Hi all,
Asking for a friend (believe it or not). They were doing a U-turn, didn't see a car coming (blocked by car in another lane) and got rear ended once they did the U turn.
IMO it's my friends fault and there's no problem with admitting it was. But I know generally it's considered the person who rear ended you (the only damage is at the back). My question is, if she puts a claim admitting fault, will the insurance company accept that? Or should she do something different?
Thanks
Victoria, I understand the rules, she was at fault. I just wasn't sure how claiming it goes.
I just wasn't sure how claiming it goes.
If you claim it was your fault, you might find out your insurance will not pay…
Don't admit fault, just put in the claim and the insurance company will work it out.
I don't think you submit a claim stating you're at fault or not. You just submit a claim and they decide based on the information you and the other party provides.
AFAIK Some even say don't admit to fault at the scene.
Eg https://www.aami.com.au/aami-informed/on-the-road/insuring-a…
https://www.youi.com.au/youi-news/what-to-do-after-you-have-…
https://www.bingle.com.au/hub/making-a-car-insurance-claim/a…
Ok thanks, I've never done a claim before so not sure how it worked!
You mean your friend never did a claim right.. hehe yeah….
I mean obviously I don't know either, if either of us knew then I wouldn't have had to ask 😂
Or should she do something different?
She can try going back to the issuing authority and give back her licence and request her Learners back and then learn how to drive. That would be different.
Thanks, helpful. Not a terrible idea, but I'd support it being law to make it consistent.
Suggesting something different because you asked lol. But seriously tell her to be careful when pulling out of traffic, doesn’t make it easier now that there’s so many SUVs on the road (unless she drives one herself).
Trust me, I'm fuming. I don't care who they are, I hate shit drivers.
Yeah, if you impeded traffic it's on you.
Cheers
Car doing u-turn must always give way to other cars.
Whoever does not know that, should not be driving.
Bear in mind 'accidents' are generally just that….an accident, thus the name! Humans will make mistakes and in the OP it was very clearly stated that the driver 'did not see' the approaching car as it was obscured from view. Therefore its not necessarily igoring the rules. I do find it funny when people assume that because an accident ocurred, someone doesn't know the rules. Statistically according to research but an Australian insurance company 65% of drivers have been involved in an accident. Thats quite a lot, I doubt 64% of drivers don't know the rules.
Funnily enough though I strongly believe you would struggle to find a person who knows 100% of all the road rules.
the driver 'did not see' the approaching car as it was obscured from view.
They should therefore not have proceeded, or proceed with caution.
Driving should not be treated as Russian roulette.
This was no 'accident', it was negligence.
Bear in mind 'accidents' are generally just that….an accident, thus the name!
disagree with this attitude. It’s a crash, it was caused by a human failure, in this case, failure to look. Part of the complacency on our roads can be attributed to the ‘just an accident’ mindset.
‘Just an accident’ is no longer acceptable as an excuse in the workplace, and should become part of our mindset in order to reduce road trauma.
It’s far too easy to get and retain a licence. A licence should be treated as a significant thing to hold and something easy to lose after a significant crash.
Well majority disagree with you, thus the term. And please do not add words to my comment "JUST" was added to over emphasise your reply.
@awdavgds: It’s just like the ‘give way’ vs ‘right of way’ arguments. It’s a subtle change in mindset from a crash being a ‘oopsie’ that has no cause to something serious. It’s a concept that has been worked out in workplaces for decades and I understand that not everyone gets it.
Workplaces record ‘near hits’ for this reason. It’s a small step from nearly getting injured to being injured or killed.
JV has summed it up a bit more bluntly.
From memory dealing with a minor accident a few years ago, the insurer applied the rule of "entering the road/lane when it wasn't safe to do so". In my case that didn't help anyway because thew guy who hit my car didn't have insurance and the damage on my car wasn't significant enough to chase him through my insurance.
If you read the AAMI PDS on page 46
They say:
If you do not comply with ‘What you must do’ and ‘What you must not do’ we can reduce or refuse to pay your claim and/or recover from you any costs and/or any monies we have paid and/or cancel your policy.
And the first point of "What you must not do"
do not admit liability or responsibility to anyone or pay for any damage before contacting us;
If the other vehicle hit an accelerating vehicle square in the back it could be the other vehicle at fault - because rear ender. But I wasn’t there and don’t have video footage.
which state?
https://www.approveddrivingschool.com.au/mastering-u-turns-3…