Different scenarios. In the event above the poster already owned the vehicle and called to report that his vehicle had been damaged, (in this case by hail). If you are buying a vehicle and it is damaged then yes they will refuse coverage without an appraisal. But in this case the damage was reported and the insurer used that info to refuse coverage, (some other companies "may" have offered to continue comprehensive but at a higher premium). They did this because of the INCREASED risk. Same if a collision is reported to insurer you are an INCREASED risk.
|
|
|
My body hit the car, not my bike - Careless driving ticket
- Thread starter Danner
- Start date
Hi everyone, OP here,
Just short of a year later and things have finally been settled.
First off, the insurance claims were cancelled and I have not seen or been informed of any increase in rates; though I also have a "first time's free" plan, so maybe that's the magic. I paid for the car's damages out of my pocket and paid much less for the repairs to my bike (she'll never be the same).
I hired a paralegal agent who was very helpful and was able to help me through the whole process and give great advice along the way. My agent was able to negotiate the charge from HTA 130, Careless Driving (6 demerits and a month's license suspension because I was an M2 rider at the time of the accident), to an HTA 148 (5), Failure to Turn Out to Avoid a Collision (2 demerit points).
I personally don't think that 148(5) applies to the case at all, but that's why the paralegal is helpful!
Thanks again to everyone who shared their advice in this thread. Hopefully some of us has learned something from my case.
Just short of a year later and things have finally been settled.
First off, the insurance claims were cancelled and I have not seen or been informed of any increase in rates; though I also have a "first time's free" plan, so maybe that's the magic. I paid for the car's damages out of my pocket and paid much less for the repairs to my bike (she'll never be the same).
I hired a paralegal agent who was very helpful and was able to help me through the whole process and give great advice along the way. My agent was able to negotiate the charge from HTA 130, Careless Driving (6 demerits and a month's license suspension because I was an M2 rider at the time of the accident), to an HTA 148 (5), Failure to Turn Out to Avoid a Collision (2 demerit points).
I personally don't think that 148(5) applies to the case at all, but that's why the paralegal is helpful!
Thanks again to everyone who shared their advice in this thread. Hopefully some of us has learned something from my case.
Just a word of caution. Even if the "victim" accepts compensation for the repair to avoid the insurance company, once the incident is "reported" it will be a matter of record. It can and may affect your "claims free" status at renewal for the at fault party.
It's also possible other losses may occur besides the damage to the vehicle. I'm not sure what the time period is but, they do have time to report physical injury.
So, don't assume anything.
It's also possible other losses may occur besides the damage to the vehicle. I'm not sure what the time period is but, they do have time to report physical injury.
So, don't assume anything.
Generally, a person has up to 2 years to report injuries sustained as a result of a collision, or the ongoing effects of said injuries. This is why PI lawyers usually don't file the statement of claim until just under the 2 year dead line. That is what my lawyer advised, Sure enough they were correct, I have injuries that have deteriorated as time goes on.
Matthew.Tremayne
Well-known member
Hopefully the other guys isn't a ******.... Because he could pocket the money and keep the claim going. Free car repair and free money for wasting his time by ramming into him.
Edit: Only read the first page. Glad it worked out for ya.
Edit: Only read the first page. Glad it worked out for ya.
Last edited:
PLau
Well-known member
This is something worth looking into if you're not sure if it worked through your first "free claim", it'll still follow you as an at-fault for the next 10 years in any other insurance company's eyes should you decide to switch companies at some point.
I have to admit, I expected this thread to be a discussion about the legal side of "body hit the car, not my bike", but I guess that wasn't as unique as my insurance situation haha
I will gather what information I can get from my insurance, and see if I can get a definitive answer so everyone can learn from it.
P.s. for anyone who didn't understand the law just as I didn't: the law see's the situation as - my body hitting the car is a direct result of being on the motorcycle, and therefore is a traffic violation, rather than some sort of civil litigation for property damages.
I will gather what information I can get from my insurance, and see if I can get a definitive answer so everyone can learn from it.
P.s. for anyone who didn't understand the law just as I didn't: the law see's the situation as - my body hitting the car is a direct result of being on the motorcycle, and therefore is a traffic violation, rather than some sort of civil litigation for property damages.
Being ejected from a bike in a collision is considered to be the same as being ejected from a car. It's all as a result of a vehicular incident.
I agree with this, but in my memory I had come to a stop and toppled over. Could the same rules apply if I had been in queue at a traffic light, lost my footing and tipped over into an adjacent vehicle?
(I'm just playing devil's advocate here, btw - my case is closed, but maybe there could have been a different outcome)
Doesn't matter. It's the result of a vehicular incident. You would essentially have to prove that you stopped the bike, got off it, then purposely body-slammed the other vehicle for it to be different, and then it would just be a different and more severe charge.
Do you have to leave space to fall over, though? It wasn't mentioned in my original post, but my bike had 'stopped' at an angle, and I lost my balance toward the car.
If I had been in a car, I'm sure it would not have been seen as too close, but cars can't tip over (that I know of).
(Edit: apologies if I am causing this thread to stray, just ignore if you feel it is out of bounds)
I'm sure I've seen a youtube video of that! hahaha
Last edited:
Yes you have to leave sufficient space to fall over, just as you have to leave sufficient space in your cage, that if a vehicle comes up rear ends you and your cage then rear ends the vehicle in front of you, same result ticket for careless, as you didn't leave sufficient space not to hit the vehicle in front of you. About 20 years ago now I was in the left turn lane, a lady comes flying up from behind rear ends the corner of my cage, then ricochets off my cage, back into her own lane hits another vehicle the three vehicles in front of that one are all hit, as they were stopped at a light too close to each other. She was charged, as were all the other drivers that hit the vehicle in front of them. I was the only one not charged and only me and the vehicle at the front of the line, assigned 0% at fault by insurers, (because I was rear ended, as were the other vehicles but then they hit the vehicle in front of them).
If you fully stopped and are pushed into the vehicle in front of you, these days, there is no charge nor any fault assigned by insurance.
I agree different systems in lace back then, Personally, I wouldn't have charged the stopped drivers either, even back then but it was a TPS Traffic officer, (there is a reason many of them appeared on the sunshine list due to court overtime)..lol. He even said to me if they were smart they would all fight it, then he said, (well except for the poor SOB from Quebec, one of the vehicles was a ford pick up with PQ plates), too far for him to come back and fight it so that one is an easy win for me.
conundrum
Well-known member
This is why when I had a stupid raccoon walk out in front of my car last year, I called my insurance from a different line and asked about rates and coverage before giving them any personal info. If they said it would be treated as a partially at fault, I likely would have said thanks, hung up, and they'd have no policy to attach a claim to since I was just John Doe.
End of day though, they said there would be no increase since it was a comprehensive claim (and there wasn't really), so I gave them my info and policy number and put things in motion. Also glad I did...what I thought might have been sub $1000 damage turned out to be around the $1800 mark (and I had a $300 deductible).
Also fun fact I learned from talking to them...if you hit a live animal that walks out in front of you, it is comprehensive and does not affect rates. If you hit a dead animal, then they assume you should have seen it in time to avoid, and it counts as a collision claim (which does increase rates). Something to keep in mind, especially regarding any blind corners up north.
Last edited:
Do they do an autopsy?
Hey all,
I finally got around to calling my insurance company (I also happened to be shopping for a new bike and wanted to get a quote), and the results are in: The insurance company has NO RECORD of any incident in my file.
Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Feel free to cross reference this thread in the Insurance forum if it's relevant.
For anyone new to the thread, the summary is:
I finally got around to calling my insurance company (I also happened to be shopping for a new bike and wanted to get a quote), and the results are in: The insurance company has NO RECORD of any incident in my file.
Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Feel free to cross reference this thread in the Insurance forum if it's relevant.
For anyone new to the thread, the summary is:
- I "rear-end" a car while on my bike
- Police and paramedics on scene (I wiped out pretty good)
- We both call our insurance (I simply ask for advice, no claim initiation from me)
- I later tell guy to cancel his claim; I will pay out of my pocket
- I pay for his damages
- He calls and cancels his claim - I even talk to his insurance to seal the deal
- I hire paralegal to fight an HTA 130
- Walk away with an HTA 148(5)
- No changes to my insurance
Chasem
Well-known member
Highly doubtful the car owner would make a claim in relation to this incident. A claim from the car owner would look like fraud now unless he had substantial medical documentation that directly correlates to said incident..... but since there is no claim on file, it's doubtful.
I'm not going to get into the physics of the situation... but a human travelling at a low velocity would not transfer a lot of energy into the car.
|
|
|
|
|