Was in a car accident with no other cars involved, was going a little bit faster than the speed alleged around 8km/h. Insurance are saying that the speed is the only thing letting me down and will have to investigate further. What are everyones thoughts if i should get away or not.
Speeding in Accident and Insurance Aren't Willing to Cover Me? Thoughts
Ljayden335 on 31/08/2017 - 18:55
Comments
So if you were really speeding, what makes you think you should get away with it? You made a mistake so man up and pay.
What? Almost all "accidents" are directly caused by one party breaking the law, there would be virtually no point in having insurance if it didn't cover you for failing to keep a safe distance and rear ending the vehicle in front etc etc.
i've done much worse than just speeding and insurance covers it
unless you were drunk or on drugs or something of a criminal nature, insurance covers it
who were you insured with?
pretty much everyone in NSW at one point
i've also worked in the industry
chances are you were talking to a random idiot call centre idiot and they just spun the conversation in that way
call up again and get someone else and you'll get a slightly more better answer
Because im with RACV, and the girl just said that everything fine except the speed which the claims department are gonna call me to ask further questions.
@jayden335: Tony is correct. You probably shouldnt have admitted to speeding the first place but insurance will cover you in any event. Source: used to work for Australia's largest insurance company pressing claims.
I haven't admitted to speeding just yet. They are going to call me to ask a few questions and then ask why i was speeding. Are you sure RACV should cover speeding?
How do they know you were speeding?
^ this
and if you were (and they could prove it), where in your policy does it say they can deny your claim?
Assume it's pretty stock standard fine print that they won't cover in case of breaking the road laws.
How can they prove it though? Are there tyre marks they can calculate from or footage or something?The fine print does not say anything about speeding thats the thing
Assume it's pretty stock standard fine print that they won't cover in case of breaking the road laws.
What? Almost all "accidents" are directly caused by one party breaking the law, there would be virtually no point in having insurance if it didn't cover you for failing to keep a safe distance and rear ending the vehicle in front etc etc.
@airal3rt:
Yeh that's true, you're right. Although I wonder where they draw the line? If you've been drinking would they still pay out?
well the airbag crash sensor records the speed it was deployed at. They compare it with the road speed and investigate
Wow I had no idea. Good luck on. Please update this thread, it would be appreciated
Well, it's great that my car does not even have airbags.
/s
The place of incident, was it downhill, or flat road? If you are travelling at constant speed, say with cruise control turned on, going downhill will increase your speed, as the car won't automatically apply brake. If it's a reasonable long downhill, gaining 8km/h isn't abnormal.
What was the alleged speed?
it was 70km/h zone i was doing 80
What year is your car? Until July 2006 ADR 18 specified an accuracy of +/- 10 percent of the vehicle’s true speed when the vehicle was travelling above 40km/h.
Jayden is on the money, the Body Control Module that is in all modern vehicles monitors things like speed, and other sensors that are embedded in your car. I am not an expert, but did work in the local industry and I know many functions - brakes, transmissions, injection systems are in most cases monitored. I also recall there was a big stink in the USA over Courts, Police investigators, and I think insurance company's making demands/submissions from the auto manufacturers to surrender data that is recorded by BCM modules. The state of play in Australia, not sure but to my knowledge our authoritys here were after data from our vehicle fleet, as in the USA!.
Insurance companies live and die by their PDS, if it isn't in there then fight them on it. Insurance companies often deny claims at first, shonky bunch of b's.
Insurance are saying that the speed is the only thing letting me down and will have to investigate further
So they haven't rejected the claim. You and others in this thread should just wait for the outcome instead of engaging in conjecture.
Yet another of these stupid posts about driving that seems to be coming up on this site more and more often!
If people are speeding, and something happens, they are in the shit, and deserve to be.
Live with it!
Within reason though. I'd hate to think that all day every day drivers are stuck staring at the speedo instead of looking out the windows. It is easy to creep over the limit by 10km/h without noticing, especially if you have been on the highway for a while and get into town.
I do agree about the threads about 'I broke the law, how can I get out of it now?'. Too many.
Ok maybe a little in some circumstances, but not really true enough to be a reason or an excuse. Most vehicles post 1990 ish have Speed Alerts, many have GPS Speed Alerts, some phones can have Speed Alerts, then there is Cruise Control, and lastly which never ever fails if we are driving responsibly, is our own Eye Speed Alert and constant visual cues watching the world around us.
1 Second on the windscreen, 1 sec on the instruments(speedo), 1 sec on RH mirror, 1 sec on speedo, 1 sec on rear view mirror, etc etc, and the cycle continues. Very easy habit for safe and defensive driving and if driving responsibly as such, there will never be flashing Blues and Twos in your/their mirror, or I/Claims being questioned for speeding.There are truly no excuses anymore for not watching your speed. So, no one is stuck staring at a speedo, but if a driver can not control his speed, then perhaps they should be staring at their speedo.
Ditto on your 'I broke the Law……..', yes too many.
Speed alerts are stupid annoyances, you can't go resetting it every time the speed limit changes as it distracts you from driving even more than looking at a speedo regularly.
So you are indicating we should be looking forwards 20% of the time? (I know you aren't really). True, I exaggerated, but I think that it is quite reasonable for a driver to be within 10% of the speed limit without watching the speedo, sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less. Head on over to the overtaking lane discussion and see what people think about cars being under the limit, some drivers think we should be exactly on the limit all the time. I'd rather see some variation in speed with drivers being more aware of what the other traffic is doing than ensuring they are exactly on the limit.
I'm not saying that its ok to speed all the time, but there is speeding, and being over the limit a bit by mistake. They are quite different.
Just contact the FIO
Well, you probably were no longer speeding when you hit whatever and came to a stop.
I have always been under the impression thag insurers wouldn't cover accidents caused by illegal activities. Now the question should be whether your speeding is caused by your action, or whether it is caused by a malfunction of your car. If it's purely because of your action, I am inclined to think that they may have a reason to reject it.
So if you were really speeding, what makes you think you should get away with it? You made a mistake so man up and pay.