Car Stone Damaged Driving in Unsealed Road - Who Is at Fault

LHemjoney on 24/02/2017 - 13:26
Last edited 24/02/2017 - 15:03 by 1 other user

Hi Oz Bragainers,

I had a incident this week which caused my brand new car stone chipped and moon roof and wind screen damaged .
There was a Piece of roadwork in Kwinana Freeway unsealed and with no reduce speed sign ( usually 110k in normal condition)

I drove and got a pretty bad stone shower from truck in front of me in the left lane . Any way I rang Mainroad WA mentioned the hazard and they came in and put sign the day after with 60 km sign! Road was in poor condition no dividing lane and speed reduction so everyone driving 110k .

I claimed it and my insurer told me I am at fault as there wasn't any other party involved unless Road company accept to pay this cost , hence I lodged damage claim to MainWA . (fail to erect enough signage ). In a same time someone from insurance company told me erecting reduction sign is a courtesy act and not a rule ( she said I'd better to double check with them . She wasn't sure . ) I still waiting for Main road WA to respond my claim but if they reject my claim I have to pay $700 excess and I loose my no claim bonus that simple ! I wasn't at fault , I just driving in the road with standard speed at that time which got rock shower .Any suggestion please ?

Automotive

Comments

Belgarath on 24/02/2017 - 13:39

+17

Isnt the age old rule .. Drive to the conditions of the road? Who in there right mind would do 110kms on an unsealed road in a new car? You are definitely at fault.
- whooah1979 on 24/02/2017 - 16:24
  
  +3
  
  Who in there right mind would do 110kms on an unsealed road in a new car?
  
  new awd suv driver?
Ryanek on 24/02/2017 - 13:45

+6

This is why my insurance premiums keep going up.
Hemjoney on 24/02/2017 - 13:52

-3

I got rock shower from a truck driving 110 K . And also cars tailgating me to drive 110k . No sign there , every one driving at that speed . So, still I am at fault ?
- Shadowsfury on 24/02/2017 - 15:22
  
  +7
  
  Doesn't matter what others are doing.
- Gronk on 24/02/2017 - 15:26
  
  +5
  
  Sounds like you were following too closely if the rocks the truck was throwing up were hitting your car, it's on you to make sure there's enough space between yourself and the vehicle in front of you.
  
  Who cares what the cars behind you are doing, if you're that concerned then pull over and let them pass, otherwise they can wait.
  
  As an adult, you shouldn't need to be told when to exercise common sense.
TakaHas on 24/02/2017 - 15:26

+1

challenging to argue this situation with govt road authority.

objectively speaking, u should not follow the truck, reduce speed and keep safe distance from trunk and rock shower in that situation. cars tailgating u can overtake u if they want as long as u r on the left lane or they can wait for the next overtake lanes.

on another note, i m not a bra-gainer.

Hi Oz Bragainers,
Euphemistic on 24/02/2017 - 15:32

+2

It's not that you were at fault, but that they cannot attribute the fault to another party. It's not always 'someone's' fault.

Suck it up. Unless you could identify that a vehicle (truck usually) in front was dropping material and prove it you are going to have to chalk this up to life experience.
- bluey47 on 24/02/2017 - 15:39
  
  or along the same lines, maybe there are mudguard regulations that the truck didn't meet.
Reggie74 on 24/02/2017 - 15:37

+1

Similar thing happened to me. I was driving on a freeway that was being upgraded. I was doing the speed limit on a sealed part of the freeway then without warning signs or a reduction in the speed limit signs I was driving over an unsealed area. A truck in front of me flicked a small rock into my windscreen causing it to crack. I was about 50m behind the truck. I contacted the company that owns the freeway due to the damage caused by no warning signs or a reduction in the speed limit signs. They basically said they weren't liable so I had to fork out for a new windscreen. Ironically the next day, signs were put up before the affected area which was too late for me unfortunately.
- whooah1979 on 24/02/2017 - 16:30
  
  I contacted the company that owns the freeway
  
  which company owns a freeway in sydney? isn't all freeways in sydney either owned by the nsw government or the commonwealth?
  - CheepCheap on 25/02/2017 - 08:49
    
    M2 is owned by Transurban. Not uncommon for tunnels and toll roads to be owned by corporations.
    
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Hills_Motorway
    - whooah1979 on 25/02/2017 - 10:15
      
      I didn't know the m2 motorway was privately owned.
      
      Anyway, my original question was is there any freeways that are privately owned?
    - CheepCheap on 26/02/2017 - 08:44
      
      @whooah1979: What's the difference between a freeway and a motorway?
    - whooah1979 on 26/02/2017 - 09:45
      
      @CheepCheap:
      
      What's the difference between a freeway and a motorway?
      
      a freeway as far as i understand are free to use. meaning no tolls are paid directly by the motorist. a motorway on the other hand collect tolls. the m4 motorway in sydney was a toll collecting motorway until 15.02.2010. the toll was removed when the rms took control. however, a toll will be reinstalled from 2017 to pay for upgrades.
- terrys on 25/02/2017 - 11:43
  
  " I was doing the speed limit on a sealed part of the freeway then without warning signs "
  
  I'm 62 and wear reading glasses. When driving along freeways, I generally treat the change in the appearance of the road surface from that of bitumen to that of an unsealed area as a warning sign that the road changes from bitumen to unsealed. Google maps, Tom-Tom and Garmin often aren't quick enough with such updates.
tassieeagle on 24/02/2017 - 15:59

+1

The stone is at fault.
- ggrant on 24/02/2017 - 16:25
  
  +3
  
  God is at fault. He should have made dope compulsory, so everyone drove at 10 kph. No rocks or animals hurt ;^)
doctordv8 on 24/02/2017 - 16:28

+1

Well……yes….you are responsible - your car. I feel for ya, new car and all. I am right peeved with my first ever paint mark/chip whenever I get a replacement - another car.

No one forced you to drive as close to the truck as you did, no one forced you to do that speed. As stated, drive to the conditions, or go a different route if possible. Signs or not, you are the driver, and it is your choice. Back off, trust me, no one will hit you from behind. If the idiots fly past, take a number, and hit them up for the paint chips.

Possible, did you have the truck info? Dash Cam? Maybe you could claim against the transport company just as much as Main Roads. Try telling the insurance company to get off their butts and chase it for you. Just a few thoughts.
- whooah1979 on 24/02/2017 - 16:33
  
  Maybe you could claim against the transport company
  
  not unless the pretty bad stone shower from the truck's load.
Godric on 24/02/2017 - 16:42

+3

Grab the stones details and provide it to the police they may be able to assist
[Deactivated] on 24/02/2017 - 17:27

I would recommend to become a member of Schmick for similar issues going forward. Great for smalls chips etc. I would also recommend to get a dash cam. Unfortunately in your scenario, whilst technically you are not at fault you will still need to put a claim under your policy. Scenarios like this is part of accidental damage covered by your insurance.
p.s If there was road works, you shouldn't be driving at 110 km/h. Just because others are doing it, doesn't mean they are correct.
Findo on 24/02/2017 - 20:54

+2

Wow it's never the OPs fault, is it? OzB is going to the dogs.
- RockyRaccoon on 24/02/2017 - 22:16
  
  Well its another weird newbies post. Maybe someone is trying to boost their SEO
djkelly69 on 24/02/2017 - 21:59

-2

I thought councils/road owners paid in this situation, as it is cheaper/better for them to let cars 'sweep' the road than close the road and have a truck or machine do it.

Therefore paying for the cracked windscreens was an expected cost.

(Unfortunately no experience or legislation to back this up, just one of those things you hear and are unsure if they are true.)
WesthamAreMassive on 25/02/2017 - 07:30

The stopping distance at 110km/h is 105.34meters. you was to close as are most drivers or else you would probably won't have got hit.

http://www.auburn.nsw.gov.au/Explore/RoadSafety/RoadSafetyDo…
- [Deactivated] on 25/02/2017 - 09:30
  
  105.34m? You do realize stopping distance depends on the car, reaction time, tyres, brakes, road surface etc. For example a koineggsegg one can stop from 100km/hr to standstill in 30m, yet a road train can take many kms to stop.
  
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koenigsegg_Agera
  
  Yes i agree the OP was travelling too close, they were approx 1.6 seconds behind the car in front (if they were 50m behind at 110km/hr). However to say the car in this situation needs exactly 105.34m to stop without knowing every single detail of the situation is just plain wrong.
  - whooah1979 on 26/02/2017 - 09:56
    
    For example a koineggsegg
    
    it's doubtful that op was driving koineggsegg. let's take a corolla as an example.
    
    Toyota Corolla 1,3 G6 46,5
    
    http://www.movitcars.com/rahmen/stoptbl.htm
    
    (if they were 50m behind at 110km/hr).
    
    a 46.5m stopping distance for a 50m gap at 110km/hr is asking for it.
  - whooah1979 on 26/02/2017 - 10:00
    
    However to say the car in this situation needs exactly 105.34m to stop without knowing every single detail of the situation is just plain wrong.
    
    not 105.34m but more according to qld transport.
    https://www.qld.gov.au/transport/safety/road-safety/driving-…
    
    110km/h 46m 67m 113m
here2rock on 25/02/2017 - 08:38

+1

I sympathise with you, my suggestion like many others is ti pay the excess, I know it is hard to accept the fact that you were not at fault. The lesson learnt is that don't follow or drive alongside trucks, you are asking for trouble, even on sealed roads, the situation is much worst on unsealed roads. Most of the times they don't cover the load properly anyway causing damage to your vehicle if you follow them too close.
Geewhizz on 25/02/2017 - 10:05

It's just one of those things that happens. I had a stick of sugar cane fly off a truck I was passing, going in the opposite direction, hit and crack the windscreen. And stones thrown up, again from trucks travelling in the opposite direction, on the highway - one was 5 weeks after having the windscreen replaced. Not happy!

As others have said, you should really be driving to the conditions. If you'd slowed down to an appropriates speed the cars behind you would have had no choice but to do the same thing, and you'd have been far enough from the truck as a result that this would probably not have happened.
- RockyRaccoon on 25/02/2017 - 10:38
  
  +1
  
  Also you forget, they chose the $700 excess, if they spent more then their excess could be zero. You roll the dice, you accept the number
  - Geewhizz on 26/02/2017 - 10:01
    
    Yeah! We pay $60 extra a year for glass damage. Excess for glass is nil.
    - Euphemistic on 01/03/2017 - 13:26
      
      $60 per year? Glad I don't pay for it. Replaced two windscreens in about 25 years of driving, one that was paid for by the parents of the kid that threw the rock, the other I had to pay for, but was cracked trying to remove it from the car for repairs not from road damage.
      
      Think I'm ahead.
    - Geewhizz on 04/03/2017 - 11:52
      
      We figured at $60 per year it would take 5 years to pay for a new windscreen, IF we got no stone chips. We don't live in the city and do a fair bit of highway driving. $60 is less than the price of a stone chip repair.
justaverage on 25/02/2017 - 14:50

There is not part of the freeway that is ever unsealed. I assume you are referring to a section that has been cold planned off and has not be resurfaced yet?

You would need some evidence to back up your claim re signage.
- Hemjoney on 25/02/2017 - 16:53
  
  Dash cam footage available the day of incident ( WITHOUT SIGN ) and day after all sign erected .
HeWhoKnows on 25/02/2017 - 17:06

+2

Shit happens sometimes. Just like when you park somewhere and someone runs into your car then drives off. Not your fault but you pay for damage anyway.
Golden rule is to drive according to conditions. Remember a speed LIMIT sign is just that: a LIMIT on the maximum legal (safe) speed. It does not mean you drive that fast, especially on unsealed roads! It does not mean you wont have an accident either.
Sawtell on 28/02/2017 - 18:04

Not sure about the law in WA.

In NSW the authorities are liable at common law for misfeasance, not nonfeasance. Generally meaning they are not liable for damage caused by wear and tear on the roads and they have no common law obligation to fix pot holes.

However if they attempt to fix a road and this construction or repair leads to an injury or loss then they can be liable.
Toons on 28/02/2017 - 18:28

i got a burst tyre 4 buckled rims thanks to roadworks they tried to tell me i wasn't driving to the road conditions at first

they had just dug out the road to a solid concrete bellows so imagine driving into a sharp roadside curb

main roads wouldn't touch it they said the contracting company had to pay or take up the dispute.

luckily the proof i had was the 2 coppers making sure people were abiding to the revised road conditions and speed at midnight

so because i wasn't charged with speeding they had to pay and they weren't prepared to ask the police to verify their location at time of incident.

but like you i had to take the chance and pay until they admitted liability

Car Stone Damaged Driving in Unsealed Road - Who Is at Fault

Comments

New Forum Topics