I rear ended another driver and his insurance company is demanding $5500, please help

Lflibbidyflop on 07/01/2017 - 15:03
Last edited 09/01/2017 - 14:42

Wanting general advise as this is my first car accident. Yes, I've learnt my lesson and now will have insurance for the rest of my life while driving, please don't hate ):

I got a letter of demand today from NRMA speaking on behalf of 2nd car who claims $5500 because I rear ended him about two months ago. The scenario happened on a highway with multiple traffic lights in qld:

  • First car abruptly stopped at a traffic light which already had a line of cars
  • Second car braked, then let go, and braked to a complete stop, did not rear end the first car
  • Third car (me) braked, however did not brake hard enough to come to a complete stop and rear-ended the second car

Facts:
* At the time I was uninsured
* Police statement was not made at the time of incident
* Second car was a red P plater, student
* Second car was insured under his mum's name
* No witnesses (except the first car, of which I have no contact details of)
* Exchanged details, took some (poor quality) photos with second car
* Attempted to contact the second car 100 times and they ignored my messages and calls prior to receiving letter of demand

The PAV of car was stated $6000 for a 2007 Ford Fiesta 3dr, Salvage value $1000, and the chassis of both passenger and driver sides were damaged, stated from motor vehicle assessment. He decided to write-off the car and I was charged for subsequent tow & car hire for 14 days.

Attached are photos from the incident:
* My car (http://tinyurl.com/jn4hfts)
* His car (http://tinyurl.com/zdexr9m, http://tinyurl.com/j4gux4u, http://tinyurl.com/zyxacux)

What's the best plan to undergo negotiations? Personally, I don't believe his damages were severe enough for a write-off and he wanted a new car. Advice would be highly appreciated as a first time it is highly mentally exhausting; and as a poor university student, this will take a huge chunk out of my existing little savings ):

Automotive

closed Comments

  • Baysew on 07/01/2017 - 15:06
    +201

    Pay insurance company $5500.

    Problem solved.

    • Marcsie on 07/01/2017 - 19:59
      +57

      And make sure to get insurance (At least 3rd party) from now on.

    • HADOUKEN on 09/01/2017 - 15:18
      +4

      /thread

    • Cheeper on 09/01/2017 - 16:44
      +42

      and leave space when you drive… don't tailgate.

    • chillin222 on 09/01/2017 - 22:07
      +20

      As a uni student, you have free access to lawyers on campus. Go and see them, they are generally experts at car accident claims. Your goal is to successfully negotiate down the amount with the insurance company.

      Also, why did you pay for car hire and tow? You shouldn't have paid a cent unless it was to settle the full claim. You should demand that the insurance company deducts that amount from the payout.

    • grr1701 on 11/01/2017 - 12:27
      +2

      If the other car's chassis was damaged, it's likely to be deemed a write-off. The owner really has no say in this even if they REALLY want it repaired. (A bloke rear-ended me with not a particularly great impact and my 7 year old Fairmont's chassis was damaged and was written off. I argued to have it fixed but failed. Got $10000 for a car that was worth MUCH more to me.) The other person probably ignored OP's phone calls because he had an insurance company to conduct any negotiations and letters of demand. That's part of the reason for having insurance. OP was completely in the wrong and will have to pay for the car he wrote-off, one way or another. Unless he wants to go down the "solicitor path" which could cost him MUCH more if he takes it past the initial consultation.

  • spackbace on 07/01/2017 - 15:09
    +92

    Regardless of all your info provided, key point is everyone else braked in time, you didn't. All costs are on you.

    Amazed a police report wasn't filed. Be thankful you didn't get charged with failure to stop in time/keeping a safe distance.

    • whooah1979 on 07/01/2017 - 15:15
      +12

      Amazed a police report wasn't filed.

      there is no need to waste taxpayers money on a fender bender.

      • spackbace on 07/01/2017 - 15:22
        +16

        Again, a law has been broken (well, probably 2) - Failing to stop in time / failing to keep a safe distance.

        • whooah1979 on 07/01/2017 - 15:49
          +23

          Again, a law has been broken (well, probably 2)

          you could be absolutely right, but wasting resources on trivial offences when no one is injured is sad.

          it's like calling the police every time we think a driver is speeding, pedestrians jaywalking, cyclists not using hand signals when turning, vehicles stopping in loading zones and not loading, vehicles stopping in front of driveways, vehicles parking on nature or median strips, drivers leaving their vehicle unattended with the windows down, etc.

        • Cheap Charlie on 07/01/2017 - 15:55
          +5

          @whooah1979:

          you could be absolutely right, but wasting resources on trivial offences when no one is injured is sad.

          Previously in NSW it was a requirement Police were called to the scene of an accident.
          I understand that rule/law has since changed. Along the lines of if no one is injured, the incident just needs to be reported to the police call centre with in 24 hours.

          There may or may not be a requirement to call/report to police.
          Secondly, Insurance companies tend to request a police report

        • mskeggs on 07/01/2017 - 18:16
          +3

          @Cheap Charlie:
          My understanding is you still need to call the cops in NSW if the damage is over a threshold (I think it was $3k or $5k), if the vehicle needs towing or somebody is injured.

        • amkssg on 07/01/2017 - 19:16
          +29

          @mskeggs: Nope, you only call the police for the following 3 situations:

          1) someone is killed or injured, or
          2) a party fails to stop and exchange particulars, or
          3) a driver is allegedly under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug.

          Source: http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/community_issues/road_safety/cr…

        • mskeggs on 07/01/2017 - 19:57
          +1

          @bsmksg:
          Cheers. I remember reading that there were changes, but I must have mixed up the message.

        • amkssg on 07/01/2017 - 20:00
          +4

          @mskeggs: Just FYI, there is actually a form/brochure for "what to do":

          http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/file/0004/315445/…

          I keep a copy in my car, just in case.

        • k-rokfm on 09/01/2017 - 09:14

          @bsmksg:

          I think in the ACT (at least) it is also if a road is blocked

        • taoz on 09/01/2017 - 09:46
          +1

          Police don't attend unless injury generally.
          In victoria Atleast

        • payless69 on 09/01/2017 - 15:33

          @Cheap Charlie: it is QLD, bogan country

        • DangerNoodle on 10/01/2017 - 08:25
          +1

          @bsmksg: that's better than in SA. I had someone rear end me and then try to do a runner. I chased him down and we eventually were stopped at lights where I managed to wave a police officer over to pull him over. Even though I had a car full of witnesses, police said that it doesn't count as a hit and run since I tailed him and police pulled him over, and they wouldn't do a statement because damage was less than 3k. The guy who hit me was aggro and looked like he was on something.

        • [Deactivated] on 10/01/2017 - 22:33
          -1

          @bsmksg:

          Never call the cops when the other person is intoxicated because their insurance won't cover you. You'll end up screwing yourself over.

        • Liqqeh on 11/01/2017 - 02:27
          +4

          @nurries:

          You're right, let the intoxicated bloke get back in his car and keep driving. I love Ozbargain, but you read some really stupid crap from people trying to save a few bucks.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/01/2017 - 02:45
          -2

          @Liqqeh:

          They should fix the rules then if they want people to actually report them. Why should I pay $600 excess or $1500 if I'm a P Plater because a drunk person hit me with no fault of my own.

        • McFly on 11/01/2017 - 09:23
          +1

          @nurries: This is real life not a game of Monopoly.
          Who is 'they' and what 'rules' should be fixed?

        • John Dough on 11/01/2017 - 10:08
          +1

          @nurries:
          Your insurance covers you.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/01/2017 - 12:39

          @McFly:
          They = Insurance Company
          Rules= Not paying the "not at fault" party because the "at fault" party was intoxicated.

          @greydaniel:

          See my previous comment regarding excess.

        • McFly on 11/01/2017 - 13:00
          -2

          @nurries: So you want insurance companies to insure drunk drivers. Who else?
          Drugged drivers? Unlicensed drivers? Blind drivers???

        • [Deactivated] on 11/01/2017 - 13:12
          +2

          @McFly:

          No, I want them to cover me if a drunk driver hits me and then they can go recoup their costs from the driver. They don't need to cover the driver's car, just mine. Until then, I refuse to call the cops if a drunk driver hits me because I don't want to pay $1000 excess for something that wasn't my fault.

        • BexForHeadache on 11/01/2017 - 16:26

          @nurries:

          Maybe you'll get lucky when one hits you , injuring you to the point you won't care…Moron

        • [Deactivated] on 11/01/2017 - 18:20
          +1

          @BexForHeadache:

          Don't you love it when someone makes valid points that you have no argument against so you decide to resort to an ad hominem response.

        • FirstNameLastName on 11/01/2017 - 19:12

          @nurries:

          Or even worse, sarcasm. wink

        • FirstNameLastName on 12/01/2017 - 10:34

          (btw nurries, i'm actually with you on this one.. one person above said 'to save a few bucks'.. but to some $1000ish is an extreme amount of bucks that takes a lot of time and struggle to save. but maybe there are some insurance policies that would waive your excess in this sort of situation.. i would hope).

        • John Dough on 12/01/2017 - 14:45
          +2

          @nurries:
          If a drunk driver hits you, even if uninsured and you are NOT at fault you don't pay excess unless your insurance company is dodgy.
          Are you new to insurance?

        • McFly on 12/01/2017 - 17:52

          @nurries:

          No, I want them to cover me if a drunk driver hits me and then they can go recoup their costs from the driver.

          Your insurance covers you if someone uninsured (for whatever reason) does damage to your property (as greydaniel says without excess charge.)

        • imurgod on 13/01/2017 - 14:51
          +1

          @greydaniel: correct. Thought I was going mad reading his comment.

      • grr1701 on 16/01/2017 - 20:16

        In Queensland, if either car can't be driven (I.e. Bent chassis) then the police have to be notified. If they're not notified in time, both drivers can be fined. I don't think the police have to actually attend the bingle, though.

      • grr1701 on 16/01/2017 - 21:56

        In Queensland, if either car can't be driven (I.e. Bent chassis) then the police have to be notified. If they're not notified in time, both drivers can be fined. I don't think the police have to actually attend the bingle, though.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 07/01/2017 - 22:28
      +18

      Regardless of all your info provided, key point is everyone else braked in time, you didn't.

      Agreed.

      How is this a 3 car collision?

      Seems like OP simply rear-ended someone and is grasping at straws trying to shirk responsibility.

    • Seraphin7 on 08/01/2017 - 15:04

      Bingo!

  • whooah1979 on 07/01/2017 - 15:12
    +16
    • At the time I was uninsured

    this may be the first of a long line of these posts for 2017.

    like baysew said. pay the $5.5k or ask the insurer if they accept a payment plan. then go and get a tpp.

    • mskeggs on 07/01/2017 - 18:17
      +7

      A payment plan might be the best option. Cry poor, agree to pay $150 a month or whatever you can get away with, then see what happens.
      I have heard others say they later missed payments and eventually stopped paying altogether, presumably when the debt was aged and lower so the insurer just gave up.

      • whoopdeedoo on 09/01/2017 - 01:11
        -7

        i wonder if you'd be singing the same tune if OP ran into you.

        • ThithLord on 09/01/2017 - 08:33
          +27

          Probably would - the insurer pays the claimant and then recoups the cost from OP.

      • knk on 09/01/2017 - 22:15
        +1

        I wonder how that would affect OPs credit rating, if at tall?

  • Cheap Charlie on 07/01/2017 - 15:50
    +24

    Sounds like you have no viable option other than pay up.
    Your lucky the car you hit was not a high value and expensive to repair car, the figure may have been significantly more than $5500.
    Rolling the dice on not having insurance may have cost you $5500 plus repairs to your car.

    • arescarti42 on 10/01/2017 - 22:23
      +9

      "Your lucky the car you hit was not a high value and expensive to repair car, the figure may have been significantly more than $5500."

      This. You should thank your lucky stars that you only ran into a relatively old Ford, and not a brand new $90,000 Mercedes or something. You could have been up for tens of thousands of dollars.

      Pay the money, get 3rd party insurance, and write the $5500 as a valuable life lesson.

  • resubaehtgnolhcs on 07/01/2017 - 15:51
    +22

    OP what exactly are you trying to argue? It's not up to you to decide whether the affected party's car was a write-off or not - this is why people have insurance. You were in the wrong, you caused the damage and now it is time to deal with the consequences. The easiest option for you to undertake with the least amount of stress is to pay up, learn from the situation and move on with your life!

    • paloverde88 on 10/01/2017 - 23:54
      +1

      Take responsibility for your action/Paying up is a measure Of your maturity

  • razorack999 on 07/01/2017 - 16:00
    +2

    It is well kniown that quotes are padded big time for insurance claims. The OP may find a better quote with a sympathetic panel beater who knows that an insurance company isnt involved. Of course the other driver has to accept this.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 07/01/2017 - 22:33
      +5

      And that is the issue for this thread.

      • razorack999 on 08/01/2017 - 07:30
        +3

        yet as far as i can see , no one above mentioned it- just that he has to pay

        • FirstNameLastName on 08/01/2017 - 11:20
          +5

          nrma has already paid their driver out.. i don't think they could send a letter of demand without having done this first, so i think the advice probably doesn't apply.

          still, better to mention it anyway just in case i'm wrong.. op should call nrma and confirm all this.

        • [Deactivated] on 09/01/2017 - 03:01
          +5

          I think people got distracted because the title and the majority of the post seems to be angling to place the blame for the accident elsewhere. If OP had asked directly about the issue it wouldn't have happened. But instead OP talks about a three car accident (which it wasn't) and brings up things like the other driver being a P plater for no apparent reason.

        • [Deactivated] on 12/01/2017 - 19:13

          @Stitchy: Yes my wife had the same thing happen to her she side swiped a car in merging lanes and there was only a little damage to the other car and hers which the driver admitted she was in the wrong. Apologised and exchanged details and heard nothing for months until bingo a letter of demand for $4000 repair cost from yep the NRMA. We explored all options with our lawyer and she ended up having to pay. I am not saying that the OP is right or wrong but once it goes to a letter of demand it is like a bad debt. You can ignore it and it will just get worse or pay it and move on. Or last sort out a payment plan with the insurer. This was even with a witness in the car.

    • windrc on 09/01/2017 - 20:57
      +1

      if you were the other driver, would you go to the cheapie panel beater instead of the ones recommended by your insurer?

    • goraygo on 10/01/2017 - 21:35
      +3

      Those cheap panel beaters won't give the other car lifetime warranty. Larger insurance companies gives lifetime warranty of the claim regardless of the panel beater assigned.

      Really, if I am the other driver and have insurance, I wouldn't accept alternative but to go thru my own insurance.

  • StewBalls on 07/01/2017 - 17:25
    +11

    Talk to a solicitor. The initial contact/advice will be free, they can advise you of your actual obligations in this matter…you may not be fully liable for (as noted) a padded out writeoff for a minor fender-bender. I've seen plenty of solicitors negotiate settlements in these things down to a couple of grand.

    Yes you were stupid to be driving uninsured, you already know this; and yes you are liable for reasonable costs, but you don't need to be pineappled completely over this.

    • Kangal on 09/01/2017 - 20:04
      -3

      +1,000

      Sure driving without Third-party insurance is looked down by all the tightarses here, a lot of people are over-reacting here.
      But that's no excuse to be unfair. Reasonable costs sounds correct and true.
      Agree, the OP could've had the other car fixed much cheaper at panel beater which would have saved the other person from paying the excess and having their mum's insurance rates increase.

      • windrc on 09/01/2017 - 21:04
        +2

        Depending on the insurer, but most waive the excess if you are not at fault and does not affect no claim bonus.

      • DingoBilly on 10/01/2017 - 20:09
        +2

        Two quick things -> You mention that driving without third-party insurance is looked down upon by all the tightarses… which seems to be a double-negative, in that only tightarses would be the ones driving without third-party insurance? I mean, realistically, it is just idiots who drive without it…

        And secondly -> if you're the victim of a car accident, you don't pay excess and your insurance rates don't increase, so the OP didn't save the other person from any costs. He just incurred cost of lost time by driving too close and hitting his car.

  • Randxyz123 on 07/01/2017 - 17:28
    +22

    What exactly are you trying to ask OP??

    At the time I was uninsured

    Why were you driving then?

    What's the best plan to undergo?

    Pay up. You hit him. You didn't leave enough space.

    I don't believe his damages were severe enough for a write-off.

    TOUGH LUCK. You don't get to decide if they were "severe" enough or not.

    Did the car you hit , hit the first car as well? If so expect a letter from them. You could be up for both repairs.

    Buy TPP insurance. If you can't afford it, then buy a bicycle.

    • Illian on 10/01/2017 - 18:09
      -5

      Why were you driving then?
      buy a bicycle

      You're obviously allowed to drive without your own insurance, I do believe CTP insurance is included with registration is it not? The government deems that to be adequate so there is technically no reason he should not have been driving.

      You hit him. You didn't leave enough space.

      Any number of factors could come into this, it's not right to assume space. All the space in the world won't help you if you're distracted, if you don't react quickly enough to the sudden change in the car ahead of you, if your brakes don't stop as quickly as the car's in front of you do (it's much more modern than your own for example), if you're in a puddle or loose gravel on the road etc etc

      I'm not saying he shouldn't have to pay, he should see a uni lawyer like others have said and negotiate a payment plan, and obviously it's much much better to have comprehensive insurance and not be in this situation, but there's no such thing as black and white.

      • DingoBilly on 10/01/2017 - 20:13
        +1

        It's always space. That is the main defining factor. If you leave adequate space, then actually yes, if you're distracted, you'll be fine because you can just look up eventually and just brake in time, and similar to all your other cases.

        Person just didn't leave enough space to handle an accident, probably due to lack of experience driving, as any safe driver will leave space for these sorts of incidents so you can be distracted or have other things come up so you don't have an accident. Live and learn.

        • Illian on 11/01/2017 - 19:45
          -2

          It certainly doesn't work like that in the real world. Even at a meandering 50km/h if you look away for even one second you have already covered 13 meters of ground, the average car is what, 3m long? That's four car lengths, have you ever witnessed a block of traffic with every car four car lengths from the one in front? Because I haven't. Even if you leave that distance, another car will take the opening and move into it, there goes your distance.

          The biggest factors here are not distance, but experience, awareness of traffic and reflexes. Awareness and reflexes can be taught, defensive driving school can help with reflexes and how to react in a situation, having a good mentor or just being the kind of person that figures it out on your own can help with awareness and looking ahead to read traffic. But unless you're tailgating, the issue won't be space.

        • Vanit on 12/01/2017 - 11:55
          +1

          @Adonael: This is literally how it works. If you hit the car in front of you because you couldn't break in time, its always your fault no matter the circumstances and its always because you didn't leave enough space.

          • Getting distracted? Pull over or leave more space so you have time to react
          • In traffic? Leave an APPROPRIATE amount of space. Obviously Phillip didn't mean leave four car lengths if you're going 10km/hr, but it should be enough to react to unforeseen behaviour
          • Car in front not moving? Don't follow until there's enough space again

          The biggest factors here are not distance, but experience, awareness of traffic and reflexes.

          This statement doesn't mean anything. You use your experience and awareness of traffic to judge the distance you should leave, they're not competing factors.

        • John Dough on 12/01/2017 - 14:57

          @Vanit:
          This is not entirely true and contrary to what you believe not all rear end accidents are the fault of the driver behind.
          This was tested in court a few years ago on the Western Ring Road. A car doing 100 kays saw the speed cameras near the Geelong interchange and recklessly slammed the brakes on out of nowhere down to something like 60kmph.
          The driver behind did his best to brake in time, but was unable to stop and hit the car.
          It went to court, evidence was produced from the traffic camera that monitors the speed camera area and the judge ruled that the car in front acted illegally and irresponsibly and was deemed to have caused the accident and was 100% at fault.

          I can try find the documentation, but clearly remembered reading about it in the paper or online and going wow, this CAN happen.

        • DingoBilly on 12/01/2017 - 16:59
          +1

          @greydaniel:

          Mmmm I think this makes sense but it's a fringe case and to be honest, I would actually disagree with the legal ruling but not my call to make.

          In a similar scenario, if a kangaroo jumps out in front of that car in that exact same scenario, the person rear-ending the person is at fault. I think the inclusion of a speed camera into the incident shouldn't change the outcome, as the person behind was not driving safely ultimately. But perhaps the courts didn't want to set a precedent given the first person was probably speeding and driving erratically.

        • John Dough on 12/01/2017 - 19:00

          @PhilipJWitow:
          Yeah I am on the fence on that one, can see both sides.

          Another example would be running up the back of a car with no brake lights.
          If you have a dashcam and can clearly prove their car was unroadworthy and unsafe, you would have a case to say it's not your fault.

          99.9% of cases are the fault of the driver behind not paying attention or tailgating and they get what they deserve, but there is a grey area….

      • Randxyz123 on 11/01/2017 - 00:01
        +6

        I do believe CTP insurance is included with registration is it not?

        For Christ sake. CTP is not car insurance. It is included with your rego if you hit someone and injure someone…

        It is the same as TAC. NSW really really needs to change this because so many people don't get this it seems.

        • Illian on 11/01/2017 - 19:35
          +3

          What it covers isn't important. My point is that if the government didn't think it was adequate to drive with just that, then it would be illegal to drive without insurance. Yet it isn't, therefore there is no question as to why he was driving, he was doing nothing wrong by doing so.

        • tebbybabes on 12/01/2017 - 03:50

          @Adonael:

          I'm upvoting @Adonael here. I certainly think it's incredibly foolish to drive around without adequate insurance but I agree that it's not illegal. It might have been foolish, but I don't think he did anything wrong.

          Just like @inherentchoice said OP just ends up being self-insured.

  • tomleonhart on 07/01/2017 - 17:46
    +52

    Use the money that you saved by not buying insurance to pay. Problem solved :)

    • inherentchoice on 11/01/2017 - 10:17
      +1

      I call this being self-insured.

      • tomleonhart on 11/01/2017 - 11:05

        I know eh. I self insured many things.

        But for the risk of car accident or my house burning down, I know i can't self insured myself. LOL.

  • whooah1979 on 07/01/2017 - 18:02
    +3

    $6000 for a 2007 Ford Fiesta 3dr

    http://tinyurl.com/zdexr9m
    your image shows a five door fiesta. $5.5k sounds about right.

    http://www.redbook.com.au/cars/research/used?q=%28%28%28%28%…

  • nachoman on 07/01/2017 - 18:48
    +18

    Pay the $5,500. Never drive without insurance. If I was the second driver I would ignore you as well and let my insurance company sort it all out.

    Also, in WA you can be fined for failing to report a traffic accident to Police where the damage is $3,000 or more. I believe the fine for first offence is $400.

    • smalltime0 on 08/01/2017 - 13:36
      +1

      You wouldn't get fined as it is a technicality between 5.5 and 3k.
      If you wrote off a merc or injured someone and didn't say anything, that's different.

    • John Dough on 10/01/2017 - 09:24
      +3

      Exactly! that's why you pay the insurance company a premium - so that when a poor, uninsured uni student runs up your backside while texting, you just sit back, relax and let them deal with ALL the bs.

  • swiggity swag on 07/01/2017 - 19:45
    +1

    Always have insurance.

    • Eeples on 11/01/2017 - 19:02

      Always insure what you can't afford to replace.

      House
      Car 3rd party property if you are driving a cheap car
      Car comprehensive if you are driving an expensive car

  • Marcsie on 07/01/2017 - 20:03
    +3

    Someone needs to learn a hard way. No insurance !

  • [Deactivated] on 07/01/2017 - 20:21
    +1

    Third car (me) braked, however did not brake hard enough to come to a complete stop and rear-ended the second car

    I don't know if your car has ABS, but if it doesn't, it might help you to understand braking and how to brake in emergency situations without ABS assisting you.

    Basically slamming hard on the brakes and keeping your foot there will likely lead you to skidding and losing control rather than actually stopping effectively.

    I'm still a noob and am learning things too, but this might help:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadence_braking

    I was lucky to have an ex-car racer as my driving instructor (my dad) who taught me about pumping the brakes in emergency stops. Haven't had to use that technique yet but its always handy to know and practise!

    • jlogic on 09/01/2017 - 23:00
      +6

      Learnt this from playing Gran Turismo. Try driving the Dodge Viper around Autumn Ring without learning to pump brakes.

      Applied it once and reckon it saved me from a rear end. Didn't save the poor car in front though.

    • Osprey06 on 13/01/2017 - 11:57

      Glad you're learning car control skills, but if the OP "did not brake hard enough", then cadence braking would only have increased the stopping distance and slamming hard on the brakes and keeping their foot there, as you put it, may have been a more effective strategy.

  • airzone on 07/01/2017 - 20:31
    +17

    These cars don't have a chassis - a monocoque is used instead. So if it's bent, then it's difficult and time consuming to try and straighten, and even so, the structural integrity might be lost. Given that it's a short hatchback, there's not a lot of play in the body before it's too far gone. It's quite easy to imagine the damage being worth more than the car itself.

    So 2 things:
    Yes, you'll need to pay the $5.5k. But don't feel bad about stringing the payments out to the insurer.
    Yes, you should get at least TPP insurance. There are a lot of expensive, high yielding investments driving around on the road.

    • WhyAmICommenting on 10/01/2017 - 13:23
      +11

      Yep, all those Westpac business grads in their 80k "assets" lol

  • FirstNameLastName on 07/01/2017 - 21:03
    +5

    I was in an identical pileup one christmas day, but I was car 2.
    car 1 was a brand new falcon work vehicle.
    at-fault car 3 was uninsured single mum with 2 kids in car.

    all 3, written off.
    i later made the driver sign a form admitting fault.. and so my insurer gave me 3kish for 'uninisured driver cover', and then chased her up I assume.

    so I assume NRMA have already paid out the driver.. and now they are chasing you.

    Clearly, you are at fault.

    You can payment plan it, probably for no credit issues down the track.
    Others just don't pay, and maybe one day down the track it's handed off to a 3rd party debt collector who buy it for 10c on the dollar, and offer for you to settle at 20c on the dollar.. or something like that. But if this is possible, I assume it could leave you with credit rating issues.

    claiming bankruptcy would probably do the same or worse.

    (as for you not thinking the damage was that big, small dings can do that if chassis gets warped or airbags deploy or too many panels are damaged, at least on cheaper cars)

    tpp insurance can be had from (groan I know) bingle for like $120.. I pay about 230 and have full comprehensive.. although my car is only worth 4k or something.

    • cjmorgan87 on 10/01/2017 - 12:36
      +2

      It's a civil matter and can't affect a credit rating. If the OP doesn't pay the only option the insurance company has is to take the matter to court.
      Not giving an opinion either way but it won't affect your credit rating because it isn't debt you agreed to (at least in QLD anyway, not sure if other states are different)

  • FirstNameLastName on 07/01/2017 - 21:06
    +1

    btw, interested to know if your airbags on your toyota echo deployed?
    and if so, did you have the original airbags, because toyota is recalling them on some cars, due to ceramic shrapnel issues during deployment.

  • ronnknee on 07/01/2017 - 21:12
    +4

    Try negotiating to a lower amount. No matter what, you will have to pay for the damages. Can't get out of that.

  • FirstNameLastName on 07/01/2017 - 22:35
    +1

    btw be thankful no one hit a utility pole.. costs can be in the tens of thousands to fix/replace.

  • HeWhoKnows on 08/01/2017 - 08:59

    You are a bloody idiot for not having even "cheap as chips" Third party insurance. Cough up and shut up! Will cost you even more to take insurance companies to court and contrary to above, they wont negotiate unless you can organize for a cheaper repair quote. Let this be a lesson to you.

    • FirstNameLastName on 08/01/2017 - 11:16
      +14

      amayz.. why all the hate buddy? alone or something?

      • HeWhoKnows on 10/01/2017 - 21:28
        +1

        If this idiot ran into you, uninsured. you would NOT be impressed. The guy is just TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE! Now comes crawling to us for help. OMG. Sorry but I have no time for such fools in life.

  • njm on 08/01/2017 - 09:37
    +3

    You should be able to negotiate a lower amount.

    Find out the exact model of the car and look at redbook. Values of 07 Fiesta's vary a fair bit based on the model and km's traveled. Use that as your guide to reducing the $6,000 starting point.

    A lot of motor policies don't allow for a hire vehicle following an accident as standard, make sure that the other driver did have this cover in place. Maybe try and argue that 14 days was too long to assess that the vehicle was to be written off and negotiate a lower number of days.

    Whatever negotiated amount you can come to, then enter into a payment plan.

    • Randxyz123 on 08/01/2017 - 23:22
      +1

      14 days is perfectly reasonable.

      Assuming the accident happened before Christmas the assessor probably already had a backlog of claims as did the panel shop. Then there were several public holidays.

      • njm on 09/01/2017 - 13:56

        The OP notes that the accident happened around 2 months prior to the post date of 07/01, meaning the accident happened early to mid November.

      • ankor on 09/01/2017 - 23:16

        Not to mention the claims processing time for these insurers. 14 days is pretty standard across the industry..

    • flibbidyflop on 09/01/2017 - 14:20
      -2

      Your comment is much appreciated, thanks for the compassion & help :)

      The vehicle hire was AFTER the vehicle was written off. I would understand the need for car hire during the repair process/ decision to be written off, however this was not the case. Would that be a justified point? As to my knowledge, insurance companies usually end their policies after a vehicle has been written off, thus he would be payed out & unable to claim car hire policy; unless, this is part of the compensation for the inconvenience caused.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join