Car Insurance Warning - Lesson learnt

MelbEng on 01/05/2017 - 10:51
Last edited 01/05/2017 - 11:32

I just learnt an expensive lesson on the weekend and I wanted to let my fellow OzBargainers know.

I was driving along a two lane road in the right hand land with another car slightly ahead in the left hand lane. As I was passing that car, it drifted out of its lane slightly. I instinctively moved across to the right to avoid a collision. This caused me to hit the kerbing, which then split the side wall of my tyre. Replacing this one tyre has just cost me over $300.
I phoned my insurance company to see if I could claim as I had the registration number of the other car. Basically, I was told that unless I had hit the other car, there was nothing that they could do. So the lesson is, if another car drives towards you, unless you want to pay for all the damage, you are better off not changing course, but hitting it.

Automotive

Comments

  • Peck on 02/05/2017 - 11:41

    $300 for one tyre. Damned expensive tyres. However I would prefer to pay for a new tyre than the hassle, time without your car, and depreciation of your car, that a body collision would cause. In all instances it is your responsibility to avoid a collision.

  • alxr0101 on 02/05/2017 - 13:07
    +1

    Clearly some clowns are going to neg this truth. If you wish to neg it and hide it from Ozbargainers that WOULD find it of value…shame on you. Misled people can be refused insurance and find themselves up for fraud charges.

    The lesson would be that if EITHER insurance company determined that you DELIBERATELY hit the other car, then they would have solid grounds to void your insurance cover and likely refuse you cover ever again.

    All future insurance companies would also have grounds to refuse any future claims (not just cars), based on the declaration to the question "have you ever been refused cover…".

    There will be a clause in your Policy stating your responsibility to mitigate risk and to not deliberately take steps that increase it.

    For example, deliberately leaving your car windows down or keys in the ignition….or driving at other vehicles in order to sustain damage.

    Your insurance company would not have told you to "hit the other car so that you can claim against them". They stated "your claim against the other party is difficult due to lack of proof."

    • John Kimble on 02/05/2017 - 13:15

      The lesson would be that if EITHER insurance company determined that you DELIBERATELY hit the other car, then they would have solid grounds to void your insurance cover and likely refuse you cover ever again.

      Your point is valid, but not sure how they would determine this unless one was stupid enough to admit/too honest and admit it straight out to them.

      It's like with banks, they always say in their T+Cs they won't refund/cover you for fraud if you share, write down or use a easy password/PIN/login details etc, but there really isn't anyway they can prove it unless you tell them (or they happen to find evidence of a PIN in your wallet or card maybe).

      • alxr0101 on 02/05/2017 - 13:31

        They can determine from simple things like…"i phoned my insurance company and they said to hit the other car…" …or posting it on social media or a blog or OZB.

        Even if an insurance company rep stated that..or words to that effect.. the Policy overrides whatever is verbally stated by a company rep. Your policy will even state that.

    • MelbEng on 02/05/2017 - 13:27

      That in some ways the point of my post. You are asked to do everything you can to avoid damage. In this case, that is exactly what I was trying to do. I managed to limit the damage in this case to only one tyre. If, we had collided we both would have been both far worse off. My only gripe is, why do I need to bear 100% of the costs?

      Say for example a choice has to be made between swerving off the road to miss a car and hitting a pole, versus a minor collision with the offending car, then the choice is now leaning towards hitting the offending car. Unless a collision occurs with the driver at fault, you cannot get their details and make a claim.

      • alxr0101 on 02/05/2017 - 13:34
        -3

        "If, we had collided we both would have been both far worse off. My only gripe is, why do I need to bear 100% of the costs?"

        It's the Shit Happens clause of life…

        Make the best of your skills, toss in a bit of luck and deal with the outcome.

        edit: There are circumstances where it's defensible to deliberately hit another car..or deliberately run off the road. Even if in hindsight it was NOT the best decision (lack of time/information/skills etc).

  • John Kimble on 02/05/2017 - 13:30
    +4

    My friend was in a similar situation, but in his case he did not have the reflexes to swerve to avoid.

    He was driving only about 30-40km p/h in a narrow single lane, two way suburban street, when a driver of a parked car flung his car door open a split second before my friend drove past. My friend kept his driving line (because he didn't have time to react) hit the open door and got panel damage down all the left side of his car.

    The driver claimed his door was already open before my friend's car drove into it (but this would mean the door would have come off when it didn't…and surely it would still be the parked car's fault anyway??? But that is another discussion).

    Luckily my friend had a dashcam and you could clearly see he opened his door without checking. You can also see another car driving in the opposite direction at the same time, so if my friend did happen to try and avoid, there was a big possibility of a head on collision with
    that car. Parked car driver was found to be at fault in the end, thanks to the dashcam. Without it I'm sure the other driver could have argued and it would have been harder to prove.

    Swerving/braking to avoid an accident I think in lots of cases could cause other accidents; it should be the fault of the other car, but as the OP said, it is technically not unfortunately and proving is difficult without a dashcam (and even then it is not the other car's fault apparently in the case of the OP).

    I totalled my car running up the back of another car at a red light because I was distracted by (trying to give an evil eye to) a van in a no stopping zone…I know it was my fault, but I still also maintain if that van wasn't parked there illegally, blocking my lane, I wouldn't have had the accident.

    With wildlife (like kangaroos), if you swerve to avoid them and hit another car or something, I think it is technically your fault, wildlife don't have insurance, which sucks.

    • ankor on 04/05/2017 - 14:05

      You are better to plough straight through the roo if you are travelling at a fairly high speed. A quick 'evasive' move can actually roll the car if you're not careful. This applies moreso to 4wd where the centre of gravity is a bit higher btw. Normal sedans and hatchbacks, nfi.

  • R1ngSt1nger on 02/05/2017 - 14:39

    Ozbargain… where members encourage you to hit another car, rather than avoid a collision to save a dollar :-)

  • [Deactivated] on 02/05/2017 - 15:55
    +5

    Try braking next time .
    We're all in such a hurry these days we've forgotten the basics.

    Ozbargain Sentence ;

    Defensive driving course for you.

  • Toons on 02/05/2017 - 16:00
    +2

    unless your camera shows the other car leaving the lane your going to have to suck this one up

    was there anything wrong with your brakes or horn slamming on the brakes would have possibly helped you more

    I understand the reaction to want to get away from danger but you had 2 choices slow down and bang the hell out of the horn or drive into the unknown (Which you tried and failed)

    Even if you had to commit to an emergency breaking situation which your entitled to do you would have remained in the lane the drifting car would have swerved back in it's own lane and if someone was tailgating you bad luck to them.

  • Lukeae93 on 02/05/2017 - 23:54
    +2

    You should at least get your wheel alignment checked. If there was enough force to damage your tyre there could be damage to suspension components too.

  • AMLagonda on 03/05/2017 - 00:12

    What kind of silly warning is this?

  • BoomTetrisForJeff on 03/05/2017 - 00:31
    +3

    So basically if someone slightly drifts into your lane, don't panic and swerve into a kerb or barrier.

  • dcuksuop on 03/05/2017 - 00:53
    +1

    Same thing happened to me past Christmas eve. I had rego of other car on dashcam but I knew not much can be done. It's not worth the hassle of actually hitting them. I was due to replace all tires in 6 months anyway. So just viewed it as a sign to get it done sooner. (had to use the spare for a few days until shops reopen). 300 for 1 tire is expensive. I replaced all 4 for around 700, bridgestones.

  • nobarginsarehere on 03/05/2017 - 02:17
    +3

    Insurance isnt there to keep your car in perfect condition
    It's for massive problems
    $300 is nothing for car related problems

    • [Deactivated] on 04/05/2017 - 11:31

      His premium will go up more than $300 for his phone call trying to claim for a tyre. On record as a petty claimant.

      What's next, call insurance because the sun hit my windscreen wipers and degraded them over a 3 year period.

      Call insurance I ran out of petrol.

  • apple2016 on 03/05/2017 - 09:43

    I am not sure what was the story you told the Insurance company and what was their reason to reject it.
    I would have told them the car in front cut me off making me loose control of my car and hitting the curb, damaging the Tyre etc.
    I am not sure how this incident is different from all the other single car crashes?

    But then for $300 I would not bother chasing up insurance.

    • John Kimble on 03/05/2017 - 09:45

      No contact is the moral of the story.

      • apple2016 on 03/05/2017 - 09:52

        Do you mean to say if I loose control of my car and crash into a tree and wreck my car I would not get insurance as its not with another car?

        • MelbEng on 03/05/2017 - 10:23

          No. In this case, the cost of the damage was below the excess.

        • John Kimble on 03/05/2017 - 11:09
          +1

          You would be insured if you had comprehensive insurance, you would just be at fault. The OP is saying he feels he is not at fault due to the other car being the catalyst.

    • MelbEng on 03/05/2017 - 09:54

      That is the moral of this story. If I had told the insurance company what you have just said, it would have been the same outcome.

      It is up you to obtain the other driver's details and fight for your own compensation. Don't assume that by giving your insurance company the other car's registration that you will be covered.

      • Ughhh on 03/05/2017 - 10:29
        +1

        Is it possible for you to upload the dash cam onto YouTube or something? You can blur or any sensitive info.

  • Toons on 03/05/2017 - 10:23
    +1

    moral of the story is have someone to actually blame (that is without doubt)

    I'm sorry i'd be angry too, but more with myself for hitting the curb in this situation.

    the up to you being to get the details is nonsense, they use every means necessary to get the information. they don't like to loose money…………

    I got hit and run guy wouldn't give me his details ( all i needed was make model of car and rego )

    i reported the incident to the police and insurance company i was out of pocket at first but all refunded once they confirmed the numpty

    The insurance company don't care who was driving, if they see a policy on the car that was involved they go after it

  • wannagrababargain on 03/05/2017 - 11:38
    +1

    I would just accept this as another cost of driving…ie sh*t happens. Insurance is there to protect you from rare events that result in a potential liability beyond ones ability to pay, not to provide a 100% financial bubble around everyone against every small hazard and mishap on the road. Real moral of this story is that there is inherent hazard in any activity that you have to accept.

  • mroarsome on 03/05/2017 - 13:42

    Had a similar situation play out but a BMW SUV turned left from the right hand lane cutting me in my tiny hatchback off. It was an 80 zone and as he cut across I slammed my brakes on and my car slid into the curb. He definitely heard the brakes and even waved "I'm sorry"… but never stopped. After almost shitting myself, I never thought to note the license plate. Phoned police and left details anyway but heard nothing.

    Repair was $300 and after that I bought a dash cam.

  • Make it so on 03/05/2017 - 16:54
    +1

    If a car swerves towards me, I'd rather they hit me than me driving my car off the road on my side. The latter is more likely to be dangerous, and would cause me to be at fault. I would first brake, then check my right on whether I have any room available, then potentially move over if I can.

    But at the end of the day, you will always suffer damage from silly people (especially leaving your car parked at a shopping centre). Best to just factor it into the "cost of driving" and not get frustrated about it.

  • neonlight on 03/05/2017 - 19:48

    Your excess is more than $300 so lesson learnt is not to get too close to any car on adjacent, unless you got a dash cam on the sides don't bother claiming anything under the other drivers fault.

    Letting yourself hitting the other car or letting the other car hit you is not worth the risks of your life and the others even if it's their fault.

  • [Deactivated] on 03/05/2017 - 20:35
    +1

    $300, pffffffff

    how much is your rego?

  • frostman on 03/05/2017 - 21:36

    So the lesson is, if another car drives towards you, unless you want to pay for all the damage, you are better off not changing course, but hitting it

    So you prefer to save $300 then have a car hit you, make you do a 360 on the road and get slammed by a truck from behind causing you to be in ICU in Hospital?

  • mousie on 04/05/2017 - 00:26

    Moral of the story.. Move to sydney. That traffic means you won't have to about passing other cars

  • SuperMid on 04/05/2017 - 10:20
    +2

    So, essentially, you drove into a curb, and want someone else to pay for the damage. Right… Take some responsiblity.

  • [Deactivated] on 04/05/2017 - 17:59

    Lol clickbait

    Cop the $300, live and learn

  • skimp on 04/05/2017 - 18:16

    I think partly the reaction to not want to get hit even a minor one comes from the fear of scratching the car. As someone who bought a new car I am definitely guilty of being quite protective. Like someone said before factor in insurance and paying the excess as part of the cost of ownership. If it's the inconvenience of losing use of the car while it's being repaired then pay for rental car cover. Then if a minor impact is imminent our mind/emotion might not fight as hard to avoid it such as swerving. If it's a potentially life threatening impact however the instinctive reaction to avoid injury should still kick in to avoid a crash. A defensive driving course will be useful to learn the most appropriate response in these situations.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join