Realistically, whats my chance of loosing this one?
Discussion
My car was stationary, unattended, legally and safely parked at the roadside (residential street)
TP's car rolled 20m down a hill and hit it. Its made a mess of the front of mine.
(Fag packet maths, impact speed 12mph, force taken by the front passenger chassis leg.)
TP's insurers are not accepting liability.
TP are saying they need time to respond until after a full mechanical inspection of their vehicle.
I sense they are revving up for a defence of
a) My client was not negligent your honour. He applied handbrake.
b) The vehicle has been badly maintained, my client was not negligent, you go persue their maintainers.
c) The vehcile has an indemic fault , my client was not negligent , you go persue the OEM manufacturer.
TP's insurers have indicated to my broker that they have had a "number of such indidents"
As they are not accepting liability, and in fact are not really in a "dialogue" with us, I was stuck on shank's pony until I kicked off and have now (after 2.5 working days) been presented with a rather diminutive hire car , by my insurers. (Not wishing to sound ungrateful it is transport, but there isnt room for the tools of my trade and hence is a little bit of a Bournville Fire Retention System)
For 2 of those days, sensing that small car might be incoming, but not confirmed, I have been threatening to hire an equivelant sized vehicle - but warned off doing so by all and sundry "in case we loose"
Can we?
My insurers (and I have no idea how they have come to this conclusion) have said mine might be a total loss. I concur theres probably is damage we cant see,and it probably wouldnt take much hidden damage for it to go "marginal" (especially when I add my phone bill to my "losses" ) - but to date it hasnt been assessed.
How can we press, formally, for that assessment to be made ?
Because at least if I knew mine was going to be written off I could source a replacement and crack on with life, work, saving for premiums - stuff like that, and then the TP's insurers can, within reason, take as long as they need to investigate to the far end of a fart - but atleast I'll be back working.
TP's car rolled 20m down a hill and hit it. Its made a mess of the front of mine.
(Fag packet maths, impact speed 12mph, force taken by the front passenger chassis leg.)
TP's insurers are not accepting liability.
TP are saying they need time to respond until after a full mechanical inspection of their vehicle.
I sense they are revving up for a defence of
a) My client was not negligent your honour. He applied handbrake.
b) The vehicle has been badly maintained, my client was not negligent, you go persue their maintainers.
c) The vehcile has an indemic fault , my client was not negligent , you go persue the OEM manufacturer.
TP's insurers have indicated to my broker that they have had a "number of such indidents"
As they are not accepting liability, and in fact are not really in a "dialogue" with us, I was stuck on shank's pony until I kicked off and have now (after 2.5 working days) been presented with a rather diminutive hire car , by my insurers. (Not wishing to sound ungrateful it is transport, but there isnt room for the tools of my trade and hence is a little bit of a Bournville Fire Retention System)
For 2 of those days, sensing that small car might be incoming, but not confirmed, I have been threatening to hire an equivelant sized vehicle - but warned off doing so by all and sundry "in case we loose"
Can we?
My insurers (and I have no idea how they have come to this conclusion) have said mine might be a total loss. I concur theres probably is damage we cant see,and it probably wouldnt take much hidden damage for it to go "marginal" (especially when I add my phone bill to my "losses" ) - but to date it hasnt been assessed.
How can we press, formally, for that assessment to be made ?
Because at least if I knew mine was going to be written off I could source a replacement and crack on with life, work, saving for premiums - stuff like that, and then the TP's insurers can, within reason, take as long as they need to investigate to the far end of a fart - but atleast I'll be back working.
TooMany2cvs said:
From a standing start, 20m roll, and you reckon it reached 12mph - enough to write your car off? <scratches head>
I have spent an enormous amount of time listening to hold music over the last 3 days - so I solved for v in this: mgh= 0.5 m v^2
and I measured the slope of our street - he lost about 1.5m in height.
which comes up with a v of 5 and a bit m/s = 12mph.
OK, its a massive simplification, no friction etc etc.. but I was bored
And the impact was all taken at one corner.
It attempted to push the whole vehicle back - except the front passenger side wheel jammed on the kerb - and so wouldnt move with the rest.
And a 70mm diameter bull bar is flat.
So he decelerated from 5.something m/s to zero in 70mm , so solving for a = (V^2 - Vo^2 )/2d = 200m/s^2
So from F=mA and allowing 200kg of equipment (car was laden) , the F was about 4500kN
(again another massive simplication, but anything to distract from the hold music)
And tell me, should the mudgaurd be scraping along the tyre on one side of the car but not the other?
LoonR1 said:
Not a cat in hell's chance of losing (note the spelling).
Plenty of posturing around this, but no way will it stick. So you're sorted on liability, of course that doesn't mean you can get a credit hire car and be guaranteed to win. Quantum and liability are two very different things.
Sorry for the spelling. English is not my first language. I usually just grunt and mumble. Plenty of posturing around this, but no way will it stick. So you're sorted on liability, of course that doesn't mean you can get a credit hire car and be guaranteed to win. Quantum and liability are two very different things.
If this vehicle has an "issue" or there is a "training need" for the operators, I am very keen that the TP's insurance do a thorough investigation at their end - they are a big employer and operate plenty of similar vehicles.
But, my reasoning for the questions is all about getting back on the road in something suitable for me to go to work.
So, all I want is for them to tell me quickly if or not if on my vehicle. I am fortunate enough to have cash reserves to go source another- if thats going to be the final result - without having the wait for a "settlement"
OR if they want to do a prolonged dance, if I can go hire something - again to get me back to work.
I confess I am massively frustrated by it all so far.
Fastdruid said:
See the highway code - https://www.gov.uk/waiting-and-parking/parking-at-...
252 - Parking on hills. If you park on a hill you should:
Yeah, thanks. Sent my broker the link to Rule 252 not long after the impact. Just for their information! 252 - Parking on hills. If you park on a hill you should:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Why waste money on a mechanical inspection then if they are 100% liable regardless of the results?
LoonR1 said:
Because they aren't liable if it can be proven. It won't be proven though and so the customer has wasted everyone's time with this bulls
t story trying to save their NCD.
Well, given its a fleet vehicle, I'd hope that the mech inspection is to prevent it happening again either to that or another in the fleet. And believe me, had my car not "gotten in the way" it would have been a lot more serious. t story trying to save their NCD. And as for "story" , I have absolutely no reason to disbelieve the other driver regarding the handbrake. He was confident infront of me, and again infront of supervisor who he summoned.
LoonR1 said:
Why? The OP himself now says that he agrees that the handbrake failed. On that basis, he's going to struggle to claim off the other driver when he's making their defence for them.
I didnt say that. I said I had no reason to disbelieve him when he said he had applied the handbrake. I didn't see the accident. He had moved and re-parked his car before alerting me. That is not the same as me agreeing it failed. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff