AAMI Insurance - Siding with Person That Reversed into Car at Shopping Centre

Quaker on 29/03/2018 - 18:32
Last edited 30/03/2018 - 08:16 by 1 other user

Need some advice for my Dad.

He was in a shopping centre carpark, a lady reversed her car into him and caused damage on her car and his car. She is claiming that my father was at fault…even though the dimwit reversed into him. My dad has contacted the shopping centre and they have footage of her reversing into him too.

Issue though is AAMI ia both their insurers the woman has full insurance and my dad only has 3rd party…so AAMI are siding with the woman.

What can my dad do?

He has been told by the shopping centre they can only supply video to insurance or police. So my dad has asked AAMI to contact the shopping centre to obtain the video.

If they still side with this woman anyone know what options my Dad has?

Automotive

Related Stores

AAMI
AAMI

Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 29/03/2018 - 18:36
    +21

    Take it to court. Note that a reasonable attempt at resolution, ie. Using proof to assign blame and liability, was already attempted.

    Win and…. Profit?

    • diddy50 on 31/03/2018 - 22:39
      +23

      Insurance Ombudsman, not court.

    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 02/04/2018 - 08:49
      +10

      An Indian once back into me, they signed off on the insurance documents as reversingh.

      Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 02/04/2018 - 08:49 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
      • CocaKoala on 02/04/2018 - 23:56
        +13

        I'm and Indian, and I find this comment hilarious. But looking at the lynch votes on your post, I'd have to admit that political correctness has taken out sense of humour for good.

        • CocaKoala on 03/04/2018 - 13:39
          +7

          If nobody should be at the butt of a joke, then jokes would simply not exist. Humour is inherently going to be at someone's expense, and in this case it's at the expense of a my own countrymen. As someone who is at the butt of this joke, I'm telling you that I found it hilarious. It is simply a play on words, and I had a laugh at it.

          We literally have thousands of "sardarji" jokes and "madrasi" jokes in India, and we quite enjoy taking the piss out of each other where I come from without having to worry about hurting someone's feelings, or about being politically incorrect.

          Just because you use CAPS does not make what you type as correct, and so no, this joke was not being racist.

          PS: Because you think humour should not exist, I think that your username checks out as well.

          PPS: You need to be relaxsingh a bit more. :)

          PPPS: I think you're obsessingh over a simple joke.

  • Quaker on 29/03/2018 - 18:41
    +1

    Is court the only option? Even though they both have insurance?

    • tomsco on 30/03/2018 - 13:13
      +14

      Get a quote for the damage, send the woman a letter of demand. She provides the letter to AAMI, and hopefully they realise you’re not screwing around and cave in.

      • Daabido on 02/04/2018 - 20:23

        Definitely a letter of demand. I tried to get an insurance company to pay the cost of the decals on my car when I was involved in a not at fault accident. My insurance paid for the repairs to the car but the decals weren't covered under my insurance. I tried to persuade the other company to do the right thing, showing the other insurance provider my other policies with them over the years. Nothing, until the letter of demand and then bingo bingo, they paid out.

  • ronnknee on 29/03/2018 - 18:41
    +4

    a lady reversed her car into him and caused damage on her car and his car.

    Naturally in that scenario, the car reversing out is at fault. What is she claiming to have happened? Were there any witnesses?

    • Quaker on 29/03/2018 - 18:44
      +1

      She is claming my dad drove into the back of her car.
      The only witness i believe is surveillance video.

  • chumlee on 29/03/2018 - 18:42
    +18

    Why don't you gobto your local police station and file a report and ask them to obtain a copy of the recording?

    May work, may not work but worth a try

    • Quaker on 30/03/2018 - 11:31

      My dad called the local police and they told him as no one got injured they won't get involved

      • chumlee on 30/03/2018 - 11:36
        +26

        Tell them the other party has lodged a false insurance claim

        You are better off starting a civil claim and obtain a copy of the cctv footage as part of discovery

        • Kangal on 31/03/2018 - 11:49
          +13

          Last time I checked fraud is a crime…

  • Quaker on 29/03/2018 - 20:01
    +1

    Apparently lady is a complete dimwit…she reversed into my dad's car twice. First time her car rolled into my dad's car, she drove forward then reversed fast into his car.

    • supersabroso on 31/03/2018 - 11:12

      It's pretty simple to settle something like this. She either reversed into your dad's car in which case the impact is on your dad's car's side. Or your dad drove into her, in which case the impact is on the side of her car. Very simple.

      If she went forwards then back again, then she's now either doubly responsible for the accident or it's half half if your dad drove into her.

      In future, invest in a $90 dash cam (eg. the Viofo A119) with a 128GB microSD card, don't stinge out on the microSD card or you'll regret it.

      • pumpkins on 31/03/2018 - 16:16

        Agree. Similar thing happened to me, but in my case I was reversing out too but saw the guy opposite start coming out after me so I stopped and honked. I had to plead with the insurer that I was stationary and warned the other driver but they kept reversing. After many phone calls, turns out we were both with RAC and they agreed not to charge me excess, only the other person. We both had fully comprehensive.

        But yes, I now have $60 dash cams front and back and have picked up many things since.

      • pwnd on 31/03/2018 - 16:20
        +6

        I don't think you understand how basic physics work.
        Why would the damage be only on one car if the other car impacted it? The force gets distributed back through both cars and they both get damaged, no matter who hit who.

        • supersabroso on 31/03/2018 - 18:38
          -2

          Yes, of course lol, duh. However, only one car can have it's side impacted (the one not at fault), the other car will have it's rear/front impacted. Impossible to have both cars impacted on the side unless they have a special hollywood car from the future.

          The only other scenario I didn't go over is if they both hit on the corner of each car, in which case it's generally the person who reversed who is at fault. They should have checked before reversing out.

        • Antikythera on 31/03/2018 - 18:40
          -1

          the key word here is side.
          - if she backed into him, damage is rear of her and side of his.
          - if he drove into her, damage is front of his and side of her.
          however person you are responding to just said, damage is side of his or side of her.

          however realistically if it was 45 degree angle parking, its likely damage is front of him and rear of her in either case.

        • tinycartAU on 02/04/2018 - 11:16
          +4

          @antikythera: Not necessarily true. It could be possible to scrape the side of a reversing car across the front of a stationary car if the reversing car was turning at the same time. Granted, it is harder to do and there are usually other signs of what happened in the damage, but a simple statement of "the car with the damage in front is at fault" isn't always true.

  • steven6 on 29/03/2018 - 20:04
    +41

    AAMI is probably also telling the other driver that they are at fault and claiming an at fault excess from both drivers.

    • xoom on 29/03/2018 - 20:16
      +1

      Wouldn't put it past these insurance companies to something this dodgy.

      • supersabroso on 31/03/2018 - 11:13
        +3

        There's a reason why they are so successful, health insurance, life insurance etc. They all make a TON of profit, overall, everyone insured loses. For every person that wins, 10 - 100 people have just lost, big time, every year.

        • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 10:39
          -1

          @supersabroso

          You clearly don't know how insurance works (or business for that matter).
          Also, health insurance and life insurance are very different to general insurance.

          @OP

          Clearly the other party has given a version of events that puts your dad in the wrong.
          Without knowing where the damage is on both vehicles, it's impossible to help but they may have charged you both an excess.

          AAMI are not very smart when dealing with this stuff and given they insure both parties, they won't have much interest, but I would be pushing them to obtain the
          video evidence. Just because you have 3rd party cover, doesn't mean you're at fault.

          A good broker would have sorted all of this out for you.

        • Munki on 03/04/2018 - 10:32
          +1

          @imurgod: Are you a good broker spruiking your business?

        • imurgod on 03/04/2018 - 13:47

          @Munki: Nope. Merely suggesting that any good broker would've sorted it out.

    • garetz on 29/03/2018 - 21:51
      +20

      I very much doubt that, whats happening in this situation is if they side with the 3rd party insurer, aami is out of pocket as they have to pay for both parties damages through the other parties comprehensive insurance, however vice versa they only have to pay for one parties damages.

      if you the Op has proof that its the other drivers fault, and aami disregards that, you should make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.

      • vinni9284 on 29/03/2018 - 22:37

        In scenarios like this is where you invest in a Dashcam. Front and rear of the car. Normally they are panoramic and can capture a wide angle. One of the best investments you can get. Especially when Insurance do the usual wriggle out of payments/handball to the claimant.

        I agree with @gartez. It seems like the Insurance companies are doing the obvious IMO. Saving more money for their coffers and their shareholders.

        • Ysk on 29/03/2018 - 23:12
          +1

          You have to set Dashcams to run at all time. Are Dashcams last for a longer period if you do that?

        • vinni9284 on 29/03/2018 - 23:18

          @Ysk:

          I have mine plugged into the cigarette lighter and runs all the time when i'm driving.
          You only need to hard wire the camera to the car when you park/car not running.

          So this accident happened when you were not in the car i.e. away from the car or driving?

          Cheers

        • Ysk on 29/03/2018 - 23:27

          @vinni9284: Thanks, need to do that, this is the only way you can get evidence.

        • vinni9284 on 29/03/2018 - 23:32
          +1

          @Ysk:

          We all know that if you get rear ended, it is automatically the drivers fault that hit you from the rear.
          How about if the other driver didn't see you and reverses on to you (similar to the OPs scenario) and their rear end hits your front? Automatically it's your fault without proof.

          A good Dashcam can prove otherwise.
          Some good Dashcams can also record sound. I.e. if the other driver admits fault and decides to reneg.
          Another great reason is to record any instances of road-rage for evidence.

          Cheers

        • 87percent on 30/03/2018 - 09:05

          Hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?

        • Cliche Guevara on 30/03/2018 - 10:28
          +15

          @supasaiyan: Hindsight would have helped the reversing driver here…

        • vinni9284 on 30/03/2018 - 11:01

          @kiwigene:

          Regardless of the circumstantial event that occurred or who is at fault, a very good Dashcam would have captured a very clear image.

          Hence no requirement of going through all the legal hurdles to obtain a grainy image from a shopping centre car park several meters away probably mounted on top of a pole that may or may not show the at fault party.

          Cheers

        • MisterQ on 02/04/2018 - 17:56

          @Ysk:

          DASHCams do usually run all of the time, by default. Depending on the size of the Memory they will eventually start overwriting old files.

          I run the Mini 0906 - it has both front and back cameras. It time stamps, GPS Stamps, records audio, and I sprung for a "PArking Guard" wiring kit. If the car is in a car park, and the dash cam is "off", Parking Guard will do a pic every x seconds, and if the car is bumped, it goes into record mode to catch the perps.

          I paid about $120 for the dual camera unit, about $20 for the PG kit, and I managed to get an officeworks Memory card on an a model run out 64GB for $20

  • SPCTRE on 30/03/2018 - 00:46
    +5

    Lol “Lucky your with AAMI”

    • ozzpete on 01/04/2018 - 05:27
      +1

      Lol . OP should contact ACA and Today Tonight etc . Have them do an investigation and find similar cases with AAMI doing dodgy stuff like this .
      Then get all the disgruntled customers together to make a parody of "Lucky your with AAMI" bit :)

    • ThithLord on 03/04/2018 - 10:06
      +2

      I don't know if that's their slogan - I believe it's "Lucky you're with Amii" ;)

      • joshykins on 03/04/2018 - 12:27
        +1

        aami* snob.

        • ThithLord on 04/04/2018 - 07:27

          I left that there on purpose!

  • whooah1979 on 30/03/2018 - 03:01

    My dad has contacted the ahopping centre and they have footage of her reversing into him too.

    Have you seen this recording?

    • spal on 30/03/2018 - 05:55

      Can you ask to view the recording again and record on a device of your phone. You will need to act fast though because the recording may be preserved for only a very short time.

    • Quaker on 30/03/2018 - 11:23

      I live interstate from my family but the security described on phone to my dad ehat he saw in footage.

  • Ocker on 30/03/2018 - 08:42
    +5

    Ombudsman here I come

    • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 10:48

      FYI, you can only approach the ombudsman after you go through the insurer's Internal Dispute Resolution process.

  • Len2801 on 30/03/2018 - 08:59
    +133

    Firstly you refer to the woman as a lady whereas her corrupt actions belie her being a lady (a person of morals)

    As a retired non practicing Solicitor my advice is that you should immediately take action against the ‘lady’ in the Small Claims division of the Magistrates Court which has jurisdiction up to $10k and as an individual the issue cost is only $99.00 in NSW and serve it on her by post. This should set the cat among the pigeons and AAMI will know that you mean business

    You don’t mention whether or not your Dad or you have seen the video, because if you have you could give evidence in the absence of the video as to what you saw on the video

    You should contact the shopping centre and advise that you are taking legal action and demand that they provide you with a copy of the video as you have suffered damages as a result of the ‘lady’ reversing into you and that they would be guilty of defeating the ends of justice if they do not comply with your demand or allow the video to be deleted. In these circumstances you will issue a subpoena against the responsible person to give evidence in court and to bring the video recording to court. One thing that frightens the recipient of such a demand, is being subpaenod to attend court and they should suddenly become very cooperative

    If by some chance you loose in court, the costs that can be awarded against you in the Small Claims court are minimal and AAMI would be heavily out of pocket, so they would be keen to settle

    Best of luck

    • Quaker on 30/03/2018 - 11:29
      +3

      Thanks Len2801. My father hasn't seen video but security guard decribed to him what he saw on video footage.

    • vinni9284 on 30/03/2018 - 12:47
      +1

      Great advice.
      Cheers

    • Hogg on 31/03/2018 - 09:10
      +14

      That was very comprehensive. Thank you for taking the time out of your day to help OP. You're a good person.

    • glassyan on 31/03/2018 - 22:55
      +2

      Can we nominate this post as the post of the year? It's one of the most helpful posts I have ever seen on Ozbargain, I wish I can +100 for this post.

    • strangeloops66 on 01/04/2018 - 11:19
      +4

      Thankfully, I've never loosed in court!

    • nfr on 01/04/2018 - 13:05

      Wow I actually learned something useful today.

    • kungfupanda on 03/04/2018 - 00:10

      I gave my only + vote so it is closer to 100+ votes ^_^

      I also agree this is the most useful post in OzBargain.

      Thanks.

    • CharityCase on 03/04/2018 - 09:09

      The damage is profound and the settlement will be profound too.

  • sharkyoz on 30/03/2018 - 09:17

    good to set up your camera connected to a separate battery, with an isolation switch, so you don't drain your main battery, while camera records 24/7.

  • [Deactivated] on 30/03/2018 - 13:26

    What do you mean when you say that AAMI are siding with the woman? Who says they are?

    • Quaker on 30/03/2018 - 21:29
      +4

      AAMI told my father he was at fault on the phone. Once my father verified from the store security that he there was footage he called back and AAMI said they (meaning my father and dimwit) would both be 50% at fault each. My dad asked to speak to a manager who then said the person he spoke to had not read the notes properly.
      AAMI are now apparently waiting to receive to video footage from the shopping centre.

      • ozzpete on 01/04/2018 - 05:34

        So AAMI told your father they have requested footage from the shopping centre and awaiting it ?
        Maybe you can check with shopping centre to comfirm the footage is being supplied to AAMI .
        As mentioned, footage can be supplied to police or insurance companies.
        If footage is on its way to AAMI, then it should be sorted out as soon as they receive and view the video evidence.

      • ankor on 01/04/2018 - 08:41
        +3

        This is super common with insurance companies and their teams. Bunch of monkeys who don't know what they are doing half the time.

        • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 10:52

          AAMI staff are little more than call centre people with no real insurance experience so don't expect them to be able to do any decent claims work for you.

          Good claims people are snapped up and retained by good insurers.

        • ankor on 02/04/2018 - 13:14
          +1

          @imurgod:

          They must just go elsewhere within the business or study up and get out.

        • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 19:42

          @ankor: correct

      • Omitsukasa on 02/04/2018 - 08:12

        Don't trust them to get the video footage, you should contact the shopping centre again to tell them to hold a copy or get the police to obtain it as the woman is committing insurance fraud.

  • Len2801 on 30/03/2018 - 16:02
    +1

    The fact that the security guard has described what he saw to your Dad would be excellent evidence in the event that the video is deleted. Just try and get the name of the security guard and if necessary he can be subpoenaed if the shopping centre fails to cooperate
    For $99 you can commence legal proceedings in Nsw and other states also have small amounts in order to sue in the Small Claims court. The Clerk of the Court would assist you in doing so

    The shopping centre’s claim that it can only supply the video to the insurance or Police has no foundation in law and they can be compelled to do so by subpoena if they continue to refuse. The shopping centre is not a law making body and they have no right to refuse you access to the video as it would assist in bringing the matter to a speedy and just result

    • whooah1979 on 30/03/2018 - 16:43
      +2

      The shopping centre is not a law making body and they have no right to refuse you access to the video

      the cctv recording is the property of either the shopping centre or the security company. they may refuse to release it to op unless op can compel it's release by legal avenues.
      https://www.maddocks.com.au/responding-requests-access-cctv-…

      • [Deactivated] on 31/03/2018 - 21:47

        You have quoted a link that deals with FOI cases. FOI only applies to government bodies. A shopping centre is not a government body.

        • whooah1979 on 31/03/2018 - 23:48
          +1

          It may have been in op’s favour if they were covered by the foi act. They’re instead subject to the privacy act. This allows them to refuse to release documents unless a formal request is made by law enforcement, a government agency with the power to compel or an order from a court.

          • [Deactivated] on 01/07/2022 - 13:57

            @whooah1979: The privacy act actually entitles you to data companies hold on you, and there's no right to privacy from video surveillance in a public area.

  • ski100 on 31/03/2018 - 09:09

    Was your Dad also reversing at the time? If he was, then both would be considered responsible for the accident.

    • Quaker on 31/03/2018 - 12:55
      +1

      He was stationary.

      • MisterQ on 02/04/2018 - 18:11

        We had similar a while back - we were in the car getting ready to reverse out - hadn't moved. Car behind us, reverses out, and into us.

        Turns out he didn't speak english (Yugoslav or similar) and was 91 years old. Got all his details, and contact detail of another person who saw it happen. Handed it to our Insurer and they "Sorted" it.

        Only having 3rd party insurance? Why?

        • joshykins on 03/04/2018 - 12:29
          +1

          3rd party only if youre cars only worth $4k makes sense

  • Hogg on 31/03/2018 - 09:14
    +4

    I'm sorry this doesn't help but I just wanted to warn other people about AAMI.

    People I know who had business insurance with AAMI were really dudded by them. There was a flood and the businesses next to them with other insurance got paid almost instantly whereas AAMI brought in an expert to determine if it was a storm causing the flood so they can refuse the payout.

    I've also read such shitty reviews for their car insurance.

    Along with OP's story, I don't think I would ever go with AAMI no matter how cheap they are.

    • dji1111111 on 31/03/2018 - 09:26
      +3

      I've known AAMI to be crap from a long time ago. There's a reason it's cheap (not always cheap though depending on the make/model and where you live)

      • SPCTRE on 31/03/2018 - 13:48
        +1

        But but it’s cheap!!!!
        Don’t you know everything is determined by how cheap the premiums are, not what the policy has to or excludes to offer

    • ChickenTalon on 02/04/2018 - 08:22
      +5

      I have a similar experience, waaay back in 99 AAMI initially tried to get me to pay excess for an accident where the police actually charged the other driver for doing an unsafe u-turn. They said it was 50/50. It’s not 50/50 when the other driver does an unsafe u-turn from the left most lane right in front of you. Both of us were with AAMI apparently so I could see what the bastards were trying to do, have us both pay an excess.

      I had to kick up a huge stink and eventually they caved. That was just the finances. Then the repair (their “preferred” “trusted” shop) took ages to fix the car, and they did such a shit job, initially tried to pass off as complete when one of the tyres was missing a huge chunck from the sidewall and totally unroadworthy. Another fight. Car was a lemon after that and I eventually sold it.

      I’ll never forget AAMI. I also avoid all of their shitty other brands too

  • field1985 on 31/03/2018 - 09:27
    +5

    AAMI are scum

    • c0balt on 31/03/2018 - 10:35
      +4

      There's an insurance company that isn't?

      • field1985 on 31/03/2018 - 10:40
        +1

        True. But in my experience they are the worst of a bad bunch. Never use AAMI.
        I've had four of their members hit my vehicles over the years. Their drivers were at fault everytime. It seems like terrible drivers choose AAMI.
        They are a nightmare to deal with. All they should do is cut you a cheque for the quoted damage, but they do everything in their power (false accusations, letters of demand, debt collectors, dodgy quotes, dodgy repairs, etc, etc) to make your life hell, until you put through the paperwork to take them to court, then they immediately flip. I've never had any problems in my dealings with the other insurance companies.

        • Yummy on 31/03/2018 - 11:16
          +1

          ^ This.

          I left AAMI for NRMA. Feels good now.

        • muncan on 31/03/2018 - 17:01
          +4

          Everyone in AAMI adverts have accidents 😂

        • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 10:54
          -1

          @Yummy: To be fair, NRMA are actually worse than AAMI

      • vinni9284 on 01/04/2018 - 09:40

        @ c0balt - Best comment! +1

      • Vhope07 on 01/04/2018 - 21:27

        I had one interaction with Allianz and one with NRMA and both were pretty competent. I realize not a great sample size so please don't decide just based on my limited experience. I wonder if the ombudsman releases stats on which insurance companies had the most complaints?

      • imurgod on 02/04/2018 - 10:57

        @c0balt

        QBE, Chubb, IAL, AIG to name a few that pay claims very quickly and don't try to squirm out of paying.

        It's all in the PDS, people. Read it or get advice on what you're buying. No use complaining your claims aren't paid when you buy the nastiest policy.

      • JimB on 03/04/2018 - 21:17

        I've had good experiences with Allianz and Shannons (at fault claims).

        Choice of repairer is important to me.

    • strangeloops66 on 01/04/2018 - 11:28
      +1

      They have good-looking call centre staff, going on their ads.

      • ankor on 03/04/2018 - 21:55

        Having previously worked at an insurer, it's only the temp backpackers doing overflow work that look like the ads. The usual staff, not so much.

  • gimme on 31/03/2018 - 09:31
    +2

    Too mych drama as usual. Once they review the footage aami will side with you.

  • ahly92 on 31/03/2018 - 10:02
    -1

    In this situation I would have contacted the lady. Told her i have the footage and will submit a case against you to the police tomorrow for providing fale information and obstructing the course of justice.

    Basically freak her out.

    Tell her u bassically dont want her to have criminal record so you thoight to contact her one last time.

    A reasonable person would freakout and tell the truth

  • harley on 31/03/2018 - 11:32
    +1

    The Financial Ombudsman Service should be able to sort this out if you want to avoid court https://www.fos.org.au. There are monetary caps on claims though https://www.fos.org.au/the-circular-4-home/monetary-limit-ca… . It's a free service to you but costs the insurance provider.

  • stumo on 31/03/2018 - 16:15
    +4

    Had something similar a month ago. Woman overtook my wife as she was turning into a driveway. Woman later lied and said to her insurer that my wife was doing a U turn. (We didnt tell the dishonest cow that we had a dashcam).

    Eventually i was able to get her insurer to view the footage i uploaded to youtube. One look at the footage and their insurer said "oh".

    Dashcam now. That $100 has saved us a $800 excess plus premiums.

    • burningrage on 31/03/2018 - 21:32
      +3

      You should pursue for attempted fraud.

      Usually when you are giving your statement you would be prompted to declare that your statement are true and correct.

      So the woman should be pursued for fraud and AAMI failing to pursue that, should be charged for being an accessory of a fraud.

  • Twilight on 31/03/2018 - 17:54
    +4

    Start the AAMI internal dispute resolution process.

    https://www.aami.com.au/contact/dispute-resolution.html#disp…

    If that fails Lodge a FOS dispute (similar to TIO).

    Taking the insurer you're paying to insure you to small claims is a bit crazy, so avoid that one.

    • SJDR on 02/04/2018 - 12:56

      This guy knows what he's talking about.

      First mention of FOS and they will backflip and do the right thing.

      FOS claim costs them thousands, win or lose.

      • gimme on 02/04/2018 - 13:12

        There's so much false/misleading/knee Jerk info on this thread it's not funny.

  • DanielR on 01/04/2018 - 10:40

    Go straight to FOS immediately and do not delay, this is a case of corporate bullying, you have done nothing wrong…

    Also the person that is responsible for this needs to be dealt with and if that is a loss of job then all the better… we do not need corporate representatives like this.

    As a AAMI customer with car insurance I am very interested in this outcome…

    If this is true… very disappointed with AAMI

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join