Vehicle Accident with a Taxi - Am I Being Scammed? Damage inconsistent

LViolentunicorn on 06/12/2023 - 14:47
Last edited 06/12/2023 - 16:04 by 1 other user

Hi all,

Rainy Saturday night in Sydney CBD - a taxi driver is claiming I hit him after merging lanes into the left lane. I have no recollection of this happening at all, didn't feel a thing, but it was raining very heavily that night.

I was chased maybe 500m from the spot of the incident after the next left turn until the traffic light. The taxi driver got out of his car to tell me I cut him off and hit him with the back of my car. We pulled over to the side. He was very quick to tell me he had a witness in the taxi (unfortunately I didn't verify)

These are the scratch marks on his car:

https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/143369/108993/40339477…

https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/143369/108991/40340888…

This is where he pointed on my car that I hit him:

https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/143369/108996/40346736…

The kicker is, my sister made these scratches (the scuffs above the wheel and the single white line) on my car YEARS ago. I could not identify any new damage on my car at all from the incident

Come Monday I get text messages from the owner of the taxi (different to the driver) telling me im at fault and pushing for a claim number. My dad was quick to warn me against putting through an insurance claim before verifying that our scratches are consistent, and to arrange a meeting with the taxi owner to compare the damage a bit more closely.

My dad is certain that the white line on our car was pre-existing, and the shape of the hand-sized vertical scratches on the taxi aren't consistent at all with the white line on mine. From the images alone, it looks like the damage on the taxi is above or higher than whatever scratches I already had on my car, but I was hoping to verify this by measuring the actual height of the marks on both vehicles.

Anyway the taxi owner was unwilling to meet, but sent me another photo with more areas of damage, which I am now convinced, could not have happened at the same time.

https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/143369/108994/40339630…

I cannot see how I also caused the dent above the wheel and the additional scratches. Again, my car has no new marks on it, and I don't remember feeling a single thing. Im hoping someone with a keener eye can elaborate whether this type of impact is possible when changing lanes or whether our scratch marks are consistent

I haven't been in an accident before, but I am curious/suspicious as he keeps on insisting on a claim number from me, I thought he could just go through his own insurance process without needing to deal with me? Or is there a chance he does not have comprehensive car insurance? I assume that would be unusual for a taxi

After not replying for a day since he denied my request to meet with the cars, he has now said we can finalize this with a cash settlement or he will go through a 'recovery process'. Is this suspicious at all?

I have been told to go to the police to report this as a potential scam?

Thank you

Automotive Audi A1 Car Taxi Toyota

Comments

  • omguleh on 06/12/2023 - 15:00
    +85

    Sounds like a scam, do a meet up at the police station car park, if any disputes/issues you can walk into the station and ask for uniform assistance.

    • Violentunicorn on 06/12/2023 - 15:08
      +7

      Thank you, great suggestion to do the meet at the police station, I will make this request again if he continues to push

    • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:35
      +2

      Also you didnt feel anything and it was raining very heavily he may be telling the truth but id'd the wrong car.

      That said it sounds like a scam or someone trying to pin existing damage on you.

      I wouldn't engage, tell insurance about it and tell him to go through insurance but you reject being in an accident and advise your company of same with photos.

  • Muzeeb on 06/12/2023 - 15:02
    +39

    SCAM

    IANAL

    Also, I'm not a lawyer.

    • kaleidoscope on 06/12/2023 - 22:40
      -2

      You what?

      ——

      Good that you explained… Some others would have mis understood that…

  • spackbace on 06/12/2023 - 15:03
    +31

    Why would a taxi not have a dashcam…?

    Simple, grab a ruler and measure the height of your scratch on your car, and the height of the mark on his car

    • Violentunicorn on 06/12/2023 - 15:10
      +3

      Hi Spackback, certainly I would have thought all taxi's have dashcams. A quick google says all taxi's should be fitted with security cameras by law, I'm not sure if that means dashcam. He was not willing to do a measurement even remotely

      • spackbace on 06/12/2023 - 15:11
        +40

        He was not willing to do a measurement even remotely

        Lol I wouldn't even bother entertaining him further if he couldn't do that simple request

        • Muzeeb on 06/12/2023 - 15:38
          +4

          That makes sense spackback. Cheers

      • Malik Nasser on 06/12/2023 - 15:51
        +7

        You can eyeball it.
        The damage on his car has a vertical height of well over 50mm, whilst the damage on your car is 2 points of contact no more than 5mm wide (vertical height).
        Even the location of the damage doesn't match up. The damage on his is more to the front of the car, so the damage to yours would have to be closer to the back (near your sensor in the bumper).
        There is no way the damage on his car was done by you based on the damage you have noted.
        Totally a scam.

    • Baysew on 06/12/2023 - 16:15
      +13

      Why would a taxi not have a dashcam…?

      Fake taxi?

      • AdosHouse on 06/12/2023 - 17:24
        +16

        They have plenty of cams

        • bhubb18 on 06/12/2023 - 20:30
          +20

          Normally a gashcam

      • SydStrand on 07/12/2023 - 01:55
        +1

        Maybe moonlighting during his second job: fakedrivinginstructor.avi

      • Poor Ass on 07/12/2023 - 11:19
        +4

        Fake Taxi definitely has cameras and plenty of videos on the net

  • Phlume on 06/12/2023 - 15:04
    +4

    Another vehicle incident that could have been easily solved with a dashcam. Sounds like a scam.

    • Rukiata on 07/12/2023 - 17:35
      +1

      a dash cam can record your behind?

      • Phlume on 07/12/2023 - 17:53
        +2

        Yes. My Viofo A129 Duo records both front and rear. Some dashcams and EVs also have side detection.

      • Agret on 07/12/2023 - 21:17
        +1

        There are dash cams with a camera on the front and back so you get a view of the interior of your car looking out the rear window. You can also get ones that have the rear camera as a plug in thing so you can run the wire through the car and mount it in your boot or outside near your rear number plate.

      • OzzyOzbourne on 08/12/2023 - 18:18

        A dash cam mounted in the rear window pointing rearward can see the rear…yes really

  • Duckie2hh on 06/12/2023 - 15:05
    +17

    Just ignore them. If they show up to your place, call the cops.

  • Brick Tamland on 06/12/2023 - 15:11
    +2

    Yeah its seems like it's probably a scam. The damage on the taxi looks like several different bumps and scrapes. The damage on your car looks way lower than that on the Camry. I'd ignore this person.

  • wetsandwich on 06/12/2023 - 15:13
    +31

    If there's a taxi driver involved then it's usually a scam, this rule applies to almost all countries in the world.

    Ignore and block all contact, and either the police or his insurance company can argue with you if they want to.

    If you don't believe there was even an accident at all, you don't need to engage with him.

    (not legal advice, see a lawyer etc)

  • Bargainitis on 06/12/2023 - 15:17
    +21

    All taxis have cameras (both sides of the car looking at the doors and inside from the front looking back). This was implemented for the safety of the driver but also for events like this.

    If I was you, tell the owner of the taxi to pull the recording from that night and share it with you. If its indeed an attempted scam, it will just go away.

    Saying that, I doubt the owner is trying to scam you (he was just told by the driver that night there was incident so he has to follow up given he is the owner / and the insurance policy holder). More likely driver scraped the car elsewhere and trying to not have to pay the costs to the owner.

    Make sure to push them on the recording. They have access to it so it should help.

    • Violentunicorn on 06/12/2023 - 15:37
      +4

      Thanks Bargainitis, I will push for a recording

      • hashtagbargain on 06/12/2023 - 21:39
        +4

        Update?

      • tik tok on 07/12/2023 - 12:54
        +2

        Needless to say you need to push urgently, if not already. Because the next thing he's gonna say is the files are overwritten!

        • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:42
          +3

          Thats still fine. OP didnt get in accident and they said he did but they overwrote the evidence? lols

      • lordra on 08/12/2023 - 17:03

        OP, did you get it?

  • D3HUN on 06/12/2023 - 15:18
    +7

    And also consider the circumstances. Was it a zip merge? If so, the vehicle behind (taxi) should give way to the one at the front (you), and so if there was a bump, it is their fault.
    Also the shape of the alleged bumps doesn't match (I don't see how a long horizontal scratch would match a long vertical one).

    Likely SCAM - although not an expert.

    • neo on 06/12/2023 - 15:28
      +5

      Would be pretty funny to lodge a claim and they end up being at fault haha

    • Violentunicorn on 06/12/2023 - 15:38

      Just a standard lane change - I was getting into the left lane so I could turn left at the eventual traffic light. I understand it is the lane changer's fault if they don't change safely

      • D3HUN on 06/12/2023 - 16:04
        +10

        I don't know man, the NSW Government thinks otherwise: https://www.nsw.gov.au/driving-boating-and-transport/roads-s…

        ("When you’re driving on a road and the number of lanes or lines of traffic reduces, and there are no longer any road markings, you must give way to the vehicle that’s ahead of you. This is called a zipper merge. "

        But yeah, the NSW Road Rules 2014 doesn't use the "Zipper" expression,

      • pegaxs on 06/12/2023 - 16:14
        +4

        What you are talking about is a no-line merge

        No, that is what you call it… Road Rule 149 deals with this scenario and what the road rules say is…

        149 Giving way when lines of traffic merge into a single line of traffic

        A driver in a line of traffic that is merging with one or more lines of traffic travelling in the same direction as the driver must give way to a vehicle in another line of traffic if any part of the vehicle is ahead of the driver’s vehicle.

        So, it is not called a zipper merge nor a "no-line merge"

          • Muzeeb on 06/12/2023 - 17:39
            +20

            @koolkorean: . #confidentlyincorrect

            • koolkorean on 06/12/2023 - 19:47
              -7

              @Muzeeb: Yeah nah I am 100% correct here. You calling something it isn't is totally up to you though.

          • KangaDrew on 06/12/2023 - 18:12
            +7

            @koolkorean: So much fail from the "kool korean" lol

          • Eeples on 06/12/2023 - 19:17
            +4

            @koolkorean: Surely if a zipper merge or zip merge….is commonly used and generally understood to be a 'no line merge' then that is good enough for this discussion.

            After all; all words are made up.

            • koolkorean on 06/12/2023 - 19:47
              -3

              @Eeples: Sure. Except zipper merges as defined do not function the same as the merges we have here. The merges here the person in front goes first. Zipper merges, the person on either side goes first. Zipper merges would be great if they were classified as our current merges or vice versa.

              • lateralus45 on 07/12/2023 - 09:10
                +2

                @koolkorean: Zipper merges only alternate because generally each alternating side is slightly in front as per the rules its the same damn thing.

                • koolkorean on 07/12/2023 - 10:57
                  -2

                  @lateralus45: No. "Generally" doesn't work when rules are in use. You're either right or wrong, and right now if you follow zipper rules on any merge in Australia you are breaking the rules.

              • larndis on 07/12/2023 - 09:14

                @koolkorean: What does 'the person on either side goes first' mean? And are they somehow not in front? Merging first from a position other than the front sounds kind of tricky.

                Maybe a link to your definition of a zipper merge?

                • koolkorean on 07/12/2023 - 10:56
                  -2

                  @larndis: Just take a look at your pants. If two "cars" of the one side go in front of the other side, the zipper breaks. In Aussie merges this is possible, in zipper merges this is not.

                  It's not tricky since there is a gap on one side. The zipper merge would require the other car to wait for the other lane to let one in.

              • CBrads4 on 07/12/2023 - 10:39
                +1

                @koolkorean: Going to need an MS Paint diagram to show how these two concepts are different here.

                • koolkorean on 07/12/2023 - 10:55
                  -1

                  @CBrads4: Just take a look at your pants. If two "cars" of the one side go in front of the other side, the zipper breaks. In Aussie merges this is possible, in zipper merges this is not.

                  • KangaDrew on 07/12/2023 - 17:22
                    -1

                    @koolkorean: The fact that you just said "In Aussie" speaks volumes… NFI 🙄

                  • larndis on 07/12/2023 - 21:18
                    +3

                    @koolkorean: Mate, we all understand how a zipper works. Are you saying in a zipper merge, if there are two cars in the right lane and the left lane is clear then the second car has to stop and wait until a car comes along in the left hand lane and let it go in front?

      • Agret on 07/12/2023 - 21:21

        Zipper merges exist on every 'added lane' that merges into the freeway, you'll see it's solid white line up until the end of the lane where it becomes dashed because you are supposed to drive to the very end of the added lane before merging over and the existing traffic is supposed to give way to your entry. This is called a zipper merge and the entire reason that they put those one car at a time green lights on the freeway ramps during peak hrs.

      • j0hnd0e on 08/12/2023 - 13:07

        Please return your license and never drive in Australia thank you

  • jv on 06/12/2023 - 15:39

    Get a forensic scientist to match the paint…

    • Muzeeb on 06/12/2023 - 15:43
      +1

      So this plumber then?

      • jv on 06/12/2023 - 15:50

        He's now an electrician.

    • websterp on 06/12/2023 - 16:13
      +1

      You can also get a colour match done at Bunnings.

  • Drakesy on 06/12/2023 - 15:52
    +12

    Lol, the scratch out of your vehicle is a deep gouge from a point, something that doesn't exist on the Camry's bumper.

    Tell them to get f*#cked. Scam every day of the week.
    Likely they just looked out for a car with a scratch on the corresponding part of the car and then targeted you.

    Pretty sure the taxi's damage is largely a metho buff out job as well. It's like they've rubbed it against a rubber bollard

    • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:43
      +1

      Thats what I reckon, rubber bollard it looks like.

  • Euphemistic on 06/12/2023 - 16:09
    +10

    The red arrow on the picture of the damage on your car is a red herring. There also damage further up the wheel arch - which is also more consistent with the damage on the taxi.

    • WhatWouldBiggieDo on 07/12/2023 - 11:50
      +4

      Agree. Bit of a coincidence that the taxi driver thought OP hit him, and it turns out that the taxi driver has black paint transfer in exactly the same position as the alleged contact.

      • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:43
        +1

        Doesnt look like paint, looks like rubber

  • Youfah Mizzum on 06/12/2023 - 16:13
    +11

    Its a scam.
    Firstly - if its a genuine accident they would've contacted their own insurer and you'd be dealing with them, not the owner/driver.

    It's just a ploy to get you all worked up & stressed and make an unfounded claim on your own insurer - or (and this is preferable for them) to just throw them money to make them go away.

    Stand your ground. Like others have said, get the footage. Meet up at a Police station etc.
    If they don't agree to anything, block all communication.

  • dylanando on 06/12/2023 - 16:24
    +4

    scam for sure

  • blitz on 06/12/2023 - 16:28
    +4

    This is definitely a scam. Definitely.

  • Protractor on 06/12/2023 - 16:35
    +3

    Melbourne AP touters moonlighting in Sydney. Pay up

  • Trance N Dance on 06/12/2023 - 17:18
    +8

    If it's a legit accident they would lodge a police report for hit and run and then an insurance claim against your vehicle themselves. If they don't you know it's a scam.

    On the flip side, contact the Point to Point Transport Commissioner and report the owner and/or driver of the taxi is trying to run a scam on you.

  • brendanm on 06/12/2023 - 17:45
    +2

    Scam.

  • JumpingUnicorns on 06/12/2023 - 17:49
    +8

    Taxi drivers are the worst

  • localhost on 06/12/2023 - 18:16

    Taxi drivers… always want cash, cash, cash… Tell him to f*xk off and to contact his insurer.

  • GordonD on 06/12/2023 - 18:22
    +1

    It supports the cabbie's story that the car he said hit him does have damage in the right general area. The damage on the OP's car would have been barely visible at night in heavy rain. It would have been pretty unlikely for him to pick another car at random that had damage in the right area.

    It discredits the cabbie's story that the damage on the OP's car and most of the damage on the cab don't match. If two cars are travelling in the same direction and come into contact with each other the witness marks can't be on the side of one vehicle and the front of the other. That is a geometric impossibility.

    That said, there are some marks on both vehicles that do correspond.

    On balance I'd say there could have been a slight contact, but the cabbie is trying the blame the OP for what happened then, and as well for damage caused on possibly two other separate occasions, and get it all fixed without having to pay an excess for the other damage.

    • Eeples on 06/12/2023 - 19:23
      +1

      The taxi has claimed the OP cut in from of him from the right to the left lane in from of the taxi too soon. And there was contact. So the damage areas look roughly correct.

      I have a hard time believing that that amount of contact (evidence by the amount of damage on the taxi) wouldn't have caused the OP's car or the taxi to fishtail in the wet.

      I also have hard time believing the OP's story about existing damage.

      And a hard time believing the taxi hasn't mentioned dash cam footage.

      Clearly, I am in disbelief.

      EDIT: OP, you might choose not to inform your insurance company of the exisiting damage to your car (if they are unaware of it).

      • randomusername2017 on 06/12/2023 - 20:35
        +5

        I have a hard time…I also have hard time…And a hard time

        exciting reading…

      • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:44

        OPs car is also very little. Would have felt an impact

  • Ughhh on 06/12/2023 - 19:45
    +1

    Unless you're driving a tank, I'm pretty sure you'd know, at least via sound, if you've been hit or hit something.
    I would assume the damage from two moving vehicles would be more than a cat scratch.

    • Minimum chips on 08/12/2023 - 01:04
      +3

      Ah, but OP is in Sydney. I have seen Sydney drivers fail to notice red lights, oncoming cars, speed humps, one-way signs and bollards. And that's just in one day.

  • MonkeyMagic1977 on 06/12/2023 - 19:47
    +2

    Some taxi businesses are also linked to panel beating companies. As others have said just block all contact.

  • JIMB0 on 06/12/2023 - 20:07
    +1

    Did they also try to claim for lost income while it is off the road for repairs?

    • Ridiculous Panda on 07/12/2023 - 10:41
      +2

      Not yet.. that is the sequel after the first scam is successful.

  • Mungulz on 06/12/2023 - 21:12
    +1

    Just block him, probs unlikely that hes gonna go through with making a claim etc. If they do, you have insurance. Just tell your insurance company its a fraudulent claim.

  • donga100 on 06/12/2023 - 21:12
    +6

    This is a very common scam. They will have a panel beater partner that will produce a very expensive invoice for repairs/parts + lost income for the weeks/months it was getting "repaired" and send you or your insurer a letter of demand. If you were at fault and they can prove it you will have no choice but to pay. In most cases they don't even complete the repairs.

  • Herbs on 06/12/2023 - 21:27
    +2

    "Related Products" top right of this page is a Toyota Camry! lols

  • TightAl on 06/12/2023 - 22:59
    +1

    These don't even line up, the damage on his car is so far above the ground and yours is so low.
    Impossible

  • jayzee on 06/12/2023 - 23:05
    +6

    It's been pointed out above a more consistent collision point is on the wheel rim of OPs car, not on the bumper. In middle of night with heavy rain, I don't think the taxi driver could easily spot a potential match to an existing damage.

  • Minimum chips on 06/12/2023 - 23:32

    The taxi clearly has damage from something. More than just scuffs, that bumper panel is not sitting quite right; you can see the fog light detaching. Hard to say if it is from you.

    It could be that the driver is lying to the owner about how the damage happened, or they or both trying to scam you. It could also still be that you obliviously cut them off and actually did the damage (I mean, Audi driver in the rain, would anyone be surprised?) - without a clear height comparison no amount of internet sleuthing can rule that out.

    Taxi owners will rent out the taxi when they are not driving it. Usually to someone they know who has their own taxi driver's license, but sometimes a friend of a friend, or it gets sub-let(?) to another person. Whoever was driving at the time may not be covered by the insurance policy (or even properly licensed) which is why they don't want to use insurance. Even if they are covered, the owner won't want to pay excess or have their rates go up.

  • Porker on 07/12/2023 - 06:57
    +6

    Many years ago, a taxi hit my car while both cars were in motion. It was that taxi driver's second day on the job and as it were, his second crash.

    Based on the damage, it was clear it was his fault. The case ended up in the courts and not surprisingly a witness came forth stating I was at fault. Witness was another taxi driver. This was all pre-dashcam days.

    So OP, while general advice is to ignore, just be prepared that a 'witness' may come forth too.

    While notifying my insurance of the above, they anticipated the other-taxi witness as it was common practise for taxi crashes.

    My insurance covered my expenses at no cost to me - they determined I was not at fault.

    • ReaperX22 on 07/12/2023 - 10:36
      +1

      Yo what insurer was this!? Gotta get onboard with them! Ha! (Great outcome!)

      • Franc-T on 07/12/2023 - 19:45

        Lets take a wild guess and assume it wasnt budget lol

  • Davo1111 on 07/12/2023 - 07:25
    +7

    Tell him to go through his insurer.

  • Inertia-g on 07/12/2023 - 08:36

    That scuff mark will just buff out, taxi driver and owner are having a lend and trying to milk you for $$$

  • FlyingMiffy on 07/12/2023 - 09:07

    I hope you didnt give out your license details for an accident that didnt occur. Perhaps respond to the latest threat with a "ill be lodging a police station tomorrow" and invite them to join.

  • Zapwap on 07/12/2023 - 10:03

    Most probably a SCAM. Same series of events happened with my brother last year. The minute we got to know a taxi was involved, we understood it's scam. However, we played along to see if this person shows up. When we requested a dashcam footage and demanded to involve police (meetup at a police station) they started giving excuses.

    They eventually stopped, realising we aren't an easy fish to net. Give it time, play along, have fun, involve police if this person wants to meetup- a very good chance of catching these sh*tbags

  • Boomstick on 07/12/2023 - 10:09
    +2

    Looks like OP has stopped responding, they sent a hitmantaxi to deal the final blow.

    On a more realistic note, given the discrepancies between the cars and the likelihood this is a scam, leave them a lovely voicemail or email stating that you’ll be submitting a police report for fraud, you’ll never hear from them again.

  • Violentunicorn on 07/12/2023 - 10:41
    +49

    UPDATE

    Just wanted to say thank you to everyone who has given their input - sharing the story here has given me alot of comfort after a week of headaches

    It has been nearly 24 hours since my last communication with him requesting dashcam footage of the incident and to meet at the police station/panel beater to compare damage. This was after his last request for a cash settlement.

    Without Ozbargain i wouldn't have known that all taxis are legally required to have security cameras. I think the matter is over, but will report here if otherwise

    Be careful out there!

    • Loopholio on 07/12/2023 - 11:28
      +4

      Thank you for the update!

    • FutureTech on 07/12/2023 - 16:19
      +1

      That's why people post on ozb after car accidents, I get it

    • stringbean402 on 09/12/2023 - 08:33

      If anything more comes of it just tell them to lodge a claim with their insurer and stop contacting you directly. Just tell them your vehicle did not collide with theirs and you will not be making an insurance claim or making any type of cash settlement.

      Your insurance will absolutely tell them/their insurers to piss off because it very obviously not from the same incident.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join