Traffic Accident

Kazvixen

Hi folks,

maybe you could help me with a couple of questions I have after a traffic accident I had 2 weeks ago. I was coming up to a junction and the car in front of me jammed on the brakes in a yellow box when she realised that she wouldn't make it through the junction as the lights turned to amber. I jammed on also but my car slid into the back of her car. There was hardly any damage done to her car but mine was in bits - whole front bumper smashed.

After the accident, I asked the other driver was she OK 3 times and she said she was fine. There were also a couple of young lads hanging around the area who came over and said it was the other drivers fault - I have one of their names and number. Nonetheless, I am willing to accept responsibility. I called the Guards immediately and they said if no-one is injured, just exchange insurance details and get off the road where we were blocking traffic. We exhanged all relevant details and phone numbers, etc and continued on our way.

I rang the other driver the next day to ensure that she had all she needed from me and to again ask was she OK. She was on a weekend away in Scotland. I then rang my insurance company and gave them the details of the accident.

6 days after the accident, I get a call from my local Garda station (which is in the vicinity of the accident) asking to produce my documents within 7 days. I ask the Guard why I have to do this as it is a Civil matter and the insurance company will deal with it and they could not give me an answer as to why. I get the impression that the other driver does not believe I am who I say I am and maybe thinks my insurance details are invalid. If she had've contacted her insurance company correctly, should they not have done the work for her and confirmed that my details were correct? I produce my documents that evening anyway as I was in such a rage at being phoned up by the Guards anyway. (I'm 5 months pregnant by the way and consider this to be very stressful).

I have now filled in my claim form for my insurance company and returned it with all the details. Yesterday evening, I return from work to find a letter from the other drivers solicitor asking me to accept responsibility for the SEVERE personal injuries, loss and damage to their client. No-where in the letter is mentioned that the claim is going through the insurance company and I must reply to them within 7 days. Now at this stage, I am considering this as a form of harrassment as I can't understand the reason for this letter. Can anyone explain to me why I have received this letter?

Oh another thing, yesterday I also found out that my brake lines broke and this is the reason for the accident. I haven't filled this in on the insurance form but should I tell the insurance company about this today?

Thanks to anyone who has read this far!

Kaz

MugMugs

Hi OP

Sorry to hear about your wee tip.

Glad to see you're accepting responsbility because you're liable anyway.

There has only ever been once case of a rear end being defended and this was with a lot of witnesses.

Anyway, pass the Solicitors letter to your Insurer and be done with it.

She is entitled to claim for any injury you may have caused her. Whiplash isn't an instant thing. It comes on afterwards and considering you destroyed the front of your own car it would mean you hit her with a bit of force.

You should disclose all information to your Insurer but beware that there are certain things I'd let them find out themselves if not directly asked for them. i'm sure they will assess your vehicle themselves.

Misticles

I think she is saying she has suffered personal injuries... probably whiplash!

Very harsh if nothing is wrong with her. Was it a heavy impact on her car?

She will have to get medical proof for the injuries that shes claiming for and then the insurance will deal wit it.

Happened to my sister only the Garda landed at her door with some letter at 11 at night.. she thought someone had died!

She crashed into a guy she works with, he swerved into the lane in front of her and she hit him. I could list you the stuff he claimed for... would make you laugh!

Forward all correspondance onto your insurance company or tell them to deal directly with them.

CardinalJ

To be honest, anyone who gets a solicitors letter in that close to an accident is generally out for money, however you are clearly liable so just call the solicitor and tell them you have passed it on to your insurer.

That will probably be the end of it.

mikemac

Kazvixen wrote: »

After the accident, I asked the other driver was she OK 3 times and she said she was fine.

And she probably was. Adrenaline kicks in and it's only later that you feel stiffness and pain.


Anyway, good advice above, forward everything to the insurance company, let them deal with it.
Their officers deals with plenty of these every week, just procedure to them

Kazvixen

Thanks for the responses.

There wasn't much of a bang but If she did have a bit of whiplash then that's fair enough. What I'm most annoyed about is the call from the Guards and now this letter. Should it not all be dealt with through the insurance company?

Padraig Mor

Kazvixen wrote: »

Nonetheless, I am willing to accept responsibility.

Well, it was your fault like!

Anan1

With all due respect, I think you're being more than a bit melodramatic. The Gardaí are perfectly entitled to ensure that your insurance is in order, they ask people to produce their documents all the time. Re the letter, just pass all correspondence over to your insurance company and let them worry about it. Remember that the other party was simply going about her business, you're the one who drove a dangerously defective car into the back of her. She's the victim, not you.;)

Cuddlesworth

Kazvixen wrote: »

Thanks for the responses.

There wasn't much of a bang but If she did have a bit of whiplash then that's fair enough. What I'm most annoyed about is the call from the Guards and now this letter. Should it not all be dealt with through the insurance company?

If you send it on to your insurance company they will contact the solicitors and tell them that they are acting on your behalf and to send them all further correspondence. Its doubtful that you will hear anything else from them.

MugMugs

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Kazvixen wrote: »

Thanks for the responses.

There wasn't much of a bang but If she did have a bit of whiplash then that's fair enough. What I'm most annoyed about is the call from the Guards and now this letter. Should it not all be dealt with through the insurance company?

If you send it on to your insurance company they will contact the solicitors and tell them that they are acting on your behalf and to send them all further correspondence. Its doubtful that you will hear anything else from them.

If only. All PIAB correspondence is copied to the defendant as well as their insurer as a matter of course. Expect a bit more on this OP

chris85

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Well, it was your fault like!

Your input is epic, bordering on stupidity. OP has accepted liability. Not an issue.

OP your insurances covers you for any injuries/claims resulting from the crash. pass the letter to your insurer and they will sort it out.

Nothing else you really need to do.

Padraig Mor

chris85 wrote: »

Your input is epic, bordering on stupidity. .

Why's that now? The OP states "There were also a couple of young lads ....who came over and said it was the other drivers fault...... Nonetheless, I am willing to accept responsibility". Clearly they feel that they are only partially liable at best and that they are doing the person they crashed into a huge favour by accepting liability despite the fact that they drove right into them.

Jumpy

Wait. Whiplash from a rear hit?

chris85

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Why's that now? The OP states "There were also a couple of young lads ....who came over and said it was the other drivers fault...... Nonetheless, I am willing to accept responsibility". Clearly they feel that they are only partially liable at best and that they are doing the person they crashed into a huge favour by accepting liability despite the fact that they drove right into them.

liability accepted by OP. The discussion is not about who is liable.

Cookie_Monster

Jumpy wrote: »

Wait. Whiplash from a rear hit?

yes, what's unusual about that?

mikemac

Jumpy wrote: »

Wait. Whiplash from a rear hit?

It's very common

Why the surprise?

BanzaiBk

MugMugs wrote: »

If only. All PIAB correspondence is copied to the defendant as well as their insurer as a matter of course. Expect a bit more on this OP

+1, going through the same thing at the moment albeit roles reversed. All correspondence is cc'd to all involved.

Anan1

chris85 wrote: »

liability accepted by OP. The discussion is not about who is liable.

I think you need to read Padraig Mór's post again. Although she says that she is willing to accept liability, the OP is also coming across as very put-upon.

Jumpy

Just seems like odd physics. I can understand whiplash caused by a seat belt in a frontal impact, but unless your posture is quite bad, whiplash in a rear hit seems more unlikely.
I have been in a minor rear ender and a frontal, in the rear ender I just got forced back into the seat, the frontal was the bone shocker.

Anan1

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

yes, what's unusual about that?

mikemac wrote: »

It's very common

Why the surprise?

* whooosh *

Jumpy

Anan1 wrote: »

I think you need to read Padraig Mór's post again. Although she says that she is willing to accept liability, the OP is also coming across as very put-upon.

Seems due to the solicitors letter claiming severe injuries when at the scene the other driver seemed unharmed.
Severe to me is a fractured spine.
Whiplash would be classified as minor to moderate.

Anan1

Jumpy wrote: »

Just seems like odd physics. I can understand whiplash caused by a seat belt in a frontal impact, but unless your posture is quite bad, whiplash in a rear hit seems more unlikely.
I have been in a minor rear ender and a frontal, in the rear ender I just got forced back into the seat, the frontal was the bone shocker.

Jesus, you were serious! Apologies to Cookie_Monster and mikemac! Whiplash is very common in such accidents, which is the main reason why head restraints are fitted. As the seat pushes the body forwards the head gets 'left behind', overextending the neck backwards and causing whiplash.

MagicSean

Ignore her solicitor. They will have to claim through the injuries board. Your insurance company should really handle this.

inforfun

No one knows for sure but i suppose the driver of the rear ended car claims she suffers from a whiplash.

I can totally understand if you are waiting for a red light, relaxed, expecting nothing and then get rear ended, your neck will suffer.
But this person had just slammed on the brakes so i suppose there was no way all (neck) muscles were relaxed. Cant see any whiplash happening in those circumstances. Unless you have a rubber neck.

On top of that when the OP contacted this person, she found out she was on a trip to Scotland. By plane i suppose.
Not something you are going to do when you are in bits.

Op, you(r insurance) are (is) going to be taken for a ride.

BanzaiBk

Whiplash can be quite often severe; pins and needles, endless numbing, massively limited movement in your neck/shoulders/arms, breathing difficulties, persistent pain and spasms etc.

Anan1

Jumpy wrote: »

Seems due to the solicitors letter claiming severe injuries when at the scene the other driver seemed unharmed.
Severe to me is a fractured spine.
Whiplash would be classified as minor to moderate.

Severe is a subjective term, and the legal profession have their own way of putting things. As MugsMugs pointed out, whiplash isn't an instant thing.

MugMugs

MagicSean wrote: »

Ignore her solicitor. They will have to claim through the injuries board. Your insurance company should really handle this.

Eh, Ignore it in the sense that you will send the letter on to your Insurer to deal with and respond. Failure to do so may prejudice their position and cause you problems.

Jumpy

Anan1 wrote: »

Jesus, you were serious! Apologies to Cookie_Monster and mikemac! Whiplash is very common in such accidents, which is the main reason why head restraints are fitted. As the seat pushes the body forwards the head gets 'left behind', overextending the neck backwards and causing whiplash.

Haha. You fell for it too.





*cough* of course it was a joke/troll *cough* yes... thats what it was.

*books into physics refresher course*

positron

Anan1 wrote: »

Whiplash is very common in such accidents, which is the main reason why head restraints are fitted. As the seat pushes the body forwards the head gets 'left behind', overextending the neck backwards and causing whiplash.

Almost 10 years ago, gf's car was rear-ended by a Nissan Micra around Parnell Street. We were only doing 30-40, and she had to brake (jaywalkers) and the car behind didn't, or did it too late. (Never thought much of Micra up until that point, but once it hits you, you realise it's made of metal! Duh..!!). I was thrown forward, and then the seat belt stops me right there, but not much support for the head in either direction. I was fine that day, but stiff and sore neck for about a week afterwards. I think we got away lucky that day.

MagicSean

MugMugs wrote: »

Eh, Ignore it in the sense that you will send the letter on to your Insurer to deal with and respond. Failure to do so may prejudice their position and cause you problems.

I'm working on the assumption that he has notified his insurance company of the accident and provided his insurance details to the other party.

Cuddlesworth

Jumpy wrote: »

Just seems like odd physics. I can understand whiplash caused by a seat belt in a frontal impact, but unless your posture is quite bad, whiplash in a rear hit seems more unlikely.
I have been in a minor rear ender and a frontal, in the rear ender I just got forced back into the seat, the frontal was the bone shocker.

I saw a great video on it years ago and like usual I can't find it now but dynamics of it are easy enough to explain. A huge portion of people drive with their head a considerable distance from the rear headrest, on a rear impact the body is driven forward and the head back. The head bounces off the headrest and whips forward with a considerable force. That's what causes the injury to the ligaments.

MagicSean

inforfun wrote: »

No one knows for sure but i suppose the driver of the rear ended car claims she suffers from a whiplash.

I can totally understand if you are waiting for a red light, relaxed, expecting nothing and then get rear ended, your neck will suffer.
But this person had just slammed on the brakes so i suppose there was no way all (neck) muscles were relaxed. Cant see any whiplash happening in those circumstances. Unless you have a rubber neck.

On top of that when the OP contacted this person, she found out she was on a trip to Scotland. By plane i suppose.
Not something you are going to do when you are in bits.

Op, you(r insurance) are (is) going to be taken for a ride.

Whiplash can occur in any collision. In a collision where the driver is tensed and prepared the whiplash tends to be more painful but short lasting and most people can recover fast from it. In an unexpected collision where the person is relaxed the damage tends to be more serious and longer lasting.

When I was in a collision a few months ago I felt fine the next day and went back to work. Two days later I could not get out of bed.

the culture of deference

MagicSean wrote: »

Whiplash can occur in any collision. In a collision where the driver is tensed and prepared the whiplash tends to be more painful but short lasting and most people can recover fast from it. In an unexpected collision where the person is relaxed the damage tends to be more serious and longer lasting.

When I was in a collision a few months ago I felt fine the next day and went back to work. Two days later I could not get out of bed.

We should all have front and rear cameras on our cars.

OP do not worry as the insurance will sort it.
If you learn one thing about this it will be to keep your distance.

Irish people seem to have no idea that cars need certain distances to stop.

dr.fuzzenstein

Hi OP, sorry to hear about your troubles.
Since you hit the other driver from behind, you're at fault sadly.
Evgen though in a proper country the other driver could carry part of the responsibility since she jammed on for no good reason other than her own incompetence and stupidity.
It sounds like an every day shunt, the other driver went home and after the excitement died down realised "Hey, I can make big bucks from this"
Whiplash should be a thing of the past, this is what headrests in cars where invented for.
Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.
It is nothing but a way to bilk the system for your own personal gain.
I once hit a car that had strayed onto my side of the road at 80 km/h, bounced off the car and went into a stone wall at pretty much the same speed.
Other car totaled, my car totaled, stone wall flattened.
I was absolutely fine, not a single scratch on me.
I have a bad back that goes at the slightest hint of anything.
Nothing. O bother, no money for me.
Sadly you can't do anything about it, she is entitled to claim (as is culture and tradition here) and so she will gut you like a kipper.
Again, anyone claiming whiplash should be subjected to rigorous, independent medical tests and their claim be assessed by experts.
Because in 99% of cases (like all personal injury cases) it's a scam.
It's like Homer once said, a lottery that pays out for stupidity.

Kazvixen

Thanks to everyone who has responded.

Anan1 wrote: »

With all due respect, I think you're being more than a bit melodramatic. The Gardaí are perfectly entitled to ensure that your insurance is in order, they ask people to produce their documents all the time. Re the letter, just pass all correspondence over to your insurance company and let them worry about it. Remember that the other party was simply going about her business, you're the one who drove a dangerously defective car into the back of her. She's the victim, not you.;)

Thanks for the response. My car wasn't defective as far as I knew - the brake lines broke when i jammed on to prevent the accident. There was no way I would have known that they were defective before the accident. I have passed the letter to my insurance company.

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Why's that now? The OP states "There were also a couple of young lads ....who came over and said it was the other drivers fault...... Nonetheless, I am willing to accept responsibility". Clearly they feel that they are only partially liable at best and that they are doing the person they crashed into a huge favour by accepting liability despite the fact that they drove right into them.

I didn't mean to sound like I wasn't accepting responsibility.

Jumpy wrote: »

Seems due to the solicitors letter claiming severe injuries when at the scene the other driver seemed unharmed.
Severe to me is a fractured spine.
Whiplash would be classified as minor to moderate.

Yes I also thought that the word "severe" was a bit much considering I asked 3 times was she OK and asked again on the call the next day.

the culture of deference wrote: »

We should all have front and rear cameras on our cars.

OP do not worry as the insurance will sort it.
If you learn one thing about this it will be to keep your distance.

Irish people seem to have no idea that cars need certain distances to stop.

Thanks for the response. I was approx. 20 yards behind her car but when I jammed on the brakes the brake lines broke and my brakes obviously weren't working as they should have been.I only discovered this the other day from the mechanic. Again, it wasn't really a very big bang because the brakes worked to an extent and I had been slowing right down approaching the juction anyway.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Hi OP, sorry to hear about your troubles.
Since you hit the other driver from behind, you're at fault sadly.
Evgen though in a proper country the other driver could carry part of the responsibility since she jammed on for no good reason other than her own incompetence and stupidity.
It sounds like an every day shunt, the other driver went home and after the excitement died down realised "Hey, I can make big bucks from this"
Whiplash should be a thing of the past, this is what headrests in cars where invented for.
Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.
It is nothing but a way to bilk the system for your own personal gain.
I once hit a car that had strayed onto my side of the road at 80 km/h, bounced off the car and went into a stone wall at pretty much the same speed.
Other car totaled, my car totaled, stone wall flattened.
I was absolutely fine, not a single scratch on me.
I have a bad back that goes at the slightest hint of anything.
Nothing. O bother, no money for me.
Sadly you can't do anything about it, she is entitled to claim (as is culture and tradition here) and so she will gut you like a kipper.
Again, anyone claiming whiplash should be subjected to rigorous, independent medical tests and their claim be assessed by experts.
Because in 99% of cases (like all personal injury cases) it's a scam.
It's like Homer once said, a lottery that pays out for stupidity.

Thanks for your response. I think this is the case.

fasttalkerchat

I wrote off a car a few months back and was 100% fine after 20 mins but for the next 3 days couldn't move my neck or back. Its possible that she is genuine but probably a dodgy claim. Find out if you legally have to respond to her solicitor. If not I would ignore it and tell them not to correspond with you (only your insurer).

anthony4335

First off , I don't think that you should claim any responsibility in any accident regardless of the circumstances . This is not up to you but up to the insurance company and their investigators to determine. If you were at fault and give a correct account of the accident they will determine that.
As for the Garda ,he was only doing his job I would suspect and I would not pay too much attention to this.
As for the injury ,it is not up to us to determine if it is real, although there is a tendency to doubt any kind of injury when it comes to a claim, the only think I can add to this is ,this kind of injury can take a few days to flare up, and what may seem like a minor accident can be deceiving in the amount of injury it can cause. I had heard of a incident where a car was rear ended with 2 passengers in the back seat, one was left paralyzed while the other had no lasting effects.
My only advice is to let the insurance company sort it out ,and don;t stress yourself out, as there is nothing you can do about it.

monkeybutter

Does this accepting responsibility affect your own claim for damages? Not the third party portion.

Crackle

Your insurance company will look after all of this for you OP. It is for situations like this that you have insurance. Any solicitors letters you get, your insurance company will also get.

Also, it's perfectly normal for the Gardai to ask for relevant documents to be produced at a station after an accident.

Hope everything works out ok for you.

Kazvixen

Thanks everyone.

kennM

Hey Kaz, plenty of good advice here....

The insurance company will determine where liability lies (afraid its with you)... regarding personal injuries & accepting liability. That is handled through injuries board. The need to get medical reports produced and submitted to piab along with application fee. Once received PIAB write to the other party asking if they are disputing liability.... and they (your insurance company) have 90 days to accept/reject liability. They are probably looking for a settlement that doesn't go through PIAB possibily....

Regarding asking if someone is ok at the time it means nothing. I was knocked off my motorbike and thought I had an injured foot. I was in hospital for two weeks with life threatening injuries once the dust had settled.

Turlock

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Hi OP, sorry to hear about your troubles.
Since you hit the other driver from behind, you're at fault sadly.
Evgen though in a proper country the other driver could carry part of the responsibility since she jammed on for no good reason other than her own incompetence and stupidity.
It sounds like an every day shunt, the other driver went home and after the excitement died down realised "Hey, I can make big bucks from this"
Whiplash should be a thing of the past, this is what headrests in cars where invented for.
Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.
It is nothing but a way to bilk the system for your own personal gain.
I once hit a car that had strayed onto my side of the road at 80 km/h, bounced off the car and went into a stone wall at pretty much the same speed.
Other car totaled, my car totaled, stone wall flattened.
I was absolutely fine, not a single scratch on me.
I have a bad back that goes at the slightest hint of anything.
Nothing. O bother, no money for me.
Sadly you can't do anything about it, she is entitled to claim (as is culture and tradition here) and so she will gut you like a kipper.
Again, anyone claiming whiplash should be subjected to rigorous, independent medical tests and their claim be assessed by experts.
Because in 99% of cases (like all personal injury cases) it's a scam.
It's like Homer once said, a lottery that pays out for stupidity.

Seriously?? So what you're concluding by your accident above is that because you were involved in what I can see as a car slamming into a wall at 80km/h and you came out unscathed that it's therefore impossible for anyone to possibly be injured during an impact of less than 50mph?

milltown

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Nonsense stated as fact based on my single experience

You're not a doctor at all are you?

You're certainly not familiar with how personal injury claims are handled by PIAB these days anyway. You'll be pleased to know that claims are actually subjected to rigorous medical examination. I had the wife and two kids in the car last year when we were rear ended at what I would consider low speed (at least we were moving at low speed, I can't say what speed the car that hit us was doing).

Myself and one of my boys were absolutely fine. The other son complained of a sore neck, as did my wife. My son was sore for a few days but no more. My wife is still on the consultant-go-round as PIAB and the insurers try to define the exact problem and come up with a prognosis. She is still in a lot of pain.

These things are called accidents for a reason and they are why we pay for insurance. If everybody sat bolt upright with their head against the headrest then such injuries would be reduced, no doubt, but we live in the real world where drivers need to look out the side windows at junctions and look over their shoulders to check blind spots etc. You can't guarantee that your posture is going to be perfect when someone behind you has a lapse in concentration and doesn't notice you or the red light you've stopped at.

kennM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Hi OP, sorry to hear about your troubles.
Since you hit the other driver from behind, you're at fault sadly.
Evgen though in a proper country the other driver could carry part of the responsibility since she jammed on for no good reason other than her own incompetence and stupidity.
It sounds like an every day shunt, the other driver went home and after the excitement died down realised "Hey, I can make big bucks from this"
Whiplash should be a thing of the past, this is what headrests in cars where invented for.
Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.
It is nothing but a way to bilk the system for your own personal gain.
I once hit a car that had strayed onto my side of the road at 80 km/h, bounced off the car and went into a stone wall at pretty much the same speed.
Other car totaled, my car totaled, stone wall flattened.
I was absolutely fine, not a single scratch on me.
I have a bad back that goes at the slightest hint of anything.
Nothing. O bother, no money for me.
Sadly you can't do anything about it, she is entitled to claim (as is culture and tradition here) and so she will gut you like a kipper.
Again, anyone claiming whiplash should be subjected to rigorous, independent medical tests and their claim be assessed by experts.
Because in 99% of cases (like all personal injury cases) it's a scam.
It's like Homer once said, a lottery that pays out for stupidity.

I hate this armchair expert BS..... so you got lucky once means that everyone else is scamming the system??? i.e. 99%. Obviously have no clue whatsoever how PIAB works.... medical evidence needed, PIAB are independent and they often seek their own medical evidence of injuries before identifying a settlement figure. Going through PIAB personally at the moment so well aware of the level of scrutiny that goes on.

A friend of mine was stopped at a set of traffic lights a good few year back, driver behind him never spotted the red lights or him and ploughed into the back of him. The two of them hopped out & were fine.... as he told her. Neck was still for a few days afterwards (you think he's scamming now...). They did an xray and it turned out he had a few broken vertebra in his neck and was immediately put in traction. If had moved his neck the wrong way in those couple of days he would have been paralyzed from the neck down.

Sorry for the rant and little thread hijack but this vast generalization which is wildly exaggerated just gets on my wick. Sure some people try to scam when they can doesn't mean the whole world does.

mullingar

@OP,

Dont be worried about it, accidents happen, that's why we have insurance.

Look at the bright side, nobody was killed/seriously injured.

Worst case scenario:
You lose your NCB (or part of it if you have NCB protection) and you must pay the excess and a major inconvenience of sorting out your car/solicitors.

If you think they are going to fraud/over claim your insurance, just call these: http://www.insuranceconfidential.ie/ and the PIAB

dr.fuzzenstein

kennM wrote: »

I hate this armchair expert BS..... so you got lucky once means that everyone else is scamming the system??? i.e. 99%. Obviously have no clue whatsoever how PIAB works.... medical evidence needed, PIAB are independent and they often seek their own medical evidence of injuries before identifying a settlement figure. Going through PIAB personally at the moment so well aware of the level of scrutiny that goes on.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2006/feb/25/motorinsurance.insurance

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2056963/Bogus-whiplash-claims-add-90-average-car-insurance-premium.html

http://www.the-claim-solicitors.co.uk/whiplash/news-government-asked-to-halt-bogus-whiplash-claims.htm

Whiplash=Fraud in a lot of the cases.
Of course some are genuine, but a lot of them just see a huge cashcow.
It's a bit of an Irish tradition, ching ching ching-cash in on your tragedy!
And if anything it's worse here than in the UK and more money paid out.
So to say that no one is bilking the system is bending over to fraud and taking it up the tailpipe.
If that annoys people I obviously struck a nerve.

Anan1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Whiplash=Fraud in a lot of the cases.
Of course some are genuine, but a lot of them just see a huge cashcow.
It's a bit of an Irish tradition, ching ching ching-cash in on your tragedy!
And if anything it's worse here than in the UK and more money paid out.
So to say that no one is bilking the system is bending over to fraud and taking it up the tailpipe.
If that annoys people I obviously struck a nerve.

That's not what you said though, is it?

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.

MugMugs

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

If that annoys people I obviously struck a nerve.

It annoys me and yet I've never suffered injury like that and if I did, probably wouldn't claim anyway.

But to make a broad sweeping statement saying every injured party is a fraudster is a bit much.

I hope you never suffer an uninsured loss such as Whiplash. Imagine the moral dilema you'd suffer when you were filling out your injuriesboard.ie application.

dr.fuzzenstein

MugMugs wrote: »

It annoys me and yet I've never suffered injury like that and if I did, probably wouldn't claim anyway.

But to make a broad sweeping statement saying every injured party is a fraudster is a bit much.

I hope you never suffer an uninsured loss such as Whiplash. Imagine the moral dilema you'd suffer when you were filling out your injuriesboard.ie application.

So you're saying every single whiplash claim is genuine and to stop asking questions.
If I sued over injuries, they'd have to be bad. If I had hospital bills and loss of earnings, of course I'd want to get compensation for that, but only because I like my house and don't fancy living under a bridge.
I wouldn't sue for thousands because I got a bit of a sore neck.
There really is a culture of entitlement at work here...

Anan1

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

So you're saying every single whiplash claim is genuine and to stop asking questions.

Nobody said that, and you know it well. What we are saying is that this:

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Anyone claiming whiplash from a straight on shunt with their seat positioned correctly and headrest at the correct height should be done for fraudIMO.

is complete and utter nonsense. Is that clear enough for you?

Fey!

@OP. Bad luck, but I'm sure that everyone on here hopes that both you and your unborn are ok.

As for the letter, talk to your insurance company about it. You've said that you've already forwarded it to them, but get advice from them as to whether or not to reply to the injured partys solicitor. Usually the fine print on your insurance policy will tell you not to admit liability, as that's the insurance companies job to assess. You getting involved with the other persons solicitor may just complicate issues further.

When it comes to your brakes, was your mechanic able to say why they failed? If he does your regular maintainence, has he been able to say how he missed whatever went wrong in your brake system? Also, and this is purely out of nosiness, how long ago did it pass it's last NCT?