Bumper bashing

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Bumper bashing

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

199 posts

Master Geek

#1273873 31-Mar-2015 02:21

Nate001: If she was on learners I would not do any digging and hope the other party didn't either. Police and insurance would be a bigger problem as she would have no insurance even if her name is on the policy.

That's actually incorrect but a common misconception. Just being an unaccompanied learner is not alone grounds for an insurer to avoid a policy. The reason to do so must be material. In this situation, if she were on her 1L there is nothing that a supervising passenger could have done to prevent the other person, assuming they are in fact at fault, which seems to be the case, from hitting her vehicle. So that makes it immaterial. Sure, they might SAY that they're not paying because of it, but the IOM would certainly rule in the policy holders favour should they wish to go to that. It's a shame so few people know about that service.

And rightly so too or we'd have them declining claims on the basis that a front park lamp was blown, and thus the vehicle was being operated while not being up to WoF standard as required by the policy, when it was a midday crash.

This is covered by Section 11 of the Insurance Law Reform Act 1977

Here's an Insurance and Savings Ombudsman decision from their Case Studies section to demonstrate it.

TonyR1973

199 posts

Master Geek

#1273874 31-Mar-2015 02:34

bazzer:If it really was a medical incident then I would expect the driver's licence to be taken off him (e.g. similar to what happens if you have an epileptic seizure). In any case, it doesn't change the fact that he's liable for the damage. Maybe the cops would feel lenient and not give him a ticket, but it wouldn't have a bearing on the insurance situation, I'd have thought.

Actually, it does. He'd not be legally responsible for the damage as he was not negligent, unless it was a pre-existing condition of which they had knowledge.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1274076 31-Mar-2015 10:33

It is possible for only one vehicle to be significantly damaged in a nose to tail. We were rear ended in our Pajero waiting to enter a roundabout.

Fortunately no-one was seriously injured.

The other vehicle had a stuffed bumper, grill, bonnet, radiator, fan and the engine appeared to have twisted on its mounts as well.

We had minor tow bar scratches.

Mike

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1274162 31-Mar-2015 11:48

TonyR1973:
bazzer:If it really was a medical incident then I would expect the driver's licence to be taken off him (e.g. similar to what happens if you have an epileptic seizure). In any case, it doesn't change the fact that he's liable for the damage. Maybe the cops would feel lenient and not give him a ticket, but it wouldn't have a bearing on the insurance situation, I'd have thought.

Actually, it does. He'd not be legally responsible for the damage as he was not negligent, unless it was a pre-existing condition of which they had knowledge.

Fair enough, I am not a lawyer. I should've said "In any case, it shouldn't change the fact that he's liable for the damage". Who is at fault in this instance? The insurance company will want someone to pay, won't they?

Should the owner of the car have to pay their excess because someone behind them had an unknown medical condition? No, I don't think so, that doesn't seem fair.
Is it true that you have to be negligent to be legally responsible? I don't believe so. Often accidents are not the result of negligence (or else everyone would be getting charged with negligent driving) but I can see that "medical emergencies" could have different treatment.

What happens in this instance if no-one has insurance and the guy that caused the accident had a medical emergency?

richms

28191 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1274410 31-Mar-2015 14:20

MikeAqua: It is possible for only one vehicle to be significantly damaged in a nose to tail. We were rear ended in our Pajero waiting to enter a roundabout.

Fortunately no-one was seriously injured.

The other vehicle had a stuffed bumper, grill, bonnet, radiator, fan and the engine appeared to have twisted on its mounts as well.

We had minor tow bar scratches.

I got rear ended into the towbar and it bent it up a little bit. Now whenever I tow a tandem trailer it gets a nasty vibration at about 54-56k - so its really annoying to drive with a trailer. Single wheeled one seems to not get it at that speed but the small bend has definatly affected towing.

Richard rich.ms

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1274472 31-Mar-2015 14:47

MikeAqua: It is possible for only one vehicle to be significantly damaged in a nose to tail. We were rear ended in our Pajero waiting to enter a roundabout.

Fortunately no-one was seriously injured.

The other vehicle had a stuffed bumper, grill, bonnet, radiator, fan and the engine appeared to have twisted on its mounts as well.

We had minor tow bar scratches.

Had a similar situation at lights. A lady bumped my corolla lightly with her people mover. The bump tore screws out of her bumper, knocked the plastic grill out and chipped all her paint off of the front. The corolla's rear bumper was totally unscathed. I couldn't find a single scratch!

richms

28191 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1274474 31-Mar-2015 14:51

DravidDavid:
Had a similar situation at lights. A lady bumped my corolla lightly with her people mover. The bump tore screws out of her bumper, knocked the plastic grill out and chipped all her paint off of the front. The corolla's rear bumper was totally unscathed. I couldn't find a single scratch!

The plastic you see is a bumper cover. After some year it has to take a low speed impact fine and not actually cause the actual bumper (metal underneith it) to be affected. But it can still pop back into shape and look fine when the underneith is totally bent.

Richard rich.ms

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1274487 31-Mar-2015 14:59

There was a story on one of these 7pm tv /news shows that showed for one particular brand of new car, that a low speed front bumper crash , which looked like just bumper damaged, basically wrote the vehicle off, as it was a very expensive repair.

TonyR1973

199 posts

Master Geek

#1275276 1-Apr-2015 13:44

bazzer: Fair enough, I am not a lawyer. I should've said "In any case, it shouldn't change the fact that he's liable for the damage". Who is at fault in this instance? The insurance company will want someone to pay, won't they?

Wanting and getting are two different things entirely. But it does change liability - how can you be liable for something you simply could not reasonably be expected to prevent from happening?. I believe it's classed as an "Act of God".

bazzer: Should the owner of the car have to pay their excess because someone behind them had an unknown medical condition? No, I don't think so, that doesn't seem fair.

They wouldn't have to pay their excess because they weren't at fault either.

bazzer: Is it true that you have to be negligent to be legally responsible? I don't believe so. Often accidents are not the result of negligence (or else everyone would be getting charged with negligent driving) but I can see that "medical emergencies" could have different treatment.

You pretty much do have to be negligent in some way.

bazzer: What happens in this instance if no-one has insurance and the guy that caused the accident had a medical emergency?

They both suffer losses. If someone's sufficiently worried about the potential loss, they should get insurance.

TonyR1973

199 posts

Master Geek

#1275299 1-Apr-2015 14:02

I just remembered this Fair Go story: http://tvnz.co.nz/fair-go/wednesday-june-20-4939428/video

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1285692 16-Apr-2015 15:55

Regarding my original post, just received a hand written letter from the other people who were involved in this bumper bashing. They are very polite, give name and address and phone number and say they didn't contact us earlier because some numbers got transposed in the phone number my daughter gave them. Guess they got our address somehow.

Anyway, they say our daughter agreed to pay for the damage to their car. She says she didn't (and has said so several times) but I guess for a 17 year olds first accident, she might have been less than clear on that point at that time. They want help for the repairs and want to know if our insurance will cover it. We should contact them as soon as possible. They do not mention if they have insurance or not.

So bearing in mind previous details about them failing to stop short after my daughter stopped, do you guys think it best to phone them up and explain our take on things, put our views in writing to them (sound better to write this kind of stuff down), or just to pass on their contact details and maybe a copy of their letter to our insurance and let them sort it out ?

Thanks for your help.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

Jase2985

13463 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1285702 16-Apr-2015 16:15

do you have their details? if so talk to your insurance company and let them sort it, thats why you pay them for.

between them and the other persons company if they have one, they will determine whos at fault and then either take your money for the excess, or chase them for the recovery. they will initially try and contact the other party and get them to admit liability. if they do this they will probably waiver your excess then and there. if not you will pay the excess, get your car fixed, and the other party will be chased to recover the costs. either way if you are not at fault you will get the excess back.

you pay hundreds if not thousands a year to them let them do the hard work, just provide them with the details.

Dratsab

3946 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1285735 16-Apr-2015 16:52

Get everything in writing. Write them a polite* letter back. If it was me, I'd advise of the following:
- daughter can't possibly be at fault as they ran into her
- she denies she agreed to pay for anything
- due to these factors she will not be paying anything
- their failing to stop short is not indicative of the actions of a reasonable and prudent driver
- daughters vehicle is to be inspected to see if there is any underlying damage which is not immediately obvious but does need repair
- if there is, they will be approached for reparation
- any further correspondence can go via the insurance company

* They've been good enough to be polite to you (although it's likely that's because they want something) and they deserve credit for providing their details as well. It's quite probable they'll see sense end so don't worry about them.

rb99

3423 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1285851 16-Apr-2015 21:08

Hmmm. Pass straight on to insurance as suggested by Jase2985 sounds easier and they'll presumably know what they're doing, but writing back seems polite and a good idea to give those points mentioned by Dratsab. Will have to contemplate for a while I think.

“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” -John Kenneth Galbraith

rb99

lapimate

352 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1285861 16-Apr-2015 21:21

rb99: ... writing back seems polite ...

Maybe, but unfortunately your insurance company may be less than impressed if you take this upon yourself. Check the policy - it may say they want full control of the matter or else any insurance claim might not be supported.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4