Alledging a vehicle defect after a collision
Discussion
Hi PH’ers,
I was recently involved in an RTC where I was travelling uphill towards a nearly 90 degree offside bend. It was 1725hrs on Friday 24/08/18 and it had just thrown it down with rain. The corner is renowned locally for being lethal when wet, mostly due to the scrubbed shellgrip surface which is now slipperier than a slippery thing. It’s a 40mph limit.
A 2005 Yaris came the round the corner in the opposite direction around 200 yards in front of me far too quickly (probably about 40mph I’d say) and I watched it initially understeer then snap into lift off oversteer which resulted in a 720 degree spin, the Yaris eventually embedding itself backwards into the front of my vehicle at about 20mph. I’d stopped by that point and could do nothing but wait for the impact.
The driver was a 19 year old lad working for Doninos Pizza and was rushing because he had pizzas on board to deliver. We moved from the scene to a safer place and exchanged details, arranged recovery etc. I got some photos and had a good look at his car.
The rear tyres were Goodyear tyres with around 2mm of tread, DOT rated 0505. That means they were manufactured in the 5th week of 2005, so they were almost certainly the original tyres the car came with from new. The sidewalls were covered in splits and cracks, as was the tread and inside the grooves. The mileage of the car was 85k.
I’ve done an MoT check on that car and in April ‘17 it had advisories on both rear tyres for perishing and cracking. In April ‘18 it passed with no advisories...oddly.
Clearly the main cause of the collision was excessive speed, failing to judge the conditions and inexperience, but I’m certain that those 13 year old, very nearly worn out and hard-as-plastic tyres can’t have helped matters. Had it been fitted with decent tyres with decent tread and of a reasonable age then maybe things would be different.
Anyway, apologies for the long message, what I want to know is has anyone got any experience of alleging a vehicle defect as a contributory factor in a collision? Would the other parties insurance company be at all interested? It’s a drivers responsibility to maintain a vehicle in a roadworthy condition and in my opinion those tyres were unroadworthy.
It angers me because I spend good money on quality tyres for my vehicles and I maintain them well. Other people don’t bother, then they come along and f**k my day up by potentially writing my very tidy VW Transporter off.
Thanks in advance for any constructive replies to my half-rant, half request. Piss taking will also be accepted.
Tom
I was recently involved in an RTC where I was travelling uphill towards a nearly 90 degree offside bend. It was 1725hrs on Friday 24/08/18 and it had just thrown it down with rain. The corner is renowned locally for being lethal when wet, mostly due to the scrubbed shellgrip surface which is now slipperier than a slippery thing. It’s a 40mph limit.
A 2005 Yaris came the round the corner in the opposite direction around 200 yards in front of me far too quickly (probably about 40mph I’d say) and I watched it initially understeer then snap into lift off oversteer which resulted in a 720 degree spin, the Yaris eventually embedding itself backwards into the front of my vehicle at about 20mph. I’d stopped by that point and could do nothing but wait for the impact.
The driver was a 19 year old lad working for Doninos Pizza and was rushing because he had pizzas on board to deliver. We moved from the scene to a safer place and exchanged details, arranged recovery etc. I got some photos and had a good look at his car.
The rear tyres were Goodyear tyres with around 2mm of tread, DOT rated 0505. That means they were manufactured in the 5th week of 2005, so they were almost certainly the original tyres the car came with from new. The sidewalls were covered in splits and cracks, as was the tread and inside the grooves. The mileage of the car was 85k.
I’ve done an MoT check on that car and in April ‘17 it had advisories on both rear tyres for perishing and cracking. In April ‘18 it passed with no advisories...oddly.
Clearly the main cause of the collision was excessive speed, failing to judge the conditions and inexperience, but I’m certain that those 13 year old, very nearly worn out and hard-as-plastic tyres can’t have helped matters. Had it been fitted with decent tyres with decent tread and of a reasonable age then maybe things would be different.
Anyway, apologies for the long message, what I want to know is has anyone got any experience of alleging a vehicle defect as a contributory factor in a collision? Would the other parties insurance company be at all interested? It’s a drivers responsibility to maintain a vehicle in a roadworthy condition and in my opinion those tyres were unroadworthy.
It angers me because I spend good money on quality tyres for my vehicles and I maintain them well. Other people don’t bother, then they come along and f**k my day up by potentially writing my very tidy VW Transporter off.
Thanks in advance for any constructive replies to my half-rant, half request. Piss taking will also be accepted.
Tom
- Original post reinstated*
Edited by Purple Tom on Friday 14th September 14:19
That’s why I’m asking. They’ve accepted liability and that’s fine and I know the tyres are ‘legal’ in terms of tread depth.
As I’ve said, it’s mostly out of frustration. When I was 19 I spent most of my wages on keeping my Mini roadworthy with good tyres etc so I didn’t spoil someone else’s day. Other people don’t bother and it causes plenty of hassle.
Thanks though.
As I’ve said, it’s mostly out of frustration. When I was 19 I spent most of my wages on keeping my Mini roadworthy with good tyres etc so I didn’t spoil someone else’s day. Other people don’t bother and it causes plenty of hassle.
Thanks though.
Perhaps you could ask the insurance companies if they would like you to be a collision investigator for them? Or maybe the police? Or maybe you could work for DVSA and go round MOT stations showing testers how to do their job?
Up to you whether you insist on payment or whether you do it for the good of all the rest of us....
Up to you whether you insist on payment or whether you do it for the good of all the rest of us....
Luckily in my line of work we’re trained not to bite. But thanks and please click here :-)
Edited by Purple Tom on Friday 14th September 14:00
Purple Tom said:
Hi PH’ers,
I was recently involved in an RTC where I was travelling uphill towards a nearly 90 degree offside bend. It was 1725hrs on Friday 24/08/18 and it had just thrown it down with rain. The corner is renowned locally for being lethal when wet, mostly due to the scrubbed shellgrip surface which is now slipperier than a slippery thing. It’s a 40mph limit.
A 2005 Yaris came the round the corner in the opposite direction around 200 yards in front of me far too quickly (probably about 40mph I’d say) and I watched it initially understeer then snap into lift off oversteer which resulted in a 720 degree spin, the Yaris eventually embedding itself backwards into the front of my vehicle at about 20mph. I’d stopped by that point and could do nothing but wait for the impact.
The driver was a 19 year old lad working for Doninos Pizza and was rushing because he had pizzas on board to deliver. We moved from the scene to a safer place and exchanged details, arranged recovery etc. I got some photos and had a good look at his car.
The rear tyres were Goodyear tyres with around 2mm of tread, DOT rated 0505. That means they were manufactured in the 5th week of 2005, so they were almost certainly the original tyres the car came with from new. The sidewalls were covered in splits and cracks, as was the tread and inside the grooves. The mileage of the car was 85k.
I’ve done an MoT check on that car and in April ‘17 it had advisories on both rear tyres for perishing and cracking. In April ‘18 it passed with no advisories...oddly.
Clearly the main cause of the collision was excessive speed, failing to judge the conditions and inexperience, but I’m certain that those 13 year old, very nearly worn out and hard-as-plastic tyres can’t have helped matters. Had it been fitted with decent tyres with decent tread and of a reasonable age then maybe things would be different.
Anyway, apologies for the long message, what I want to know is has anyone got any experience of alleging a vehicle defect as a contributory factor in a collision? Would the other parties insurance company be at all interested? It’s a drivers responsibility to maintain a vehicle in a roadworthy condition and in my opinion those tyres were unroadworthy.
It angers me because I spend good money on quality tyres for my vehicles and I maintain them well. Other people don’t bother, then they come along and f**k my day up by potentially writing my very tidy VW Transporter off.
Thanks in advance for any constructive replies to my half-rant, half request. Piss taking will also be accepted.
Tom
Thought it would be interesting to read the original post.I was recently involved in an RTC where I was travelling uphill towards a nearly 90 degree offside bend. It was 1725hrs on Friday 24/08/18 and it had just thrown it down with rain. The corner is renowned locally for being lethal when wet, mostly due to the scrubbed shellgrip surface which is now slipperier than a slippery thing. It’s a 40mph limit.
A 2005 Yaris came the round the corner in the opposite direction around 200 yards in front of me far too quickly (probably about 40mph I’d say) and I watched it initially understeer then snap into lift off oversteer which resulted in a 720 degree spin, the Yaris eventually embedding itself backwards into the front of my vehicle at about 20mph. I’d stopped by that point and could do nothing but wait for the impact.
The driver was a 19 year old lad working for Doninos Pizza and was rushing because he had pizzas on board to deliver. We moved from the scene to a safer place and exchanged details, arranged recovery etc. I got some photos and had a good look at his car.
The rear tyres were Goodyear tyres with around 2mm of tread, DOT rated 0505. That means they were manufactured in the 5th week of 2005, so they were almost certainly the original tyres the car came with from new. The sidewalls were covered in splits and cracks, as was the tread and inside the grooves. The mileage of the car was 85k.
I’ve done an MoT check on that car and in April ‘17 it had advisories on both rear tyres for perishing and cracking. In April ‘18 it passed with no advisories...oddly.
Clearly the main cause of the collision was excessive speed, failing to judge the conditions and inexperience, but I’m certain that those 13 year old, very nearly worn out and hard-as-plastic tyres can’t have helped matters. Had it been fitted with decent tyres with decent tread and of a reasonable age then maybe things would be different.
Anyway, apologies for the long message, what I want to know is has anyone got any experience of alleging a vehicle defect as a contributory factor in a collision? Would the other parties insurance company be at all interested? It’s a drivers responsibility to maintain a vehicle in a roadworthy condition and in my opinion those tyres were unroadworthy.
It angers me because I spend good money on quality tyres for my vehicles and I maintain them well. Other people don’t bother, then they come along and f**k my day up by potentially writing my very tidy VW Transporter off.
Thanks in advance for any constructive replies to my half-rant, half request. Piss taking will also be accepted.
Tom
Purple Tom said:
Luckily in my line of work we’re trained not to bite. But thanks and please click here :-)
That training at work isn't very effective.
Sebring440 said:
Thought it would be interesting to read the original post.
Indeed.I suspect that his insurer would be more interested in the "delivering pizzas" thing, tbh.
Purple Tom said:
in April ‘17 it had advisories on both rear tyres for perishing and cracking. In April ‘18 it passed with no advisories...oddly.
Not that odd. Different tester, different standards of "What should I advise the owner of?".Dominos have insurance which covers drivers while on deliveries, which is where the claim has gone to. I’ve no idea if the other party has informed his own insurance company or not.
As for the MoT, I do understand that and everything is subjective I suppose. Plus, it could well be that the car for whatever reason was fitted with different wheels/tyres when it was MoT’d. I’m not about to go to VOSA/DVSA and start saying that the garage has been negligent.
As for the MoT, I do understand that and everything is subjective I suppose. Plus, it could well be that the car for whatever reason was fitted with different wheels/tyres when it was MoT’d. I’m not about to go to VOSA/DVSA and start saying that the garage has been negligent.
Spoke with his insurer. There is no claim registered with them and they said Dominos cover their own drivers and there is no need for them to be informed of a collision when a Dominos driver crashes on a delivery as long as it’s a fixed wage and not a paid-per-delivery job.
Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
Purple Tom said:
Spoke with his insurer. There is no claim registered with them and they said Dominos cover their own drivers and there is no need for them to be informed of a collision when a Dominos driver crashes on a delivery as long as it’s a fixed wage and not a paid-per-delivery job.
Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
Well, apart from the "declaring an at-fault collision" bit, of course.Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
TooMany2cvs said:
Purple Tom said:
Spoke with his insurer. There is no claim registered with them and they said Dominos cover their own drivers and there is no need for them to be informed of a collision when a Dominos driver crashes on a delivery as long as it’s a fixed wage and not a paid-per-delivery job.
Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
Well, apart from the "declaring an at-fault collision" bit, of course.Good for younger drivers who crash on deliveries because it means its less likely to affect their own claim history I guess
If he does - as he should - he'll get battered come renewal and may even find it impossible to get insured for a reasonable sum, which would put his Dominos job at risk too.
As long as your car gets fixed to your satisfaction I don't see why you would need to make this guys life more difficult when he was ultimately driving a road legal car.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff