younger htan her. It dropped by i think £55.

    With regard to my fault accident, again on ice, i was 24 and the reduction from getting older far offset the increase from having a crash. Again my insurance dropped on renewal after a fault accident. Although i do believe there wasnt much claimed.

    Just put it through the insurance and never think about it again. He might be slightly disgruntled upon renewal but if he can afford £300 to pay for the repairs he should be able to afford an increase in his premiums.


    Either way any insurance provider will want him to declare any fault accidents. Because youve settled outside of insurance doesnt change the fact that there was an at fault accident. The damage to his insurance is already done.
    Last edited by spadoosh; 05-07-2018 at 11:29 AM.
    Don't be angry!
    • garth549
    • By garth549 5th Jul 18, 1:42 PM
    • 213 Posts
    • 86 Thanks
    garth549
    ^^

    I agree, tell him to just go through his insurance. Even though it seems unlikely in this case, the cost of a claim can quickly spiral into 5 figures. It's just not worth the risk.

    If he's already 25 then depending on his no claims, the increase in premiums he'll pay over the new 3-4 years shouldn't be too excessive (few hundred pounds total)
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 5th Jul 18, 1:51 PM
    • 17,873 Posts
    • 10,900 Thanks
    motorguy
    ^^

    I agree, tell him to just go through his insurance. Even though it seems unlikely in this case, the cost of a claim can quickly spiral into 5 figures. It's just not worth the risk.

    If he's already 25 then depending on his no claims, the increase in premiums he'll pay over the new 3-4 years shouldn't be too excessive (few hundred pounds total)
    Originally posted by garth549
    With respect telling someone to go through your insurance is effectively inviting them to roger you senseless.

    If it can be contained to £300, i'd pay it. It will be marked on the insurance as an accident but no costs which will have a minimal effect. Accident + costs + potential personal injury claim will send the insurance renewal quotes mental.
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • Nobbie1967
    • By Nobbie1967 5th Jul 18, 2:05 PM
    • 809 Posts
    • 883 Thanks
    Nobbie1967
    I dont see the point in paying for insurance so that when you need it you decide not to use it.

    The risk to your son by not using the insurance is a a future claim of an undetermined amount. This could be 50p or £50k. To give some perspective the maximum claim for a fractured foot that heals completely is £4,300. If it doesnt heal completely its bigger, if thers loss of earnings as a result its even more.

    The risk to your son for going through the insurance is paying a few hundred pounds more a year for a few year on insurance.

    To give some perspective. My OH had an accident with no one else involved, skidded on ice and ended up ploughing through a private estate and tearing up the grass. The claim from the other party was in the thousands, OH car was clost ot being a write off, but was repaired for £4k. When she renewed she added me to her policy (had 3 points, and 2 accidents, 1 fault 1 non fault to be reported) im male and younger htan her. It dropped by i think £55.

    With regard to my fault accident, again on ice, i was 24 and the reduction from getting older far offset the increase from having a crash. Again my insurance dropped on renewal after a fault accident. Although i do believe there wasnt much claimed.

    Just put it through the insurance and never think about it again. He might be slightly disgruntled upon renewal but if he can afford £300 to pay for the repairs he should be able to afford an increase in his premiums.


    Either way any insurance provider will want him to declare any fault accidents. Because youve settled outside of insurance doesnt change the fact that there was an at fault accident. The damage to his insurance is already done.
    Originally posted by spadoosh
    Paying £300 direct to the other party after informing your insurance company of the incident does not expose you to the risks of a subsequent claim for personal injury. This would be handled by the insurance company as usual. Depending on there NCB and premium, it may be worth taking the risk of a later claim affecting NCB as well as base premium.
    • Programmer
    • By Programmer 5th Jul 18, 5:16 PM
    • 26 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Programmer
    ^^

    I agree, tell him to just go through his insurance. Even though it seems unlikely in this case, the cost of a claim can quickly spiral into 5 figures. It's just not worth the risk.

    If he's already 25 then depending on his no claims, the increase in premiums he'll pay over the new 3-4 years shouldn't be too excessive (few hundred pounds total)
    Originally posted by garth549

    See Nobbie1967's post. I don't see there is any risk settling privately. Insurance works in perpetuity. If you make a claim on your household insurance for subsidence, and you have used different insurers over the years, first thing your current insurer will do is investigate the subsidence and try to work out when it commenced and attempt to pass the claim to the insurer who covered that year. I have heard these inter-insurance discussions can delay settlement of a claim for years, but ultimately you are insured. Same with a late-notified motor claim. If you have paid your premium for that year you will be covered.
    • Programmer
    • By Programmer 5th Jul 18, 5:36 PM
    • 26 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Programmer
    Several contributors have questioned the insurer's promise that the incident will not affect future premiums, saying there is no such thing as a non-event once that event has been recorded. This might be a little too pessimistic. My whole working life was spent in IT working for an insurance company. I often worked on the rating and renewal systems. Rates were set by accessing rating tables. The databases held many pieces of data that had no corresponding entries on the rating tables and were therefore transparent as far as premium calculation was concerned. It could be that Hastings' rating engines do not access data concerning incidents not resulting in a claim, conviction, or allocation of blame.



    On the other hand, Hastings could have a ruthlessly efficient system that rates on everything including colour of your eyes, your inside leg measurement, and how you voted in the Brexit referendum. I don't know.
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 5th Jul 18, 5:45 PM
    • 17,873 Posts
    • 10,900 Thanks
    motorguy
    Several contributors have questioned the insurer's promise that the incident will not affect future premiums, saying there is no such thing as a non-event once that event has been recorded. This might be a little too pessimistic. My whole working life was spent in IT working for an insurance company. I often worked on the rating and renewal systems. Rates were set by accessing rating tables. The databases held many pieces of data that had no corresponding entries on the rating tables and were therefore transparent as far as premium calculation was concerned. It could be that Hastings' rating engines do not access data concerning incidents not resulting in a claim, conviction, or allocation of blame.



    On the other hand, Hastings could have a ruthlessly efficient system that rates on everything including colour of your eyes, your inside leg measurement, and how you voted in the Brexit referendum. I don't know.
    Originally posted by Programmer
    The flaw in that is that any insurance broker / online quote will ask your sone if he's had any accidents, claims or convictions. He would have to declare that he had an accident. In my experience, that will affect the quote.
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 5th Jul 18, 6:02 PM
    • 17,873 Posts
    • 10,900 Thanks
    motorguy
    Just for interest i plugged the following details in to Compare the market

    25 year old
    3 years NCB
    driving 3 years
    Driving a 2011 Petrol megane 1.4
    No accidents

    Cheapest quote = £670

    Ran it again only with one accident declared, June 2018, £0 cost claim, other party involved, driver at fault.

    Cheapest quote = £707

    Ran it again with above, damage = £300.

    Cheapest quote = £707

    So yes the accident impacts the premium slightly but it definitely is taken in to account
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • rudekid48
    • By rudekid48 5th Jul 18, 6:06 PM
    • 2,113 Posts
    • 3,596 Thanks
    rudekid48
    Several contributors have questioned the insurer's promise that the incident will not affect future premiums, saying there is no such thing as a non-event once that event has been recorded. This might be a little too pessimistic. My whole working life was spent in IT working for an insurance company. I often worked on the rating and renewal systems. Rates were set by accessing rating tables. The databases held many pieces of data that had no corresponding entries on the rating tables and were therefore transparent as far as premium calculation was concerned. It could be that Hastings' rating engines do not access data concerning incidents not resulting in a claim, conviction, or allocation of blame.



    On the other hand, Hastings could have a ruthlessly efficient system that rates on everything including colour of your eyes, your inside leg measurement, and how you voted in the Brexit referendum. I don't know.
    Originally posted by Programmer
    If the insurer was given the same information that you have given on here then there is no way that they would have acted as described for one simple reason - the injury to the biker.

    You need to check again with your son exactly what he told Hastings. It sounds to me like they believed that the £300 damage was to your sons vehicle as with a £250 excess they may well recommend that he pays for the repairs himself but even this is highly unlikely if they were told about injuries to the other party.
    All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.
    • Arklight
    • By Arklight 6th Jul 18, 10:23 AM
    • 1,586 Posts
    • 2,467 Thanks
    Arklight
    If the insurer was given the same information that you have given on here then there is no way that they would have acted as described for one simple reason - the injury to the biker.

    You need to check again with your son exactly what he told Hastings. It sounds to me like they believed that the £300 damage was to your sons vehicle as with a £250 excess they may well recommend that he pays for the repairs himself but even this is highly unlikely if they were told about injuries to the other party.
    Originally posted by rudekid48
    Yes I agree, attempting to deal with this out of his back pocket instead of passing on to the insurers is absolute madness in my opinion.

    Why on earth do people buy insurance then try not to use it? The chances of this not ending up as an injury claim are tiny.
    • spadoosh
    • By spadoosh 6th Jul 18, 10:31 AM
    • 5,748 Posts
    • 7,894 Thanks
    spadoosh
    With respect telling someone to go through your insurance is effectively inviting them to roger you senseless.

    If it can be contained to £300, i'd pay it. It will be marked on the insurance as an accident but no costs which will have a minimal effect. Accident + costs + potential personal injury claim will send the insurance renewal quotes mental.
    Originally posted by motorguy
    Just for interest i plugged the following details in to Compare the market

    25 year old
    3 years NCB
    driving 3 years
    Driving a 2011 Petrol megane 1.4
    No accidents

    Cheapest quote = £670

    Ran it again only with one accident declared, June 2018, £0 cost claim, other party involved, driver at fault.

    Cheapest quote = £707

    Ran it again with above, damage = £300.

    Cheapest quote = £707

    So yes the accident impacts the premium slightly but it definitely is taken in to account
    Originally posted by motorguy
    Would you still rather pay the £300?
    Don't be angry!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,564Posts Today

7,295Users online

Martin's Twitter