Third payout for being rear ended

Noveight · 28-09-2017 08:53PM

The two most farcical situations in Ireland; Travellers and motor insurance.

ArnoldJRimmer · 28-09-2017 08:58PM

Sorry if I'm being a bit thick here, but given that its not the fault of the driver in front in each case, whose insurance is being raided here? Is he claiming off his own wife's insurance? Or even if the driver in front is not liable, can there be a claim on their insurance if someone is injured in the car behind?

Have never owned a car or had insurance, but this seems to be going against everything I had previously believed about one car rear ending another.

BillyBobBS · 28-09-2017 08:58PM

Hitman3000 wrote: »

He just seems to get in accidents when his family members are driving wife/sister. Very unfortunate lad, hope the injuries didn't keep him off work for too long....

I see what you did there

donegaLroad · 28-09-2017 09:00PM

Mint Sauce wrote: »

I am more concerned that the wife has been the cause of at least two accidents where she cannot recall how either happened. Hope he puts some of that payout to her increased premiums.

:rolleyes:

he will more than likely put most of that money towards his own increased rear end

TallGlass · 28-09-2017 09:08PM

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being a bit thick here, but given that its not the fault of the driver in front in each case, whose insurance is being raided here? Is he claiming off his own wife's insurance? Or even if the driver in front is not liable, can there be a claim on their insurance if someone is injured in the car behind?

Have never owned a car or had insurance, but this seems to be going against everything I had previously believed about one car rear ending another.

Insurance companies operate with no logic. Until the claim is settled everyone is to blame. So it's hard to move to a new insurance company.

Car behind should pay out and they'll have the full cost of the claim on there policy, but you still need to report the claim, so it goes on your policy also, but your NCB isn't effected. This gives your insurance company a reason to do you over (they do this anyway without reason). But if you have to move company you need to report you have had a claim. Take for example AAs assumptions, you have to declare this incident.

'This includes for example current medical details or history in respect of you or anyone else you propose to name on the policy, details of any claims previously made or submitted by or anyone else to be named.'

Beasty · 28-09-2017 09:20PM

_Brian wrote: »

I do know someone who was recently rear ended twice in the last 8 weeks, no fault of their own after 25 years clean driving..

Happened to me twice in less than 8 seconds!!

One day last year was driving along a straight, clear road (N2 with plenty of room for overtaking) and saw this guy come right up to my rear bumper. He then backed off and I wondered if he'd put his foot on the accelerator rather than brake. Then he did it again, and again. The fourth or fifth time he rammed into the back of me. I slowed to a halt and he did the same again!

Got out of the car to remonstrate and the guy just sat in his car staring into space. I start shouting at him. He moves his hand towards the gear lever then starts backing up. I stand in front of his car, completely on adrenalin. He backs up again so I move quickly out of the way and he speeds off up the N2.

Ended up with some urgent laser eye surgery and am still suffering from 3 slipped discs (after a lifetime of back problems). He left his number plate at the scene so the guards eventually tracked him down. They are pretty sure he's insured (probably on his dad's policy), but I am awaiting details of any compensation they are going to offer

8am Sunday morning heading away from Dublin. If he was on alcohol he would have made an attempt to miss me (both collisions were pretty much square-on). He claimed he blacked out when driving and has no recollection of me (despite me having possession of his number plate!) - so I suspect he may have been under the influence of something else

TallGlass · 28-09-2017 09:26PM

That's a bizarre story. What was his plan there?

28-09-2017 09:26PM

I love cases like these when a judge says they don't believe parts of the claimants' stories but sure here's some cash anywayz.

Liam McPoyle · 28-09-2017 09:32PM

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

Sorry if I'm being a bit thick here, but given that its not the fault of the driver in front in each case, whose insurance is being raided here? Is he claiming off his own wife's insurance? Or even if the driver in front is not liable, can there be a claim on their insurance if someone is injured in the car behind?

Have never owned a car or had insurance, but this seems to be going against everything I had previously believed about one car rear ending another.

His wife was driving when she crashed into the person in front.

He claimed off her insurance.

Any passenger in a vehicle is third party and can claim off the policy holder / driver.

We have a customer on our books, funnily enough from a nomadic background.

He has two policies with us and on both there are open claims where the policy holder was driving, crashed the vehicle on both occasions into a ditch and the vehicle at the time was packed with various family members.

All of whom have logged personal injury claims against the policy holder.

Nothing suspicious there, eh.

Beasty · 28-09-2017 09:42PM

TallGlass wrote: »

That's a bizarre story. What was his plan there?

No idea - I equally suspect he had little idea what he was doing. Maybe he was playing a game looking to intimidate me. He had plenty of opportunity to overtake and I was pretty much at the speed limit of 100 km/h. There was a car looking to turn onto the road ahead and I was wondering if he was just trying to gee me along to get past that then overtake, but he made no attempt at any stage to move outside me and overtake. Fortunately I didn't panic but I hate to think what could have happened with an inexperienced driver perhaps with a couple of young kids in the back

Of course if he was out of his head on something that could help explain what was completely irrational behaviour.

It took the guards a few weeks to catch up with him, by which time he'd sold the car, and probably thought he's got away with it, oblivious to the fact I'd picked up his number plate

Are Am Eye · 28-09-2017 09:50PM

TallGlass wrote: »

That's a bizarre story. What was his plan there?

The plan...

This is very common. A staged traffic accident. Several people in the hitting and hit cars put in personal injury compensation claims. The "offending" driver suffers no real consequences. He will get a piece of the action from the other participants. No one will be able to prove it was a set up (gardai or insurance companies). In this country (high legal costs) it is usually more cost effective to settle personal injury claims before court. Even if it goes to court they will get a pay out. Back pain, whip lash, psychological trauma etc.

Each individual, perhaps eight or nine people altogether, will get 40 to 60K.

To anyone, without the moral and ethical deficits that constrain normal members of society, why not do it?

TallGlass · 28-09-2017 10:28PM

Are Am Eye wrote: »

The plan...

This is very common. A staged traffic accident. Several people in the hitting and hit cars put in personal injury compensation claims. The "offending" driver suffers no real consequences. He will get a piece of the action from the other participants. No one will be able to prove it was a set up (gardai or insurance companies). In this country (high legal costs) it is usually more cost effective to settle personal injury claims before court. Even if it goes to court they will get a pay out. Back pain, whip lash, psychological trauma etc.

Each individual, perhaps eight or nine people altogether, will get 40 to 60K.

To anyone, without the moral and ethical deficits that constrain normal members of society, why not do it?

Oh right, I thought the fella was driving by himself!

Gen.Zhukov · 28-09-2017 10:34PM

Not strictly related to the insurance claims as such, more a general statement...
Revenue, CAB and the Dsp should be all over these c**ts like a rash, relentlessly, 24/7

They are running fcuking rings around us.

myshirt · 29-09-2017 07:29AM

It's not said often enough, but the socioeconomic profile of judges is relevant here. If we had a better mix of diversity on the bench, it would bring a different value set and represent society more broadly. Why are kids from poorer backgrounds not getting jobs on the bench? Thankfully some are getting over the line as solicitors, and the bar is making a valiant effort.

There is always a disconnect between the general public and the law, the legal profession, and the judiciary on this. It's not just some random guy shouting on boards. There is a real issue here. It is not Frank Clarke's problem, but id like him to serve as an example and lest he and his buddies forget Salus populi suprema lex esto.

mcko · 29-09-2017 07:43AM

At least they are no longer Irish.

29-09-2017 07:53AM

mcko wrote: »

At least they are no longer Irish.

Silly stuff.

They are as Irish as you or I.

gramar · 29-09-2017 08:05AM

It brings a new meaning to coming home and saying 'you'll never guess who I ran into'.

mcko · 29-09-2017 08:10AM

They are an Ethnic Minority according to themselves and I am quiet proud they are no longer Irish, we should issue them special passports.

29-09-2017 08:16AM

Ultimately the problem is not with Judges, or the law, or Solicitors, or Insurance Companies, or Doctors.

The problem is simply that it's so very difficult to detect. Judges have to rely on direct evidence, not hunches, not on the basis of the ethnic identity of the parties - an extremely dangerous undercurrent here. Oh and the idea that because of their socio economic background Judges have some affinity with travellers is laughable.

If 2 people in a car, the driver and passenger, say there was no fraud, is a Doctor supposed to say the passenger didn't sustain an injury, is the Solicitor supposed to brand that passenger a liar?

29-09-2017 08:19AM

mcko wrote: »

They are an Ethnic Minority according to themselves and I am quiet proud they are no longer Irish, we should issue them special passports.

You simply do not understand the difference between ethnic status and citizenship.

You could make your remarkable ignorance clearer with a third effort...or slide away and hope it's forgotten.

baldbear · 29-09-2017 08:28AM

Fair play to them. Hopefully they keep doing it & the government or someone is forced to do something.

Their must be a training college down in Ennis on how to make claims.

It's the legal profession who are behind this massive fraud.

BPKS · 29-09-2017 08:39AM

Said this on another thread but I'd love to know the solicitor who keeps taking on this fellas cases. Or would it just drum up more business for said solicitors if it was public knowledge?

DrumSteve · 29-09-2017 08:39AM

mcko wrote: »

They are an Ethnic Minority according to themselves and I am quiet proud they are no longer Irish, we should issue them special passports.

Sure while we’re at it why not give them some special symbol they can stitch to their clothes so we can identify them while we’re out and about

marvin80 · 29-09-2017 08:47AM

Be interesting to find out about the people that were rear-ended in each incident.
Did they suffer any injuries or damage to their car?
Did they put in a claim?
Were the people in all the cars involved known to each other? (this has been known to happen in other cases)

2smiggy · 29-09-2017 09:08AM

link here to 16 people in cork , who managed to crash into eachother in a number of crashes. They had some bad luck !

..

Sue Pa Key Pa · 29-09-2017 09:13AM

Noveight wrote: »

The two most farcical situations in Ireland; Travellers and motor insurance.

Why are you giving out about insurers in this thread? The insurer brought this to court in an attempt to have the claim dismissed.

Sultan of Bling · 29-09-2017 09:15AM

marvin80 wrote:

Be interesting to find out about the people that were rear-ended in each incident. Did they suffer any injuries or damage to their car? Did they put in a claim? Were the people in all the cars involved known to each other? (this has been known to happen in other cases)

It's rarely strangers they rear end. It's normally another car packed with their ilk who are also in on the scam, who all seem to share certain surnames, ward, connors, mongan, nevin etc.

I note from the injuries board annual report that they have a large amount of claims from people in limerick. I wonder if this is the rathkeale factor.

They deserve their few quid though, the most discriminated race in Ireland according to pavee point.

Nermal · 29-09-2017 09:24AM

Deleted User wrote: »

If 2 people in a car, the driver and passenger, say there was no fraud, is a Doctor supposed to say the passenger didn't sustain an injury, is the Solicitor supposed to brand that passenger a liar?

What a surprise, the law throws it's hands to the skies and says 'nothing can be done' when it's the one making fees.

Change the law so that injuries for which scientific evidence cannot be obtained (back pain, whiplash) don't qualify compensation.

You might say you have a sore neck, your doctor may agree, and the judge may say you're not lying. But if it doesn't show on an X-ray, you should get nothing.

keano_afc · 29-09-2017 09:27AM

Rather unfortunate that he managed to swallow the airbag after the crash.

29-09-2017 09:31AM

Nermal wrote: »

Change the law so that injuries for which scientific evidence cannot be obtained (back pain, whiplash) don't qualify compensation.

Are you saying acceptance of conditions can only be based on lab results and you would not accept the patient's own description of their condition and the observations of medical experts?

I wouldn't put you in charge of psychiatric services anyway!

Third payout for being rear ended

Comments