Is there a minimum speed for a whiplash claim?

Is there a minimum speed for a whiplash claim?

Author
Discussion

eltax91

Original Poster:

9,842 posts

205 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Hi guys

'Er indoors had a little bump in her QQ. She was at the filling station and was dealing with a screaming nipper and inadvertently let the car roll backwards and into the modeo which had arrived at the pump behind.

She said it was a minor tap and that she has caused no damage to either vehicle, apart from a very small crack in the front bumper of the mondeo. She estimates the speed to be less than walking pace, says she was rolling for less than 6 feet. It's not a steep forecourt, just has an incline on it

The problem is, the old boy driving was quite calm, but his son jumped out of the car holding his neck and shouting/ swearing at my wife and baby. Also levelled at her she was a terrible mother as he wouldn't ever crash with his kids in the car. He then started kicking at the bumper trying to suggest it was severely damaged and phoned his body shop friend to say it needed and entire new front end. My wife took picture of the damage, it looks like nothing.

Anyway, what I wanted to know was, is there any way this chancer will be able to claim whiplash? Of course it would push the claim value up so I'm sure that won't help her premiums.

Surely at such a low speed the insurers will rebuke any claim?!

Superhoop

4,676 posts

192 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Whilst it sounds very much like a scammer out for cash (as it's very unlikely you suffer whiplash when being reversed into, as your head would go backwards into the head rest preventing next movement - whiplash is caused by the head/neck moving forwards) I'm not sure how you think there is a minimum speed

Example: someone sitting stationary in traffic i.e. Speed 0mph, gets hit from behind by vehicle doing 30mph, chance of whiplash is very high...

zeduffman

4,054 posts

150 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
No minimum speed. Don't forget a car is 1.5 tonnes - even at walking pace there's a lot of energy there.

You can't exclude whiplash clinically so if he claims for it, he will get the money.

siovey

1,632 posts

137 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Any independent witnesses or cctv? If not, he drove into you...this is what some tw*t did to me last year while i was parked up. He reversed into the rear of my car then claimed it was my fault. It went 50/50...

rscott

14,690 posts

190 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Many garages have CCTV on the forecourts - why not contact them and see if they have footage of the incident?

TheEnd

15,370 posts

187 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Superhoop said:
Whilst it sounds very much like a scammer out for cash (as it's very unlikely you suffer whiplash when being reversed into, as your head would go backwards into the head rest preventing next movement - whiplash is caused by the head/neck moving forwards)
Hmm, it's the other way around according to Newton's laws of physics.

Mr Classic

224 posts

118 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Superhoop said:
Whilst it sounds very much like a scammer out for cash (as it's very unlikely you suffer whiplash when being reversed into, as your head would go backwards into the head rest preventing next movement - whiplash is caused by the head/neck moving forwards) I'm not sure how you think there is a minimum speed

Example: someone sitting stationary in traffic i.e. Speed 0mph, gets hit from behind by vehicle doing 30mph, chance of whiplash is very high...
Got yourself mixed up there, head going backwards while body/car is shunted forwards causes whiplash, for example when you are hit from behind, causing the car and your body to go forwards but not your head. This is why a headrest at the right height stops/restricts the backwards movement of your head.

Gixer

4,463 posts

247 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
zeduffman said:
No minimum speed. Don't forget a car is 1.5 tonnes - even at walking pace there's a lot of energy there.

You can't exclude whiplash clinically so if he claims for it, he will get the money.
Apparently the gov is bringing in legislation where it will be medically checked for etc to nip these false claims in the bud. If there was near to no damage and it was as the OP described there was no high amount of energy involved, certainly not enough for a claim. These wkers need stopping. We are all paying for it in our premiums. No win no fee has screwed this country. Hell, anyone watched daytime TV lately? Every advert is oh you weren't looking where you were going then call us and get some free money.

Big Fat Fatty

3,303 posts

155 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
While I have absolutely no idea if it's true or not, I remember a 'news' story on Top Gear a few years ago saying that either insurers or the government had imposed a minimum speed of 6 1/4 mph for whiplash claims.

Again, I've no idea if it's true or if it was a piss take but it was touted as though it was genuine at the time. Just putting it out there.

Mr Sparkle

1,921 posts

169 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
TheEnd said:
Superhoop said:
Whilst it sounds very much like a scammer out for cash (as it's very unlikely you suffer whiplash when being reversed into, as your head would go backwards into the head rest preventing next movement - whiplash is caused by the head/neck moving forwards)
Hmm, it's the other way around according to Newton's laws of physics.
Wouldn't trust Newton, he also took a blow to the head.

98elise

26,376 posts

160 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
zeduffman said:
No minimum speed. Don't forget a car is 1.5 tonnes - even at walking pace there's a lot of energy there.

You can't exclude whiplash clinically so if he claims for it, he will get the money.
Cars are designed to absorb the energy. A car rolling slowly into another one will barely register on the people inside.

dazwalsh

6,095 posts

140 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
If CCTV of forecourt is observed it will show someone with apparent whiplash getting out of the car and kicking a bumper, not the behaviour of someone in a lot of pain. I would then use this as the main defence of what is clearly a scam. Also if car rolled into car behind then it wouldn't be whiplash at all as head would go forward not backwards upon impact.

dazwalsh

6,095 posts

140 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
If CCTV of forecourt is observed it will show someone with apparent whiplash getting out of the car and kicking a bumper, not the behaviour of someone in a lot of pain. I would then use this as the main defence of what is clearly a scam. Also if car rolled into car behind then it wouldn't be whiplash at all as head would go forward not backwards upon impact.

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

254 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Next time, carry a stty stick in the boot and poke it in the eye of this chancer.

dazwalsh

6,095 posts

140 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
If CCTV of forecourt is observed it will show someone with apparent whiplash getting out of the car and kicking a bumper, not the behaviour of someone in a lot of pain. I would then use this as the main defence of what is clearly a scam. Also if car rolled into car behind then it wouldn't be whiplash at all as head would go forward not backwards upon impact.

stevensdrs

3,208 posts

199 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Whiplash injury is not always immediate and therefore the actions of someone at a crash scene has no bearing on whether they will suffer from whiplash or not. However, in the op's scenario, a whiplash injury is extremely unlikely to have occurred. This however won't stop a chancer claiming for such an injury and getting a weak insurance company to pay up.

lookingforajob

1,339 posts

117 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Why do you care?

If an insurance claim if for £200 or £200k your insurance increases by the same amount, and you lose the same amount of NCB.

In an ideal world people wouldn't pull scams and everyone would be slightly better off. But it's not an ideal world and it's not ever going to be. Getting upset about this isn't going to do anything positive. The only people who should really get upset are insurance companies, and they have plenty of power behind them to change things if they really really wanted too.

750turbo

6,164 posts

223 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
lookingforajob said:
Why do you care?

If an insurance claim if for £200 or £200k your insurance increases by the same amount, and you lose the same amount of NCB.

In an ideal world people wouldn't pull scams and everyone would be slightly better off. But it's not an ideal world and it's not ever going to be. Getting upset about this isn't going to do anything positive. The only people who should really get upset are insurance companies, and they have plenty of power behind them to change things if they really really wanted too.
Because some people know the difference between right and wrong, irrespective of who is paying.

This really is a piss boiler and the sooner it is clamped down, and the scumbag ambulance chasers sorted out the better.

Not a personal dig lookingforajob, just my gut feeling, which is "normally" fairly sound.



eldar

21,614 posts

195 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
lookingforajob said:
Why do you care?

If an insurance claim if for £200 or £200k your insurance increases by the same amount, and you lose the same amount of NCB.

In an ideal world people wouldn't pull scams and everyone would be slightly better off. But it's not an ideal world and it's not ever going to be. Getting upset about this isn't going to do anything positive. The only people who should really get upset are insurance companies, and they have plenty of power behind them to change things if they really really wanted too.
The power of apathy....

wolves_wanderer

12,356 posts

236 months

Sunday 27th July 2014
quotequote all
Just make sure you get a copy of the cctv. It may not make any difference to what the insurance company do but at least you've done the most you can.