Had Accident - Car Insurance Has Just Expired

LElla44 on 01/08/2017 - 21:55
Last edited 02/08/2017 - 08:51 by 1 other user

Hi everyone,

On the 29th of July I had an accident at a roundabout. I was driving on the main road, as I approached the roundabout I T-boned another driver which came from the left side of the roundabout. His vehicle spun across the garter, and smashed through a brick wall & a Telstra box on a private home property. Both cars were towed away. The car I got involved on the accident belongs to my mum.

She is covered with QBE third party insurance. On the 15th of July the insurance expired. We were unaware of this as usually the company sends a reminder letter in the mailbox. However, they did send an email, although my mum is aged, she rarely ever use that service.

We still don't know who's in the wrong. Is there a chance to renew the insurance as it wasn't our fault we didn't read the email in time? We have been with QBE for 2 years.

PS: My Samsung 5 was stolen by the towing truck driver. Any chance of retrieving it?

Automotive

Comments

  • tsunamisurfer on 02/08/2017 - 11:03

    OP…..

    There is good news, better news and bad news.

    Good news is you are covered in the 2 week grace period.

    Better news is you don't need your third party insurance because you have the right of way in the roundabout and the other party is in the wrong.

    Bad news is, he is uninsured, you have third party only, you will have to chase him yourself for the money, this may take a while depending on how cooperative he is. You will have to arrange repairs or writing off / towing all yourself.

    Best of luck.

    • Findo on 02/08/2017 - 12:36
      -3

      This is why you need comprehensive insurance. Third party property is useless unless you hit a Ferrari.

      • JimmyF on 03/08/2017 - 10:46
        +3

        Not true, third party is good for anything you hit when at fault. Even small 'hits' and be many thousands after the insurance company has handled it and added their bits on. If the other party had hire car option, you could be up for the hire car costs as well as the repair, towing costs etc while the car is being repaired.

        So that small scrap now has towing costs to repairer, repair costs, hire car while being repaired costs, maybe some admin fees.

        But yes if it was a Ferrari, add another few zeros to this price. Either way, unless you can afford to pay out of pocket, you're crazy not to have 3rd party at least.

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 11:32
          -7

          If you can afford to drive a car, you can afford to get comprehensive car insurance.

        • JimmyF on 03/08/2017 - 12:20
          +6

          @niggard: again not true. Depends on the cost of the car you drive and the insurance amount. Why pay $600/yr for full comp when the cars only a junker worth $1200.

          Its a RISK, but 3rd party can be cheaper in the long run.

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 12:44
          -4

          @JimmyF: you are neglecting the cost of your own time and effort in chasing up claims. Your insurer doesn't want to know you if you're not at fault and only have 3rd party.

        • JimmyF on 03/08/2017 - 12:54
          +1

          @niggard: You're missing the point… But sure. you win, move on.

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 13:29

          @JimmyF: I don't understand why people will come to the forums and ask questions like OPs when they have 3rd party only. The biggest risk with 3rd party not at fault claims is a non-straightforward claim involving lawyers and heaps of your own time. Why do that to yourself when you can pay a little more and get comprehensive? You don't see people cheaping out on health insurance, unless it's for QFF points only.

        • Name on 04/08/2017 - 20:39
          +3

          @niggard: nope

          @JimmyF is right, there is no benefit to having full comprehensive insurance on a bomb. The amount you'd have paid on comprehensive insurance to get that "benefit" would cover the cost of another car. On the off chance someone screws you over, dump the car at the wreckers, buy another one and move on. Still works out cheaper than paying for full comprehensive. Only time it doesn't work out is if you're prone to crashing and get into "not at fault" crashes more than once every x years.

        • jv on 05/08/2017 - 00:24

          @JimmyF:

          Why pay $600/yr for full comp when the cars only a junker worth $1200.

          Because if you drive a 'junker' the price difference between comprehensive and third party will be minimal…

          Its a RISK, but 3rd party can be cheaper in the long run.

          Paying or not paying for any type of insurance is a risk. That's what you are paying for, to cover risk.

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 09:40
          +1

          @jv:

          Because if you drive a 'junker' the price difference between comprehensive and third party will be minimal…

          Depends on your age, driving history etc. Its not as clear cut as that like it is for a middle aged driver without any claims.

        • imurgod on 07/08/2017 - 07:23

          I can tell you that a recent claim I've worked on was a numbers scrape at best and the final repair bill was just shy of $4K

    • harley on 03/08/2017 - 18:09

      There is the Uninsured Motorist Extension in 3rd party insurances, though the payout it capped to around 3-5k. Generally the other party needs to be clearly at fault and their details known. Look into the conditions required by each insurance co. to claim.

    • Findo on 02/08/2017 - 14:29

      Helmets whilst driving?

        • Findo on 02/08/2017 - 20:34

          How fast do you think the speed limit should be on small roads, regular roads, larger roads and freeways?

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 00:41
          +12

          @eggmaster: I say double all the speeds you've listed

        • Ughhh on 03/08/2017 - 06:35
          +8

          @eggmaster:

          If one has the brain capacity of a mad cow, 5kmph speed limit would still be dangerous. Education and skill developing would be more important imo.

          Those speeds are far toooo slow.

        • [Deactivated] on 03/08/2017 - 14:46
          -1

          @Ughhh:

          I never mention 5km/h. But many countries around the world drive through busy, small, inner city roads at 20-30km/h. Perhaps it is the Aussie bogans brains in thier utes, commodores "pridenjoys" etc who have mad cow brains….

        • Ughhh on 03/08/2017 - 15:52
          +1

          @eggmaster:

          I think you've partially misunderstood my point. You could reduce the speed limit to 2kmph and it still wouldn't stop idiots being idiots, whether intentionally or not ie. Lacking skills.

        • [Deactivated] on 03/08/2017 - 16:59
          -4

          @Ughhh:

          Though speeds of 20-30 wouldn't put other cars through brick walls.

          Heck you could even a pedestrian at 20 and they would probably get up with bruising.

          If we reduced speeds and took a 1 strike approach to traffic offenses, the world would be a better place.

        • bargdebarg on 03/08/2017 - 20:53
          +1

          @niggard: triple

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 22:09

          @bargdebarg: I like the way you think!

        • Findo on 03/08/2017 - 22:10

          @eggmaster: I could drive through the streets drifting sideways everywhere at your recommended speeds. Would that make me a safe driver in your eyes?

        • [Deactivated] on 03/08/2017 - 23:58

          @niggard:

          At those speeds it would be less likely to cause accident.

          Couple that with a touch 1 strike rule on traffic offences before license is removed and we will be a safer country.

          A car is a privilege not a right. You can live without a car.

        • Findo on 04/08/2017 - 00:42
          -1

          @eggmaster: hmm, not sure about that. I'd rather someone speeding through my quiet street doing 80+ than drifting around at 30km/h

        • bargdebarg on 04/08/2017 - 07:26
          -1

          @niggard: actually to be honest, I believe we should have moderate speeds in built up areas but no limit (similar to Germany) for most freeways. However, more budget for better roads and police who actually patrol keep to the left.

    • dogboy on 03/08/2017 - 12:23

      An obvious troll. Please don't feed it guys.

  • whooah1979 on 02/08/2017 - 20:33
    -1

    it sounds like a 50/50 fault. a dashcam vid or a third party witness could improve you claim that the other party didn't give way.

  • picklewizard on 03/08/2017 - 10:25
    +6

    You hit a car that came from the left?

    Your responsibility is to give way from the right.

    If you T-boned the drivers side of a car at a roundabout, the evidence is there that they didn't give way to you.

    Some contention regarding give way to right/cars already in the roundabout, but still, it seems clear that if you were able to hit their side, you were clearly already fully in the roundabout when they entered and were hit.

  • Seni0r El Cheapo on 03/08/2017 - 12:05

    I am with RACV. I prefer renewing the insurance for whole year in advance. My insurance was expired and I had no money to pay full year in advance. I called them and the rep told me not to worry, they have by default two weeks of grace period. And I am fully covered during these two weeks.

    • JimmyF on 03/08/2017 - 12:22
      -1

      You're only covered IF you make the yearly payment within those two weeks. So you can't claim 10 days past the expiry without paying the next year.

      • Seni0r El Cheapo on 03/08/2017 - 12:30
        +1

        Off course. Thank you for the clarification.

        • Dingus on 04/08/2017 - 14:37
          -2

          Where's he going then?

  • billa911 on 03/08/2017 - 16:40
    +4

    Ella..

    Hope you get better soon from the accident

    Since the other guy does not have insurance, he will try his best to pin the blame on you. He may harass you by saying that he will take you to court etc.

    The only way I see you can prove your innocence is by revisiting the location and speak to the Corner Wholesale food shop or Gas station owner. I am guessing they have CCTV Cameras in there. I also hope one of the camera would be facing the roundabout. They may or may not give you the footage. If you manage to get hold of the footage, then you tell the other guy to pay up or face court.

    Your insurance valid or not valid, you still had third party insurance so you got to get your car repaired yourself (if you cant do without it) as the other guy does not have insurance and I dont think he is ready to admit that he is at fault

    Good Luck

    • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 12:02

      Thank you very much. Everything you wrote, so it was. I'm Igor mama. I'm writing here through translit. I do not want to ask my son to write here. He went through hell. I'm hardly alive myself. Because of the idiots on the road, I almost lost My only son. I called the QBE and thank God they extended the insurance. If your insurance is overdue, you have another month to pay. I learned that not all insurance companies give such a chance.Thanks to the man who took photos from the scene of the accident. It immediately became clear that the other driver was guilty. In the photo it is seen that the car is hit in the door from the driver's side. The car broke the brick fence not backwards, but back.What was … My son was Inside the circle, the other car did not yield to it from the left side. Another car was sporty.Perhaps the driver thought that he could drive quickly. Son crashed into the door, another car turned 180 degrees and crashed into a fence and a Telstra box.A specialist when he looked at our car said that your son did not go quickly because our car would have been more damaged. And no one would have stayed alive.The insurance company found the other driver guilty. But the other driver does not have insurance. Therefore, they said that they will pay up to $ 5,000 for our car. Minus expenses. How much will I not know. Your policy is Third Party Only and this does not cover the repairs to your vehicle if you are at fault of the accident. However, if you are not at fault of the accident, we will cover repairs to your vehicle under Uninsured Motorist Benefit found in your policy given that the following requirements are satisfied.

      1. Other Party is 100% at fault.
      2. Other Party is uninsured.
      3. Other Party is not a family member.
      4. You have provided Other Party's Rego, Name and Address.

      Please be advised that if we accept the claim, we will only cover repairs to your vehicle only up to $5,000.00. Any other costs will not be covered under this benefit (e.g.: towing/hire car)

      • Ughhh on 11/08/2017 - 12:12

        You're lucky they're offering to pay you $5000. lucky that the other driver is uninsured too, otherwise you would receive $0 unless you sue the driver.

      • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 12:48

        What was after the accident? My son had a cut on his head. For a whole week he lay in bed. We went out with him only to the doctor and to the police. On the third day after the accident, we went out with him for two hours. When we got home he went to bed. He fell asleep and began to snore very loudly. I approached him after half an hour and began to wake him. I called him, I shook him. I was very frightened. I wanted to call for medical help. I shook him for about two minutes. He opened his eyes and could not speak. His eyes were twirling in different directions. For about an hour he could not get up from the bed. He started saying that I Could not understand him.When my son began to recover a little, I asked him to write a letter on the computer. He began to write and could not. I think that it happened because of the fact that he hit his head. He slept almost all week. For 20 hours a day. Now he feels better. Already began to go out into the street.The head, back and neck still hurt. But, when we were in the hospital right after the accident, we were told that everything would hurt. I pray to God that he will not have any problems later because of an accident.The X-ray of the head showed that everything is fine. But what is it then with him was when I could not wake him up?I am disabled and this accident made me even more ill.

        • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 13:19

          Three days ago my son received a call. It was my father calling from the guy who broke the car. I took the phone and he started He asked if we have insurance. I said yes.shouting that my son was guilty. He said that my son was traveling quickly and that his son was the first in the circle. I said that your son nearly killed my son.. My son was in the hospital and you did not call and asked about his health.I understand that guy. He can not tell his father the truth. He can not admit that he drove fast. Because Dad will not stroke him for it on the head.Father said that now he will go to the police. I told him, go at least where. We were already in the police.

        • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 14:02

          What do I do now? Insurance has recognized that my son is not guilty.What have I lost? Today, the tow truck drove my car.The insurance estimated my car at 6100 dollars. I'm waiting for the money to be returned. Maybe 3 or 4 thousand dollars. I paid $ 400 for the tow truck from the scene of the accident.Now I'm waiting for the invoice to be received from the ambulance. It can be about 700 dollars.I do not know what to do. I was left without a car. I do not know what will happen next with my son's health. To God's Majesty, so that everything will be all right with him.I want to ask you. When will all the bills arrive. Can I send them to the culprit of the accident? Or should I go to court? I do not have money for the court. I do not know yet how it ends. Maybe another driver will want to sue us.Maybe he will want to prove his innocence.But it will not work for him.Guys, I'm writing through translit. There may be errors. Everybody is a big thank you. Take care of yourself! Drive the car carefully! Life is one!

        • [Deactivated] on 11/08/2017 - 14:19

          @Ella44:

          My understanding is that TAC insurance should cover the medical bills. Have you contacted them about a claim? Was the hospital notified that the injuries happened during a Transport Accident?

        • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 14:30

          The ambulance and the police came together. We do not know who called.What is TAC?From the scene of the accident, an ambulance took my son to the hospital.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/08/2017 - 14:31

          @Ella44:
          I just realised TAC is for Victoria only and according to your profile you are in New South Wales. Sorry for the confusion. My guess is that CTP in other states also includes medical expenses but I don't have exact knowledge of the situation.

        • [Deactivated] on 11/08/2017 - 14:33

          @Ella44:
          Try this webpage for information for NSW

          http://www.sira.nsw.gov.au/resources-library/motor-accident-…

        • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 14:33

          /

        • Ella44 on 11/08/2017 - 14:35

          Three days ago my son received a call. It was father calling from the guy who broke the car.

  • Lockieasy on 03/08/2017 - 17:03

    You can usually still renew insurance after it expires.

    I've forgotten to renew my Allianz car insurance for 2-3 weeks past expiration before, so when I realised this I paid it anyway then called them up and they said yeah the system accepted it.

  • wiipantz on 03/08/2017 - 17:28
    +1

    Nothing to do with the insurance part… but if you T-boned a driver entering from the left, I assume you were on the round-a-bout. Ergo all traffic on the round-a-bout has right of way and you would be in the majority right? Hard to tell without knowing more of the case but it seems this was potentially not your fault anyways?

    • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 13:57
      -1

      Agreed, but sounds like the OP was moving with a bit of speed, as they pushed the other car through the roundabout, over the nature strip and into a fence causing damage to the fence/car/telstra box etc. Both cars had to be towed away.

      This wasn't a 'light' little tap, I'm guessing the car entering from the left thought the roundabout was 'clear' when they started to enter, and most likely was before the OP came screaming through.

      The OP did say "as I approached the roundabout", sounds like they hadn't entered the roundabout before the car pulled out. Which meant they can the right of way.

      If the OP was going at a normal speed for a roundabout, they would have been able to stop in time, or not end up pushing a car into a fence, etc.

      • wyrmy on 04/08/2017 - 20:11
        +3

        You don't need a lot of speed. If the car T-boned was hit centre or closer to rear then the loss of traction and the driver panicking and turning the wheel is more than enough to spin and go off in unexpected directions. This effect is even more if the car hit happen to be a FWD

        This is also why you see polices chases where the police approaches a car from the the rear and does a small nudge to completely throw the criminals car off track.

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 20:43
          -1

          Those police chases, the cars have momentum, which a car that slowed down to enter the roundabout doesn't have. So won't be like the 'movies' that a small nudge sends them flying

        • wyrmy on 04/08/2017 - 23:34
          +1

          @JimmyF: Why do you think the other vehicle slowed down before they entered the roundabout?
          You are implying OP was the one speeding and assumping the car in the roundabout was moving slowly. As you said yourself it takes a reasonable speed to cause that level of damage. So isnt it more likely that the car moving forward which hit the fence after the sideways Tbone impact was moving too fast?
          It would take a masssive moving object like a truck to "push" another car sideways.

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 23:41
          -1

          @wyrmy: Most NORMAL people slow down before entering a roundabout.

          OP at a guess is most likely on P plates, hence the car being in their 'mums' name for cheaper insurance.

          Someone was going FAST to provide the momentum to go flying into a fence etc… Two cars hitting in the dry at 25kmh wouldn't do that!

          As above, the OP did say "as I approached the roundabout", sounds like they hadn't entered the roundabout before the other car pulled out. Which meant the other car had the right of way as they had been in the roundabout. Hence the OP T boning them.

          Now, which car do you think was providing the momentum?

        • BartholemewH on 05/08/2017 - 00:13

          @JimmyF:

          It depends on how the damaged fence is oriented versus the roundabout and both vehicles. From the description though, I'd agree with wyrmy and suggest that the increased forward momentum of the so called sports car carried it through the roundabout and into the fence. If the OP had excess momentum and the tap was in the mid side area, wouldn't OP's momentum push the other party brute force style along the road surface or into a traffic island? I think the only cars that tend to 'spin off' after being hit are travelling at a fair rate to begin with.

          The OP is presumably young and doubting themselves. The other party is looking to capitalise on this and obtain an early admission of guilt.

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 09:46

          @BartholemewH: I don't see the OP saying the other party was pushing for an admission of guilt.

          I was the one who said the OP had all the forward momentum. OP wants to blame the other party so they can get their car repaired by them, but appears OP is at fault, so will be paying and may not even have insurance!

        • BartholemewH on 05/08/2017 - 12:15

          @JimmyF:
          Let's avoid using lawyers is the first step towards shirking responsibility when the damage is significant imo.

        • BartholemewH on 05/08/2017 - 12:17

          @BartholemewH:
          Yes, I know what you are saying, I disagreed and said the other party could have been carrying most of the momentum. Assuming the other party is a NORMAL driver doesn't cut it, there is nothing to lead us to believe the other party is a NORMAL driver.

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 13:44
          -1

          @BartholemewH: Why? You assume the OP is a NORMAL driver…. Clearly, with the amount of momentum here, someone wasn't a normal driver!

          The car that HAS the most momentum is the one that ISN'T pushed around in most cases. In this case, the OP pushed the other car into a fence. Its clear the OP had momentum behind them. Both cars had to be towed away. Even though some like to think some fancy police defence driving skills was used in such a small space to dislodge the other car. Fact is both cars had to be towed. Big impact.

          Also the OP car was in mums name for insurance, a clear sign of their age and driving skill level.

          I would lay money that the OP is on P plates, was travelling at higher than normal speed for a roundabout transaction, failed to give way to a car already in the intersection aka roundabout.

        • wyrmy on 05/08/2017 - 15:43
          +2

          @JimmyF: OP never said the car was pushed into a fence. Thats a statement you are making. OPs wording was "His vehicle spun across the garter, and smashed through a brick wall & a Telstra box". There is a massive difference between spinning out and being pushed. About a trucks worth of difference if you read my original comment.
          We are correcting you because you don't seem to realise how easy it is to cause a spin out. Hell I can do that by myself in a light car with bad tyres aquaplaning on a road. I don't need someone fast to hit me, all I need is loss of traction and panic. It is also quite easy to have a front collision where the car needs towing. No illegal excess speed required.

          You are making blind assumptions about insurance. OP: "The car I got involved on the accident belongs to my mum." Its mums car, not the drivers. For more than a year in my 30s I drove a car registered and insured with my mum. She was too old to use it and it was more practical for weekend use than my other large weekend car.

          You are awfully selective about which of OPS statements to interpret. If you happen to be right about OP being on P plates it would just be coincidence and not because of any deduction based on the information presented so far.

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 16:25

          @wyrmy: Oh you're correcting me… Why thank you oh Wyrmy… What would I do without all your wonderful wisdom?

          I don't need your corrections, I didn't ask for them. So again why are you providing them? Oh right you know more than everyone else. Thanks for YOUR blind assumptions here too. Amazing.

          hahaha gotta be a coincidence you say if the OP is on P plates? I've read enough of these oh poor me no insurance things to read between the lines. Its pretty easy these days to spot of streaming pile of ……

          The fact the OP is now MIA pretty much confirms what I thought.

          Carry on! The OP might start a go fund me page, you'll be first in line!

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 16:34

          @wyrmy: BTW you still think the OP just lightly tapped them?

          https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/321854#comment-4935122

          Sounds like someone hit the other car with a bit of force ;)

        • wyrmy on 05/08/2017 - 16:40

          @JimmyF: Except I never said it was light tap. You did. Plenty of speeds between light tap and too fast to be legal/safe. And plenty of speeds in that upper range can cause a write-off and physical injury without breaking any laws.

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 16:45

          @wyrmy: hahaha get your hand off it. We're done!

  • KaTst3R on 03/08/2017 - 17:49

    So no news about the stolen phone?

    • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 13:57

      Its currently on holidays enjoying a lovely new owner….

  • neyo on 04/08/2017 - 04:31

    Is there a chance to renew the insurance as it wasn't our fault we didn't read the email in time?

    Just pointing out that it was your/your mums fault that the email wasn't read.
    Hope you recover okay and sort this out in your favour as the accident does not sound like you are at fault.

  • nobarginsarehere on 04/08/2017 - 04:43
    -3

    Can you (profanity) please learn how to use round-a-bouts!

  • decr on 04/08/2017 - 08:34
    -1

    After reading all the comments I still don't get how you can t-bone someone in a roundabout, send the other vehicle flying smashing fences and walls. Small roundabouts and high velocity don't mix. I'm confused.

    • billa911 on 04/08/2017 - 09:29
      +1

      1. The vehicle entering from the left could have been speeding which went out of control after getting T-boned

      2. The vechile entering from the left was not speeding but the driver panicked after getting T-boned and lost control

    • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 13:49
      +1

      OP was driving at excessive speed, which meant the other car misjudged their speed as they thought they should slow down for the roundabout and have time to get through.

      As a result, the car got hit, the OP speed pushed the car through the roundabout, over the nature strips and into a fence with such force to cause damage.

      • King Tightarse on 04/08/2017 - 18:29

        You dont know that at all/
        Ever seen the US cops do the pit maneuver? Sometimes just a little force from car A can cause car B to go flying. It depends of the physics of the specific situation, exact angle of deflection and speed.
        Most of that energy could have come from the other car.

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 18:53

          pit maneuver requires speed/momentum.

          If the other car slowed down to enter the roundabout and the OP was going a 'normal' speed within the roundabout, there would be no "pit maneuver" as the cars don't have enough speed aka momentum to go flying like the car did.

          If you read the OP post, the other car entered the roundabout BEFORE the OP did, yet the OP still hit them. So have a guess who was speeding?

          as I approached the roundabout I T-boned another driver which came from the left side of the roundabout

          So OP was approaching, but the other car got in first, yet OP still hit them. So doesn't know how to give way and was speeding.

        • King Tightarse on 04/08/2017 - 19:03

          @JimmyF:
          No, the pit maneuver is mostly about accuracy, you largely use the other drivers energy and just hit precisely hard enough to break his traction. I gave it as an example of a little energy causing a larger result, such as potentially in this case with the second car ending up spectacularly off road.
          You directly accused the OP of speeding but I suggest you are jumping to conclusions and you have no reason to say that other than you "reckon".
          They may well have been travelling at a perfectly normal speed and achieved this result.

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 19:21

          @King Tightarse:

          Correct

          you largely use the other drivers energy

          Which is next to nothing for someone who slowed to a near stop before entering a roundabout.

          I did say the OP was speeding. They did appear to come out of nowhere to T-Bone them.

          At a guess there is more to this than has been said.

          Another wild guess, the OP is on P plates, as the car is in his 'mums' name to save dollars on insurance.

          So yes highly likely speeding!

        • King Tightarse on 04/08/2017 - 19:24
          +1

          @JimmyF:
          How do you know that he came to a near stop? The OP doesn't say that. Plenty of people go right through without even slowing. He may well have barreled through at high speed.

          For example:
          - you have no idea of the speeds of the various parties
          - you do not know whether the OP is on P plates
          - Ella44 is unlikely to be a "he"

          This is why dashcams rule the day but when there is no dashcam footage it is important not to jump to conclusions.

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 19:28

          @King Tightarse:

          How do you know that he came to a near stop?

          He the OP? no way… The other car, at a guess most NORMAL drivers slow down before entering

          He may well have barreled through at high speed.

          Based on the other driver entering before the OP did and the OP hitting them, this is safe to say.

          it is important not to jump to conclusions.

          Any yet here you are, assuming the OP just slowly entered and hit another car, sending them flying in to a fence…..

        • King Tightarse on 04/08/2017 - 19:31

          @JimmyF:
          Come driving in the streets of Melbourne sometime and see how many people slow down like good citizens at roundabouts.
          Most don't even slow a little unless they absolutely have to.
          and really man… is Ella 44 …he?

          Probably not

        • JimmyF on 04/08/2017 - 19:45

          @King Tightarse:

          and really man… is Ella 44 …he?

          Who knows… Its the internet! Names mean nothing.

          and why are you calling me a man? Look at my profile picture!

        • King Tightarse on 04/08/2017 - 19:53

          @JimmyF:
          A female called JimmyF ? OK, I don't know, so I wont jump to conclusions and neither should you.
          OzBargain is a safe space so no judgements here ;)
          Every snowflake is unique

    • wyrmy on 05/08/2017 - 18:34
      +1

      This would be where it happened:
      https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/11+Chuter+Ave,+Monterey…

      If you zoom into the South West corner house you can see the Telsta street box directly in front of the fence. I'm guessing this is the one since I cant see any other telstra units in that roundabout. Looks like:
      A) OP was travelling south on Chuter and T-boned a car moving West on Barton.
      or B) OP was heading East on Barton and hit a car travelling South on Chuter

      Both those situations can cause the T-boned car to hit the Telstra box. Situation B more easily due to much shorter distances.
      NOTE: The posted speed limit in the area is 50km/h.

  • cockneylondoner on 04/08/2017 - 09:17

    In my opinion people who drive, and those who are the owners of, an uninsured vehicle should automatically be prosecuted and have their driving licence taken away. Ignorance is no defence in law and you and your mother should have taken steps to ensure that the vehicle was legal to drive before it was driven.
    Good luck with getting the insurance company to cover you. In my experience the insurance ceases when the renewal time has passed. On occasions an insurance company will give you a two week grace to renew the policy at the quoted renewal price but the insurance will only recommence from the time the monies have been paid - the period between the two dates will see the vehicle uninsured by that company.
    I note having looked into the somewhat differing insurance conditions in Australia than those in the UK that in some states CTP has to be paid at the same time as the 'rego' and one would ask if this is the case with you, or your mother as she is the owner of the vehicle.

    • pwnd on 05/08/2017 - 09:28
      +2

      Not following…. why should people who don't have comprehensive insurance get prosecuted and lose their license? Why are you suggesting OP's car was illegal to drive?
      I think you are confusing compulsory third party insurance, which is paid automatically when you renew rego, with comprehensive insurance.

      • cockneylondoner on 07/08/2017 - 08:33

        Sorry for the delay in replying.
        I didn't mention anything about Comprehensive Insurance and I can't see how you have come to the conclusion that I did. Here is an extract from the OP where he was saying that the vehicle he was driving belonged to his mother
        'She is covered with QBE third party insurance. On the 15th of July the insurance expired.'
        My understanding is that in all states, except NSW, CTP is payable when the 'rego' is due for payment unless, one presumes, an alternative form of insurance for at least Third Party can be provided (In NSW the insurance company are required to notify the authorities that a vehicle is covered for insurance - that is the difference as I understand it).
        As Third Party is just a basic insurance to cover claims made by the third party for damage/injury, and on the basis that it is illegal to drive on the road any vehicle that is uninsured then I stand by my comment that the vehicle owner and the driver should be prosecuted for allowing an uninsured vehicle to be driven on the road and if they are so lax as to not know that the insurance had expired then they shouldn't be allowed to keep their driving licence.
        For anyone to suggest that it is perfectly acceptable to go around in an uninsured vehicle hoping that they never have an accident, or if they do it can be proved it wasn't their fault, beggars belief. Try telling someone who has been crippled by an uninsured driver who has no money or assets for compensation that what the driver did was acceptable and see what answer you get.

        • bongom on 07/08/2017 - 11:40

          It is not illegal to drive an uninsured vehicle. Vehicle registration and vehicle insurance in Oz are completely separate. Anyone injured in an accident is covered by TAC insurance which is part of the registration cost.

        • cockneylondoner on 07/08/2017 - 21:35

          @bongom:

          Thank you for your post. I must admit that your opening comment amazed me until I looked into the matter more fully and found that CTP only covers for injury, not for damage to a Third Parties property and that separate insurance has to be taken out to cover for that, which is not compulsory! Who came up with that hairbrained scheme?
          And there's me making the mistake thinking that Australia is more civilized then it actually is. On a recent TV programme the reporter's first sentence was 'Even today Australia is still very much a pioneering country', which seems to sum up matters.

        • pwnd on 10/08/2017 - 15:54

          @cockneylondoner: So to sum it up, yes you were confused. No harm done. Happy to help a befuddled Brit any day.

  • Seraphin7 on 04/08/2017 - 11:36
    +2

    Have you made a statement to police on the matter?

    Do you have the police report on the matter?

    What have the police determined with respect to fault?

    What has the insurance company said about all of this?

    Have you engaged appropriate legal assistance?

    • OzzyOzbourne on 05/08/2017 - 15:11

      Ozbargain should always be the first place to ask for everything from car accidents through to what to drink. There is simply no point in thinking things through yourself when you can get others to do the thinking for you.

  • suicine94 on 04/08/2017 - 12:31
    +3

    Get a galaxy s8 thwy are amazing

    • QW3RTY on 04/08/2017 - 17:04

      Sage advice.

      • John Kimble on 04/08/2017 - 17:09

        Perhaps it was meant for my most recent topic haha

  • The Gent on 04/08/2017 - 19:54

    No clue about car insurance or the theft of this phone, but for future android phones, put this app on and make sure it's working.

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and…

    If it happens again, please don't go vigilante, just give the police the information and let them do their job.

    For iPhone, "Find My iPhone" does a great job and I know someone at my work who successfully used it a few weeks back.

  • [Deactivated] on 04/08/2017 - 20:44
    -1

    Why are yall still posting. The troll is long gone

  • Bofenco on 05/08/2017 - 11:36
    +2

    Hi,

    Thought i'd put my two cents in as I am seeing a lot of wrong information

    To give some context first I have worked in the industry for the last 12 years with most of that time as a broker so I have a pretty good understanding of this subject.

    The first question I would ask is if the renewal was sent and if so was a letter of cancellation sent by QBE? If not then the policy is still in force and all you need to do is pay the premium. This is as per section 59 of the insurance contact act which states that a policy is only cancelled once a letter of cancellation is sent (which is usually 3 days after the letter is dated).

    Cheers

    • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 16:28

      Letter had been sent, see the OP

      However, they did send an email, although my mum is aged, she rarely ever use that service.

      Now if that was a cancellation or not, who knows. The OP is MIA. Going by the dates the OP was just within the 14 days to pay the premium. Hopefully, for them, they did this before it expired.

      But its 3rd party, so not really a great help to the OP unless they're in the wrong.

      • andyken on 05/08/2017 - 22:19
        -1

        you get confused between renewal letter and a cancellation letter

        • JimmyF on 05/08/2017 - 22:27
          -3

          You just get confused reading it seems.

          As I said, a letter had been sent, "Now if that was a cancellation or not, who knows."

        • andyken on 06/08/2017 - 11:39

          @JimmyF: insurance always sent a renewal letter first.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join