Fender Bender Chaos

the varg

Why do people insist on remaining EXACTLY in place after a fender bender? This morning a guy in a mini ran into the back of a passat this morning on high street in dublin. It was a low speed tip, he probably done more damage to his own car as he hit your one's towbar. However they two of them thought it better to stay in the middle lane creating a big backlog across the quays in morning rush hour.

The woman(first driver) was calling the gardai as I eventually got past.(The OH saw them there when she past the scene later) I mean show some cop on, it was a tip, very minor damage done. Nobody injured no need to call the gardai. Move to the side of the road, let traffic pass, swap insurance details & then on your way. Fair enough if one party has no insurance or is pissed call the gardai but time and again you see a fender bender creating traffic chaos because they refuse to move and call the gardai.

And whats the first thing the gardai do when they arrive? Move the cars to the side of the road to let traffic pass. And that is about the extent the gardai get involved.

AFAIK it is not mandatory to call the gardai in situations where nobody has been injured and it is only minor. Open to correction though. The ROR state "If the accident damages only property and there is a Garda in the
immediate vicinity you must report it to the Garda. If there is no Garda
available you must provide this information to the owner or the person in
charge of the property. If, for any reason, neither a Garda nor the owner
is immediately available you must give all relevant information at a Garda
station as soon a reasonable possible"

Thoughts?

Esel

How do you know there were no injuries? The car in front, with the tow bar, could have taken a fair shunt to the chassis, which could conceivably result in a whiplash-type injury.

I agree with your general point, though.

Tomas_S

sometimes after accident when dealing with insurance companies is hard to prove what actually happened. Other driver start talkine sh*te like it never happened like that and I wasnt there!
I even know an example when some old woman was exiting motorway behind the truck and then tried to UNDERTAKE from the left even there was only one lane. She then clipped the truck because there was no more room to move left. And what you think happened later? They said it was fault from both sides! So truck driver got done with insurance aswell! Even he done nothing wrong.

Wolverine_1999

A woman went into the back of me before while I was stationary on the road. Until I heard the words come out of her mouth that she was at fault I wasn't moving. I then mentioned to her to move the cars and I called the guards. I would always call the guards don't trust what anyone says.

Some middle aged bolox in a car passing shouted out "sure that isn't even anything". I shouted at him would he ever **** off and keep ****ing driving. The Irish have a tendency not to bother about small tips a lot of the time, especially in car parks. I'm certainly not one of those people.

TonyStark

Wolverine_1999 wrote: »

A woman went into the back of me before while I was stationary on the road. Until I heard the words come out of her mouth that she was at fault I wasn't moving. I then mentioned to her to move the cars and I called the guards. I would always call the guards don't trust what anyone says.

Some middle aged bolox in a car passing shouted out "sure that isn't even anything". I shouted at him would he ever **** off and keep ****ing driving. The Irish have a tendency not to bother about small tips a lot of the time, especially in car parks. I'm certainly not one of those people.

A colleague was hit from behind. The person who hit her said that she herself was at fault but when they arrived at the Garda station her story has changed. You can never be too careful.

What i find in terms of accidents like yours it's never the accident that holds up traffic but more the rubberneckers looking at your accident.

sydthebeat

Arent the guards required to witness the swapping of details and isnt it also an insurance requirement to log the incident with the garda?

Esel

sydthebeat wrote: »

Arent the guards required to witness the swapping of details?

Definitely not.

Gophur

Wolverine_1999 wrote: »

A woman went into the back of me before while I was stationary on the road. Until I heard the words come out of her mouth that she was at fault I wasn't moving................

TonyStark wrote: »

A colleague was hit from behind. The person who hit her said that she herself was at fault but when they arrived at the Garda station her story has changed.............

If you look at any documentation from your Insurance Company you are advised to not admit liability at the scene of an incident. Even if you admit, or the other Party admits, you face the possibility of your/their Insurance Company refusing to back you.

sydthebeat wrote: »

Arent the guards required to witness the swapping of details and isnt it also an insurance requirement to log the incident with the garda?

No.

cabrwab

In work if anything happens I have to call the guards in our driving policy.

When my o/h was in a crash the first thing the insurance company did was ask were the guards called.

However id move over to the side of the road. Wouldn't stay there with a minor fender bender call the guards and wait, but your next problem is the rubber neckers.

If one party wishes to contact them you sit and wait or get done for leaving the scene!

Caoimhín

Speaking of bumpers, my Land Rover defender lost it going around a sharp bend in the rain yesterday (bloody all terrain tyres!). I thumped into a stone wall and then into a steep drain.
I just kept doing and drove out of it. The only damage is a bent bumper, although the bumper in the defender is a lump of iron. Any other vehicle would have been written off!

Wolverine_1999

Gophur wrote: »

If you look at any documentation from your Insurance Company you are advised to not admit liability at the scene of an incident.

Just shows you how Insurance companies are a bunch of criminals

fletch

I saw this yesterday....what a joy it was to be cycling and not stuck in the traffic

To the people saying that there would be questions over liability, one car would have damage to the front, the other to the rear so it'd be pretty clear cut as to who is liable.

ShadowHearth

sydthebeat wrote: »

Arent the guards required to witness the swapping of details and isnt it also an insurance requirement to log the incident with the garda?

Not in this country.

Back from where I came, if there is even a tiny accident , you got to call police. Can't move cars until police say that you can. If you got involved I'm accident and bouth parties are happy and just make a deal or something they still have to call police. If they wont, and police finds out, good citizens... , then bouth parties get a fine of 1.3k eu for fleeding accident spot. 1.3k in that country its freaking huge huge money.

I personally would call Garda if it's bigger then minor accident.

Once I cought woman who managed to park In to my Mazda in car park where i work. Scratched doors and back panel. I took **** loads of pictures, her insurance details. Statement what happened and what damage was done in writing. Signed by bouth of us and 2 witnesses.

Just to be on the safe side... As later on her sorry can turn in to: " that Mazda flew in there on 200miles per hour while I was parking and then it hit my car!!!

In the end she payed for paintwork herself.

padd b1975

fletch wrote: »

I saw this yesterday....what a joy it was to be cycling and not stuck in the traffic

To the people saying that there would be questions over liability, one car would have damage to the front, the other to the rear so it'd be pretty clear cut as to who is liable.

What if the car in front had mistakenly selected reverse gear?? Not pretty clear then is it???

Wolverine_1999

padd b1975 wrote: »

What if the car in front had mistakenly selected reverse gear?? Not pretty clear then is it???

I've seen this happen as well!

Not making progress, moving off hesitantly, unneccessary and dangerous braking..

A few to say the least!

fletch

padd b1975 wrote: »

What if the car in front had mistakenly selected reverse gear?? Not pretty clear then is it???

And by leaving the cars in their locations, the Gardai will be able to prove this how?

padd b1975

fletch wrote: »

And by leaving the cars in their locations, the Gardai will be able to prove this how?

Your point was that in your opinion it is clear who is at fault when the front of the car behind is damaged, and the rear of the car in front is damaged. My point was that on some occasions it as not as clear cut as it seems.
Yes it can be annoying to be delayed by a minor crash, but tomorrow that could be any of us in a crash so I just cut them a bit of slack. OK?

sydthebeat

Esel wrote: »

Definitely not.

The reason i asked this was because i was involved in an accident last friday... wet road and slid into the side of a lorry.
I rang 999 and they asked if anyone was injured etc. When i said no she said ok, the guards will be there soon to witness the swapping of details. The guard came, nice guy, looked everything over.. took my details and the other guys.. and ensured we both had each others correct details.

when i rang my insurance to notify of the incident they specifically asked if the guards had been called to log the incident and was there one there to witness the detail swapping.....

so maybe not a legal requirement, but seems to be the standard course of action.....

kiddums

My insurance requires the guards to be called.

I was involved in what you would probablly call a fender bender, but we left the cars in place and called the guards. They made sure we swapped details and cleared the light glass off the road.

Turns out the other guy got whiplash and my car was a finincal write off.
Didn't look that bad from the damage. Chassis arm was buckled and it was going to cost me 2.5-3K to fix a car worth 1k tops.

TL:DR? Can't judge by the look of it.

Esel

sydthebeat wrote: »

The reason i asked this was because i was involved in an accident last friday... wet road and slid into the side of a lorry.
I rang 999 and they asked if anyone was injured etc. When i said no she said ok, the guards will be there soon to witness the swapping of details. The guard came, nice guy, looked everything over.. took my details and the other guys.. and ensured we both had each others correct details.

when i rang my insurance to notify of the incident they specifically asked if the guards had been called to log the incident and was there one there to witness the detail swapping.....

so maybe not a legal requirement, but seems to be the standard course of action.....

That's interesting. That change in procedure might have been prompted by the increase in the number of un-insured cowboys on the roads. I haven't heard anything about it now being a legal requirement to call them to the scene of an accident that involves property damage only though.

sydthebeat

Esel wrote: »

That's interesting. That change in procedure might have been prompted by the increase in the number of un-insured cowboys on the roads. I haven't heard anything about it now being a legal requirement to call them to the scene of an accident that involves property damage only though.

dont get me wrong, i dont know if its a legal requirement or not... its just the procedure that i was told to follow.

the varg

padd b1975 wrote: »

What if the car in front had mistakenly selected reverse gear?? Not pretty clear then is it???

Going slightly off topic but I was always under the impression that you should always leave enough room from the car in front either driving to allow you brake safely or stationary in traffic to allow for situations like the one above.

So if someone reverses accidentally into you, you are still at fault because you did not leave enough distance between the two cars. Again open to correction on this as I've never had the misfortune of that type of ding.

anthonymax

I would just like to add something to this discussion. Last week I was in a cinema car park and was reversing out of my space. Just as I was straightening up getting ready to move off, a woman reversed her car out of her space and directly into my front passenger side door.

The car park was quite busy so I pulled back into the space I had come from, thinking she would do the same, we would be clear of the traffic and would exit our cars to discuss what happened.

WRONG. She drove off! I was just out of my car about to walk over to hers and there she goes on her way, looking at me out the window! I was gobsmacked, but just managed to get her reg. I rang the gards and it's being dealt with now, she's saying I reversed into her etc etc, but my point is this, I moved out of the way out of consideration for other cars. If I had stayed in place holding up everyone with the arse of her car embedded in my door, she would not have been able to drive away and any gard would be able to see she was in the wrong.

So, sorry, but if anything like this ever happens to me again I'm staying put!

TylerIE

An acquaintance had a similar experience to the last poster in a car park a few years ago.

He was 17 and had just started driving and was behind an older man on a slight up-hill incline exiting a car park. The guy in fronts car rolled back into the guy I know. Older guy gets out and insists its ok he will fix it, insisted there was no need for guards etc.

As the 17 year old learner he believed the other guy was right and carried on about his business. The older guy subsequently claimed of the 17 year olds insurance. The insurance company paid out as it the older guy claimed he was rear ended.

To the OP your extract of the Rules of the Road is correct but many people either are not aware, or are afraid to move. I also believe the last version of rules of the road stated or implied you should always call Gardai for any accident involving injury or damage to property. Many, many, people due to lack of knowledge or fear just block the road and wait.

TwoShedsJackson

the varg wrote: »

So if someone reverses accidentally into you, you are still at fault because you did not leave enough distance between the two cars. Again open to correction on this as I've never had the misfortune of that type of ding.

Not the case as a reversing car has no right of way, so if someone is in reverse and goes into you, they are at fault.

padd b1975

the varg wrote: »

Going slightly off topic but I was always under the impression that you should always leave enough room from the car in front either driving to allow you brake safely or stationary in traffic to allow for situations like the one above.

So if someone reverses accidentally into you, you are still at fault because you did not leave enough distance between the two cars. Again open to correction on this as I've never had the misfortune of that type of ding.

yeah think you may have a point, a driving instructor told me years ago that if you could not see the rear tyres of the car in front when stopped you were too close but that is obviously just a rule of thumb and not law.

johnos1984

I had a fender bender over 2 years ago when I rear ended a car.

The other person didn't want to move her car as her sister had been done before by someone changing their statement.

So to quickly clear the road as traffic was building up I suggested we both take pictures on our phones from any angle to show the Gardaí or insurance companies later on in case of a dispute. Two short written accounts of what happened were made and signed by both parties so everyone had some little bit of evidence as to what happened. The cars were then moved and straight away we both called the insurance companies and gave them the details to sort it out and decide.

All done and dusted in ten minutes. The worst part was waiting for her father to come and watching them rub their necks.

TylerIE

padd b1975 wrote: »

yeah think you may have a point, a driving instructor told me years ago that if you could not see the rear tyres of the car in front when stopped you were too close but that is obviously just a rule of thumb and not law.

The guide used by some of the UK Advanced Driving Groups was "Tyres and tar".... The tyres of the vehicle in front and a bit of tar behind....

LLU

From what I've seen, the first thing the guards always do at an accident is get everything out of the way as quick as possible so that traffic can get moving. although presumably if there were injuries they would handle it differently.

padd b1975

lst wrote: »

The guide used by some of the UK Advanced Driving Groups was "Tyres and tar".... The tyres of the vehicle in front and a bit of tar behind....

Fair enough.

Esel

lst wrote: »

The guide used by some of the UK Advanced Driving Groups was "Tyres and tar".... The tyres of the vehicle in front and a bit of tar behind....

You have no control over the 'tar' part....

snowman707

Caoimhín wrote: »

Speaking of bumpers, my Land Rover defender lost it going around a sharp bend in the rain yesterday (bloody all terrain tyres!). I thumped into a stone wall and then into a steep drain.
I just kept doing and drove out of it. The only damage is a bent bumper, although the bumper in the defender is a lump of iron. Any other vehicle would have been written off!

most other vehicles wouldn't have lost the bend

Gophur

sydthebeat wrote: »

The reason i asked this was because i was involved in an accident last friday... wet road and slid into the side of a lorry.
I rang 999 ......................

999 is for emergencies, which your case was not.

phill106

fletch wrote: »

I saw this yesterday....what a joy it was to be cycling and not stuck in the traffic

To the people saying that there would be questions over liability, one car would have damage to the front, the other to the rear so it'd be pretty clear cut as to who is liable.

Good thing vehicles can't go in reverse, otherwise your argument wouldn't be true.


*Looks down at gear stick*


JUST A MINUTE!
What's this gear? Labelled R? My goodness, cars can go in reverse!