Motor Insurance-yet another dysfunctional system?

provence3

In the past months, I've discovered that being involved in a car collision when not at fault is only the first stage in a very long victimisation process.
As it turns out, what seems like a really straightforward incident can take turns and twists that can be used in everybody else’s interest except the victim’s.
Once you play by the rules, drive correctly, notify the authorities (garda, insurance companies) you enter this intricate system that has been put in place to protect the mere contributor. Or has it?
The Garda’s Role
In most cases, there is a liability dispute, as it is actually advisable not to admit liability. Once/If the Garda arrives at the site (it turns out they may choose not to, if no one was injured), their duty is to aid the involved parties exchange data. (?!?)
As it turns out, a Garda Report - key in a liability dispute- can only be an abstract description of location, date, particulars of involved vehicles…
They do not have to include decisive facts such as positioning of vehicles or drivers’ statements. Reason? Fear that facts could be interpreted as ‘subjective opinion’- as they put it. (?)
The Insurance Companies’ Role
Needless to say that they “do not put a timeframe” on liability dispute claims.
Hence, the complete lack of progress unless you -the consumer-take a proactive approach. Four months after the accident, they do not have sufficient proof, therefore they may reach a “50-50 settlement“.
Insufficient proof? What about the Garda Report, the witness (whose details the garda took), the involved drivers’ description of the accident, the assessors’ reports?
One more month of frequent phone calls and visits to the police station you aid the insurance company to finally get the Abstract Report. At least, it had the witness details but Garda warns he had stated he wasn’t sure what happened. Five months later, hope is even more feeble.
To Conclude: If upon policy renewal date the liability dispute is not settled, the premium will increase (following a possible reimbursement), regardless of the fully protected +7yrs NCB and no actual damage claim.
Question: Are 'regulations' like these in place to protect the people or other bodies? And if they aren't for the people, why must we pay insurance, taxes, etc.?

coylemj

As far as the Gardai are concerned they have no business getting involved in a car accident where there is no personal injury. People seem to think that the Gardai are going to arrive at the scene, take out measuring tapes and make a decision on the spot as to who is at fault, that kind of instant arbitration is not the role of the Gardai so as far as they are concerned material damage accidents are a pain in the arse as it means paperwork to no great benefit for the general public. The abstract that they fill out by the way is for statistical purposes, not to assign liability.

Your principal grievance if you don't mind my saying so is that you think that you were in the right but you are peeved that the Garda who arrived on the scene doesn't think it's all that clear cut.

If you had witnesses to back up your version of events you should have had them make written statements and you should have submitted these plus your own statement and drawings & photographs to both insurance companies. I suspect from your post that you were waiting for the Gardai to do this, they will not.

Even if there was personal injury, if the Gardai think that it's not cut and dried to the extent that there was little prospect of getting a conviction for dangerous or careless driving on the part of either driver, they won't bother pursuing it as long as both of the drivers were insured.

provence3

coylemj wrote: »

People seem to think that the Gardai are going to arrive at the scene, take out measuring tapes and make a decision on the spot as to who is at fault, that kind of instant arbitration is not the role of the Gardai so as far as they are concerned material damage accidents are a pain in the arse as it means paperwork to no great benefit for the general public. The abstract that they fill out by the way is for statistical purposes, not to assign liability.

Ok. But things like stating how/where the vehicles were placed & taking statements from the drivers & witnesses are facts not opinion. Should these not be part of the official police report? Aren't they the ones in the know, with a clear mind and in a position to put everything down correctly?
Otherwise, it's just one driver's word against the other's. Not to mention that, most of the time, the involved parties- already in a state of shock-haven't the presence of spirit to chase witnesses and take written statements off them. From what I've heard, this is the way it's done in other european states. I might be wrong...But if fear of paperwork is the only reason...

coylemj

provence3 wrote: »

Ok. But things like stating how/where the vehicles were placed & taking statements from the drivers & witnesses are facts not opinion. Should these not be part of the official police report? Aren't they the ones in the know, with a clear mind and in a position to put everything down correctly?
Otherwise, it's just one driver's word against the other's. Not to mention that, most of the time, the involved parties- already in a state of shock-haven't the presence of spirit to chase witnesses and take written statements off them. From what I've heard, this is the way it's done in other european states. I might be wrong...But if fear of paperwork is the only reason...

You need to say if there was anybody injured or not. I will assume there was not in which case the Gardai will most definitely not take statements from the drivers or witnesses, that is not their role in society, it is a civil matter between the two drivers.

What you are expecting of the Gardai is something that you and/or your solicitor should be doing. There is no valid reason why people paid out of public funds should have to do this work for you in what is essentially a private matter between two citizens.

If you're walking down the street and you trip over a beer crate carelessly left outside a pub, the Gardai will tell you that it is a civil matter and that you can sue the publican for negligence but that they will not get involved, your motor accident falls into the same category.

It's your word against the other guy, what value can the Gardai bring to the table anyway, even if there was some public interest in the matter?

provence3

Thank you for the clarification Coylemj. I do understand how things are. It doesn't mean I have to agree. It only proves my point that the poor contributor, who pays high taxes towards all these "public funds" you mention and who cannot afford a solicitor, has no proper means of defence and will only end up having to pay more for someone else's mistake/negligence..all this because the insurer doesn't have "enough proof"(?)
Which brings me to the next issue, shouldn't my & the OP's report be enough for the insurance companies to establish liability? What about the assessor's reports. Why claim to wait months for a garda report then?
Maybe my reasoning is indeed impeded by subjectivity here. And this is why I have chosen to post this. Maybe someone can bring some light into this...

coylemj

provence3 wrote: »

Which brings me to the next issue, shouldn't my & the OP's report be enough for the insurance companies to establish liability?

You are the OP (original poster), to whom are you referering when you talk about the OP's report? The other guy will have his version of events which will probably contradict what you say.

provence3 wrote: »

What about the assessor's reports.

What about it? How can I comment on it when you don't even say what's in it?

provence3 wrote: »

Why claim to wait months for a garda report then?

You shouldn't wait 'months' for the Garda report because there won't be one. The Gardai do not write up reports on material damage motor accidents and if you're talking about the abstract, you will have to pay to get a copy of this and it won't be worth the paper it's written on.

provence3 wrote: »

Maybe my reasoning is indeed impeded by subjectivity here. And this is why I have chosen to post this. Maybe someone can bring some light into this...

I think I'm wasting my time talking to you, you registered on boards.ie to make your rant, nobody else has bothered to reply to you and you don't seem to be taking on board anything I'm telling you so let me just reiterate the main point - the Gardai do not give a toss about material damage traffic accidents and if you're waiting for some kind of Garda report which will straighten everything out and tell your insurance company that you were in the right, you are living in a parallel universe.

MinnyMinor

I know of an accident where there were imjuries and no garda report or abstract

provence3

Coylemj, sorry, maybe I'm not clear.
1. By OP I meant the other party.

2. The insurance company claimed for a few months that they were waiting for the garda report - which they now have. Mostly due to my numerous visits to the station ( I have stated this in the original post). What I meant was : why weren't they making use of what they already had, i.e. my report,the other driver's report and the assessors' reports.
Why use the excuse with the garda report? They should know better...

3. You may be right when you say I am ranting. But I do appreciate the opinion.

4. No one may have "bothered to reply" because this post is too new..

But thank you for your time...

coylemj

The insurance company was probably waiting for the Garda report because of (1) the high and misguided expectations that you had for it and (2) because you didn't make it your business to get details of the other guy's insurance on the day but relied on the Gardai to gather that data on your behalf.

If you are involved in a material damage traffic accident, you need to make it your business to get all of the details of witnesses who will back up your side of things and you need to get details of the other guy's insurance (from the insurance disc on his windscreen). If you leave all of that work to the cops you'll be waiting for a while, just like happened to you.

You still haven't outlined a single detail of the accident or stated if anybody was injured.

MagicSean

The Garda report is called an abstract. It contains details of who, when, where etc.. It cannot be released until the Garda is satisfied no criminal proceedings will be brought to court in relation to the accident. There is also a fee for this report. Insurance companies won't act until they receive this report because criminal proceedings always come before civil ones. Once they are sure Boone will be prosecuted they launch their own "investigation". Basically they assign blame and haggle price.

provence3

@Coylmj:
I gave the insurance company the other driver's details immediatelly... I had them..I did not have the witness details. This was my first accident in my 8 years of driving and I did not know at the time it was up to me to take the witness details. I wasn't even sure he would have given his personal details to me...
When I filled in the claim report form, I wrote that the garda was at the site and that they had details of the witness. I was just answering the questions on the form.That's all.
The insurance company had warned me from the very beginning that they do not put a timeframe on liability dispute claims.
Every time I rang to get a status, they told me they were gathering information. Four months later, they were still gathering information but told me that since they reckoned there wasn't enough proof, they might settle for "50-50". My report was very clearly detailed and also included pictures of the site and a clear sketch of how the accident happened.
When I mentioned this to them, they said the pictures weren't very clear.
The pictures were cristal clear but they probably found them unnecessary.

As I said, now the insurance company has everything...I'll just have to see how long will take them to conclude this case from here on...

@k mac:
Thank you. This clears things a bit for me. On the last conversation, they mentioned there hadn't been any legal proceedings so far. I had no idea why they mentioned this...

provence3

@Coylemj:
You still haven't outlined a single detail of the accident or stated if anybody was injured.

"You still haven't outlined a single detail of the accident or stated if anybody was injured"

No one was injured. I'm not sure how much detail I'm allowed to give on this forum. The accident happened at a fairly straightforward roundabout. The cars were stopped at the roundabout. Mine on the right lane as I was aiming to take the third exit. The other car, on the left lane (from what I gather, intending to take the second exit). Lanes are marked only up to the roundabout entry but the roundabout is fairly wide.
Both cars started off simultaneously. I kept to my right lane as close to the centre isle as possible. As soon as the 1st exit was passed, the other driver started to drive too close to the right. I noticed and stopped but to no avail. The other driver didn't even look or notice my car and continued to drive too close to the right lane until her car crushed into mine. I could not back up as there were other cars behind. All I could do was stop and watch in amazement as this was happening. I had no time to use the horn. When I got out, my car was 10 inches away from the centre isle. She claimed I had entered the roundabout at a speed and should not have been there. I've been using this roundabout for the last 5 years and I know that 2 fairly big vehicles can pass there simultaneously as there are two wide imaginary lanes.

hullaballoo

You need legal advice and legal advice cannot be sought or given on this forum.

Please engage the services of a legal professional.