Whiplash Claim sub 2mph.
Discussion
Just looking for some advice. I currently have a claim being made against myself which i accept was my fault. (reversed into someone at sub 2mph.)
I've just received correspondence stating the claimant is claiming for whiplash etc.
Now as the accident was my fault i did not think to submit dashcam footage which i have.
The dashcam footage shows the claimant walking past the front of my car fully able showing no signs of injury etc. The dashcam footage also shows that the moment of impact was below 2mph.
I don't dispute that it was my fault i just think he's having it on with the claim for whiplash etc....
Do i have anything to gain/lose by submitting this footage? AFAIK most insurers don't challenge whiplash claims but i think as the speed was below 2mph....he might be pushing it?
I've just received correspondence stating the claimant is claiming for whiplash etc.
Now as the accident was my fault i did not think to submit dashcam footage which i have.
The dashcam footage shows the claimant walking past the front of my car fully able showing no signs of injury etc. The dashcam footage also shows that the moment of impact was below 2mph.
I don't dispute that it was my fault i just think he's having it on with the claim for whiplash etc....
Do i have anything to gain/lose by submitting this footage? AFAIK most insurers don't challenge whiplash claims but i think as the speed was below 2mph....he might be pushing it?
Edited by AMV on Wednesday 27th March 22:57
Pericoloso said:
A few years ago a lot of insurers just paid up for these potentially false claims.
Their fraud departments take a dim view of it nowadays.
I thought the same.Their fraud departments take a dim view of it nowadays.
Having said that - although I agree from the OPs story that it's probably bogus - I also suspect that the other party could very easily say that the pain started a couple of days later, hence it didn't affect him walking around after the accident. Or even that he was in pain, but still needed to walk around after the accident.
Durzel said:
No one is getting whiplash from a ~2mph collision though, immediately or subsequently.
Of course not - but they'll still claim for it! I know of someone who hit a parked car in a supermarket. The only damage to the car was to the driver's door mirror and was settled in full with Herz, the owners. The hirer and 3 passengers all claimed for whiplash. (Though the car was actually unoccupied at the time of the accident!)
Same here. I reversed into a chap. My van didn’t move 50cm. He’d parked practically bumper to bumper behind me thinking he’d be back to his van and away before me. I returned first and reversed out of the parking spot not expecting another vehicle to be directly behind me. No damage to either vehicle as the speed involved was less than walking pace. Subsequently I was contacted by my insurance company as the guy had submitted a personal injury claim (whiplash). My insurance company are having none of it and have passed the claim onto their fraud department. I’ve given a statement and had my vehicle inspected. The other idiot is now claiming the “impact” wrote his van off as somehow his engine was forced into the bulkhead and deformed it....I’ve not heard anything for the last six months. I’m guessing the case is closed. The kick in the nuts came when my insurance needed renewing while this claim was pending, it went up from £300 to £900! This w
ker who is lying to get money for an injury that never happened has cost me £600. Cheers !
ker who is lying to get money for an injury that never happened has cost me £600. Cheers ! My son bumped into the back of another car at a roundabout (driver of the car in front started to pull away, then changed her mind). There was absolutely no damage at all - the bottle of water on my son's passenger seat stayed there.
However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
Whilst there are lots of genuine claims, it boils my pi55 that so many people are "on the make" from smaller claims, last year I had a very minor incident, I caused minimal damage to another vehicle & left a note with my details saying "please contact me to arrange repair" but they decided not to & the first thing I heard was from my insurance company. I told them what had happened & that I would rather pay for it myself than have a claim against me, never heard another thing until renewal. Apparently the claim was paid, £2400 including £600 vehicle rental. The damage was a very small dent on the front wheel arch & I've seen far worse fixed by paintless dent removal!
The main dealer wouldn't charge that much to replace the whole wing so someone has got away with it & my insurance (3 policies in all) has gone up over £1000 already, I'm surprised that there wasn't a whiplash claim too.....
The main dealer wouldn't charge that much to replace the whole wing so someone has got away with it & my insurance (3 policies in all) has gone up over £1000 already, I'm surprised that there wasn't a whiplash claim too.....
Nigel_O said:
My son bumped into the back of another car at a roundabout (driver of the car in front started to pull away, then changed her mind). There was absolutely no damage at all - the bottle of water on my son's passenger seat stayed there.
However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
Why would you threaten to issue proceeding and against your own insurer. They’re at liberty to dispose of any third party claims as they see fit. It’ll be in the terms and conditions.However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
all too common now from the looks of it.
SIL reversed out of a space at Tesco's just as another person was reversing out of there's.
The other person claimed against my SIL and included a whiplash claim and for time off work - paid out of course.
My SIL was fine, no whiplash and hardly any damage to hers or the claimants car.
Makes me so angry!
SIL reversed out of a space at Tesco's just as another person was reversing out of there's.
The other person claimed against my SIL and included a whiplash claim and for time off work - paid out of course.
My SIL was fine, no whiplash and hardly any damage to hers or the claimants car.
Makes me so angry!
Claimant will submit an expert witness statement from someone "medically qualified" (in reality some washed up old quack reduced to doing whiplash reports for chancers at the end of his/her career).
A court (if it gets that far, which it won't) will favour the opinion of an expert witness over that of a lay person.
It will cost your insurers more to get their own contradictory expert witness statement than it will to settle the claim.
Unless your video evidence is damning enough to show that the medical opinion the claimant provides is incompetent or dishonest (or that the incident didn't occur), then it won't be enough to defend the claim.
A court (if it gets that far, which it won't) will favour the opinion of an expert witness over that of a lay person.
It will cost your insurers more to get their own contradictory expert witness statement than it will to settle the claim.
Unless your video evidence is damning enough to show that the medical opinion the claimant provides is incompetent or dishonest (or that the incident didn't occur), then it won't be enough to defend the claim.
Edited by Seight_Returns on Thursday 28th March 09:26
CanAm said:
Durzel said:
No one is getting whiplash from a ~2mph collision though, immediately or subsequently.
Of course not - but they'll still claim for it! I know of someone who hit a parked car in a supermarket. The only damage to the car was to the driver's door mirror and was settled in full with Herz, the owners. The hirer and 3 passengers all claimed for whiplash. (Though the car was actually unoccupied at the time of the accident!)
I had an incident on a roundabout about 14 years ago and the extra passengers and their passport pictures etc looked nothing like the occupants when the insurance fraud guy came round to my house to discuss it.
A friend's son nudged someone's car a while back and whilst there was absolutely no damage to either car, the car in front claimed £4,000 in whiplash injuries for the driver and passenger.
The insurance company decided to investigate and found that both driver and passenger were active members of a local gym and had sustained no injuries whatsoever. The driver had 2 other similar claims running.
It went to court last week - the insurance company prosecuted for fraud.
Despite a translator being available in court, the judge let the fraudsters walk free 'because English was their second language'.
I don't have the exact ruling, but that was the gist of it.
Unbelievable!
The insurance company decided to investigate and found that both driver and passenger were active members of a local gym and had sustained no injuries whatsoever. The driver had 2 other similar claims running.
It went to court last week - the insurance company prosecuted for fraud.
Despite a translator being available in court, the judge let the fraudsters walk free 'because English was their second language'.
I don't have the exact ruling, but that was the gist of it.
Unbelievable!
KungFuPanda said:
Nigel_O said:
My son bumped into the back of another car at a roundabout (driver of the car in front started to pull away, then changed her mind). There was absolutely no damage at all - the bottle of water on my son's passenger seat stayed there.
However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
Why would you threaten to issue proceeding and against your own insurer. They’re at liberty to dispose of any third party claims as they see fit. It’ll be in the terms and conditions.However, the other driver subsequently claimed for several hundred pounds worth of damage to her rear bumper (on a Golf Mk4) and the inevitable whiplash (diagnosed several weeks after the original accident)
My son proved to his insurance company that the damage on the bumper couldn't have been caused in the accident (too high up to have been caused by my son's car) and even if the damage on the other car HAD been caused by the impact, it was clearly insufficient to have caused any injury.
However, the insurance company said they were going to pay out anyway, as it was less costly for them.
We told them that under no circumstances were they to pay out, otherwise we would take proceedings against THEM - they eventually twigged that the other driver was making a fraudulent claim and they counter-claimed.
Other party never responded...
OP - fight it! The practice of having a crack at claiming for something when its not even partially deserved is utterly abhorrent.
It's a hollow threat though because you subrogate your rights to your insurer when you take out a policy. They are free to do whatever they want legally in your stead, including nothing at all.
Being pedantic but I presume the identification of the claim as being potentially fraudulent and the timing of the hollow threat were just coincidental.
Being pedantic but I presume the identification of the claim as being potentially fraudulent and the timing of the hollow threat were just coincidental.
As others have mentioned i have now passed on the dashcam video to my insurance company. However they did state that injuries won't always present themselves immediately after the incident, of which i totally respect however the speed should be something to be taken into consideration....
Bloke on the phone pretty much said 9/10 claims they deal with have some sort of injury claim being made.
If the person i had an accident with genuinely had injuries as a result of the accident i can accept that but this claim culture seems to be out of hand.
Also something that was mentioned was GDPR and how they are not allowed tell me anything etc!!!
from reading peoples replies it seems this is a widely abused practice amongst injury claims...
Bloke on the phone pretty much said 9/10 claims they deal with have some sort of injury claim being made.
If the person i had an accident with genuinely had injuries as a result of the accident i can accept that but this claim culture seems to be out of hand.
Also something that was mentioned was GDPR and how they are not allowed tell me anything etc!!!
from reading peoples replies it seems this is a widely abused practice amongst injury claims...
We had a similar incident at work. The truck glanced the back of a BMW that had blocked our roller doors. Nobody in the car, damage was an exchange of paint so nothing major.
Owner saw what happened (he was hiding around the corner so guessing this was planned) and runs over shouting and making a scene. We exchange insurance details and left it at that.
Week later our insurance company get in touch with the claim details. Now turns out there were five men in the car, all claiming injury. Although the lady on the phone was equally pissed off when we said the car was empty at the time of the incident, apparently it's cheaper to just pay out than to fight it
Owner saw what happened (he was hiding around the corner so guessing this was planned) and runs over shouting and making a scene. We exchange insurance details and left it at that.
Week later our insurance company get in touch with the claim details. Now turns out there were five men in the car, all claiming injury. Although the lady on the phone was equally pissed off when we said the car was empty at the time of the incident, apparently it's cheaper to just pay out than to fight it
Bergs said:
all too common now from the looks of it.
!
People think it's OK to make up for the inconvenience, and having had a car written off in the last few months after being rear-ended, and then going through a fair amount of hassle with both ours and their insurer (their insurer didn't repond for weeks) you can understand why people do it, hoping to get a grand or so for their trouble.!
We didn't claim for injuries, by the way - no injuries despite being smacked up the arse pretty hard by a Mercedes van. Did discover later that granddaughter had a graze on her shoulder caused by the seat belt, but no lasting damage.
Edited by Sheepshanks on Thursday 28th March 12:48
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff