That didn't take long.....

[mekon]

Pass test on 7/12/09
beg borrow and steal for ludicrous insurance premiums, policy starts 31/12/09
Tax online 01/01/10
Tax disc arrive 05/01/10
Take car into town, get new tyres fitted on front and spare, go to collect sister from shop. Approach parked vehicles on left hand side of road which has a sweeping left hand bend cautiously to be met by a 15 Tonne ish delivery van going like a bat out of hell who scrapes my rear bumber and wheel arch 06/01/10

My immediate response of "slow down" was met with a very aggressive lie of "i was doing 22mph you shouldn't of been so far out!"
mum in my front passenger seat been driving 36 years agreed he was not doing 22 he was going far too fast, he then started swearing and behaving quite threateningly accusing me of having an attitude because i told him to slow down.

If in his opinion i was too far out why did he not slow down?
I will be interested to see what his tachograph says his speed was.
I am going to be claiming for the damage to my wheel arch.
I have already contacted his manager regarding the damage and his attitude, if i had behaved like him where i work i would have been sacked on the spot!
He asked me at the time if i wanted to do anything regarding insurance but i just grunted a nah at him. Took his reg number, truck number and called his head office, with his attitude there is no way he would own up to his boss.
Had my gf, my mother and my sister not been there, aswell as other witnesses i am positive we would of come to blows!

grumble over.... normal service can now resume

 

[Merc Owner 2B]

That's too bad mate. Hope you get it sorted

 

[KNU7S]

Dont mention to them you have just past your test, and make it very clear you have witnesses

 

[HumberMart]

Dont mention to them you have just past your test, and make it very clear you have witnesses

Yes a witness is key to success.

A couple of years ago, I was hit by a van whilst my car was parked. It left half of his broken red reflector on my bonnet, which clearly matched the other half still attached to his van.

Problem was there were no witnesses. The police did pick it up and ran with it to a point, but he just stone wall denied it, despite the evidence.

Eventually the police said they would have to drop it, since no one was injured, they couldn't justify using forensics etc. to build up a winable case. So I lost my no claims, and a £700 excess. Of course I could have taken legal action myself, but without any witnesses, it would be unlikely to have proved fruitful.

Best you secure a non-related witness if poss.

 

[mekon]

guys manager seems to be a pretty reasonable chap, it was the driver who was an absolute idiot, going far too fast, as soon as he came into sight my first thoughts were "oh shoot hes compressed alot" followed by "**** he's guna hit me!" my thoughts after he clipped me are not repeattable in polite company, however given how his front suspension appeared to be fully or atleast very compressed im not sure he would of maintained control had he actually braked, poorly loaded van maybe? i dunno, but as soon as he came into view i was suprised at how much the front end was angled.
Doesnt matter that i have only recently passsed my test, if his defence is that i shouldnt of been soo far out why didnt he slow down? also as an experience biker i am very aware of how speed affects handling, not to mention the fact we were on a less gritted area of road and although not an ice rink i was aware of a few little patches that had not thawed yet so his speed was doubley foolish, poor visibility and unpredictable road surface = SLOW DOWN.... least they do in the eyes of anyone with a brain cell....

i wonder if his attitude was due to me being a youngster in a nice car, when the manager asked me for make and model and i said Mercedes i bet he got a bit worried lol

 

[G.O'Rilla]

Hope it gets sorted in your favour......

nice bike by the way

 

[mekon]

only unrelated witness was my gf... probably count her as bias.... car behind was too far behind and didnt see it

 

[mekon]

The NC24 is going to go up for sale soon, its too quick for my liking, i prefer the laid back comfort of my 700 cruiser, its very me whereas the sports bike isnt really.....

 

[Sp!ke]

If you've got no independant witnesses I'm not sure making a claim was such a good idea as a new driver.

Next year there'll be an even bigger loading on your insurance.

 

[mekon]

he hit me... im claiming off his insurance.... why would my premium go up?

 

[hitenhirani]

Sorry to hear this.
hopefully it goes in your favour.
if it does, it would be a non fault claim, and should not influence your insurance premium next year.
If the head office is willing to settle outside of the insurance companies, it would be ideal.
Good luck to you mate.

 

[mekon]

the manager said its company policy to go through the insurer, on the other hand cos the damage is only minor when he sees it he might prefer not to, i was actually more annoyed with the drivers attitude than the damage! he was going too fast, he was dangerous, he caused damage to my car, and then he starts behaving in a threatening manner!
is it wrong of me that i want him sacked?
dangerous, aggressive, swearing infront of ladies! being rude to my disabled mum!

 

[Will]

Sorry to hear about the accident.

But to echo what Sp!ke has already said, your insurance will almost certainly go up next year - not because you've claimed against your own company, but because you've been involved in an accident, regardless of fault.

Sadly, as unfair as it seems, people who are involved in accidents and even not deemed to have been at fault are perceived to be a greater risk than those who haven't.

With no independant witnesses, there's also a chance that if the third party (the van driver) doesn't admit liability, the insurers may settle the claim 50:50, on a 'knock for knock' basis.

Sorry to offer not the most desirable of views, but the above is all quite possible and may be useful for you to know.

BTW, I used to have an NC24 years ago also, a Rothmans Rep - was great fun

Will

 

[Noodle-Pulp]

is it wrong of me that i want him sacked?
dangerous, aggressive, swearing infront of ladies! being rude to my disabled mum!

I imagine, at the very least you should insist on disciplinary action and a personal letter of apology for his behaviour.

 

[w124coupe]

Are you saying he now admits fault? If not, then you will be on dodgy ground re an insurance claim.

They will see it like this:

You are passing parked cars and he has right of way.
There are no independent witnesses (will disregard your girlfriend).
You word versus his.

Claim will go against you and ruin next years premium.


My own case was this:

I was approaching a T-junction to turn right.

Guy turned right off the main road at speed, cutting the corner at 45 degrees and hit my front right corner.

No independent witnesses.

He verbally accepted fault at the scene, declined to write anything except his details and left.

He then claimed I had emerged from the junction without looking and hit him as he carefully turned in.

Insurers decided it was my fault....(you have no "say" - THEY decide).


Be careful....

 

[JumboBeef]

Hope you get it sorted

Pass test on 7/12/09

<irrelevant fact> I passed on 7/12/82

</irrelevant fact>

 

[PXW]

Sadly this will affect your premium next year - the declaration is whether you have been claim and accident free. As others have indicated, there are stats that show that someone who has been involved in an accident (even no-fault) is more likely to be involved with another.

The logic, is that at the extreme there are no (or very very few) true 'accidents', and that in the vast majority of cases a driver could at least theoretically have taken avoiding action. I've had the odd prang myself over the years, but my self-analysis has always been to consider what I could have done to avoid it - so when I skidded (slowly!) on some ice about 5 years ago, even though the police assured me it was not my fault and there was nothing I could have done, I had to disagree - I could have gone (even) slower; I could have taken a different route; I could have stopped and checked the road surface before trying to make the manoeuvre; I could have stayed at home. You get the drift. So if I have a prang, I am not doing some/all of those things, and that will reflect in my general driving, with an increased likelihood of another prang.

One of my instructors on a defensive driving course once said to me that even a no-fault accident should be thought of as my fault. I even extend the logic to the time my merc was sideswiped by a delivery van whilst legally parked in a marked parking bay...what could I have done differently? Should I have anticipated a van coming down that road and parked elsewhere? The essence of defensive driving is not just to do what I am supposed to do but to anticipate all the wrong things that someone else might do.

 

[wemorgan]

Sorry to read your story.

It's worth taking photos at the scene to prove where cars were on the road and relative to one another.

 

[Mark300SL]

Are you saying he now admits fault? If not, then you will be on dodgy ground re an insurance claim.

They will see it like this:

You are passing parked cars and he has right of way.
There are no independent witnesses (will disregard your girlfriend).
You word versus his.

Claim will go against you and ruin next years premium.

That is unfortunately how I see it - if you were even close to being on his side of the road to pass parked cars then he possibly could consider that you were on his side of the road
If there was ice about (I assume there was) then its likely that he will claim as a professional driver he was driving well withing the limits of the conditions of the road and you just appeared on his side of the road leavign him nowhere to go

Pictures are invaluable under these circumstances.

 

[Mudster]

With no independant witnesses, there's also a chance that if the third party (the van driver) doesn't admit liability, the insurers may settle the claim 50:50, on a 'knock for knock' basis.

The Knock for Knock arrangement between insurers is often misunderstood in this way.

It was and is simply an arrangement between the major companies to save having to transfer large sums of money on a daily basis backward and forward between them therefore saving banking costs and helping cashflow.

The claim is handled in the same way and blame is apportioned and agreed, each insurer then pays for repairs to it's own insureds vehicle.

50/50 is where the insurers can't agree who was at fault and decided there was an element of fault with both parties...each insurer then pays half the claim of each party...however if they are party to the knock for knock agreement this then kiks in and each pays for their own insured.