Crash for cash awards
Discussion
This year’s winners are ........
Same as always Bradford and Birmingham.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57058755
Same as always Bradford and Birmingham.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57058755
What really gets my goat is that you run into them due to their contrived "accident" and they want your insurance details. See what happens when they run into YOU. You won't be getting any insurance details. Well any details at all.
This will probably get some "enlightened" types upset, but when driving in certain towns you really have to stay away from certain cars - well away - based upon the appearance of the driver. Crash for cash is absolutely rife - and remember that those statistics that you see are the tip of the iceberg - how many simply give them cash to avoid going through insurance?
This will probably get some "enlightened" types upset, but when driving in certain towns you really have to stay away from certain cars - well away - based upon the appearance of the driver. Crash for cash is absolutely rife - and remember that those statistics that you see are the tip of the iceberg - how many simply give them cash to avoid going through insurance?
The only way you can avoid being involved in CFC is to remain very alert at all times and keep well back from
all vehicles, you cant always see who is in front so you treat every vehicle the same, keep your distance
and if you see anyone in front trying to do something unusual, pull over and let them get away ahead of you.
all vehicles, you cant always see who is in front so you treat every vehicle the same, keep your distance
and if you see anyone in front trying to do something unusual, pull over and let them get away ahead of you.
I have no respect or sympathy for the insurance companies any more, and I'm aware that the payouts make our premiums higher.
A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
Fastchas said:
I have no respect or sympathy for the insurance companies any more, and I'm aware that the payouts make our premiums higher.
A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
Why isn't your Mrs looking where she's going when reversing?A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
Carl_Manchester said:
Nice to see Shard End winning awards.
It’s pretty rare isn’t it? I had a girlfriend from Shard End about 20 years ago. Great memories! Nice to see Stetchford get a mention too. I bought my first house in B23, it was a s
t tip then, and it still is now. It taught me a valuable life lesson though - better to buy a st house in a decent location, than a decent house in a st location 
These days if I had to get from BHX to the city centre in the car, I’d go all the way around the M42/M6/A38 to avoid the Coventry road and the Small Heath Bypass. That whole area is just too dodgy (as proven by the article on the BBC) and blatantly swarming with uninsured, untaxed cars.
Oakey said:
Fastchas said:
I have no respect or sympathy for the insurance companies any more, and I'm aware that the payouts make our premiums higher.
A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
Why isn't your Mrs looking where she's going when reversing?A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
Fastchas said:
I have no respect or sympathy for the insurance companies any more, and I'm aware that the payouts make our premiums higher.
A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
There was a documentary about these whiplash claims. Whiplash shows no medical evidence because it is minor tissue damage and not bone. Most the time, the only way to tell is that the patient is in pain. This makes it very easy to fake.A few years ago, my partner got into her car that was parked on her drive at the end of her cul-de-sac.
By the time she had started the car and reversed off the drive, a taxi had pulled up on the opposite side. She bumped her car into the off side rear wheelarch of the oldish Passat. The driver claimed for whiplash and the car was written off, for which he probably bought back off the insurers. The damage was a very slight dent to the arch. There was no damage to her car because the speed was so slow. A whiplash injury was impossible.
My partner was livid, the insurers said they never really challenge whiplash injuries and just pay out. Her premiums increased because of a false claim, albeit she did bump into the car.
If the insurers don't challenge then they are part of the problem IMO.
GPs know when they are being fooled but when their livelihood and practice licence is at threat from agressive patients then have no choice but to sign it off. That's all that is needed from the patient's lawyer (no win no fee usually) and they can do the rest.
This leaves the insurance company vulnerable. They cannot fight this in court so there is no point.
I thought they were clamping down in false whiplash claims in some way?
It's very easy to say, but most of the accidents do seem avoidable if you follow at the correct distance and pay attention etc.
Occasionally when I've been a bit annoyed by someone slow and I've found myself too close I've conciously decided to back off just incase it was someone about to brake suddenly, on purpose!
Probably plenty of times when I'm at risk though because I'm not leaving the gap I should.
From what I've read certain types are picked on more than others. I believe women by themselves for example are a primary target.
It's very easy to say, but most of the accidents do seem avoidable if you follow at the correct distance and pay attention etc.
Occasionally when I've been a bit annoyed by someone slow and I've found myself too close I've conciously decided to back off just incase it was someone about to brake suddenly, on purpose!
Probably plenty of times when I'm at risk though because I'm not leaving the gap I should.
From what I've read certain types are picked on more than others. I believe women by themselves for example are a primary target.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff