Gen 3 Insight Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,326 Posts
Sometimes 'less is more' unfortunately... like more accidents tend to happen at the start of rain and/or when it's misty rain, rather than severe downpours. Theories I've heard on that relate to inattention (i.e. it's not so bad yet) and initial slickness from list mist/snow from oil residue on ground.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Not to mention unless it's really cold, day time snow normally starts with an ice layer on the road surface before snow actually starts sticking.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,340 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
I'm not a perfect driver but this seems preventable if common sense was used. Slowing down during adverse weather condition and eyes focused on the road.

#donotletjesustakethewheel
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
I'm not a perfect driver but this seems preventable if common sense was used. Slowing down during adverse weather condition and eyes focused on the road.

#donotletjesustakethewheel
Yep! Lack of common sense by lots of people is what kept me employed as an auto adjuster for 20+ years. I saw lots of this in Virginia. Used to get a big kick when listening to people that moved down to Richmond from up north. They did not understand why people could not drive in snow, especially when there was minimal accumulation. Richmond just isn't used to getting anything more than minor snows but people tend to panic here.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,340 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Yep! Lack of common sense by lots of people is what kept me employed as an auto adjuster for 20+ years. I saw lots of this in Virginia. Used to get a big kick when listening to people that moved down to Richmond from up north. They did not understand why people could not drive in snow, especially when there was minimal accumulation. Richmond just isn't used to getting anything more than minor snows but people tend to panic here.
How does fault get decided in a pileup? Do you need to trade auto insurance info with every vehicle that was in your crash domino?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
How does fault get decided in a pileup? Do you need to trade auto insurance info with every vehicle that was in your crash domino?
YES!!! It can get pretty complicated and drawn out because each insurance company wants to limit their liability. What typically happens in a multi-car accident is each insurance company wants to know HOW MANY IMPACTS a driver felt. Here is a simplified version of a multi-car accident involving only 3 cars: The very front driver, (#1), slams on brakes to avoid a deer on the interstate. Driver #2 does not stop in time and hits the back of #1. a second or two later, driver #3 doesn't stop in time and hits driver #2. This impact causes driver #2 to move forward again and hit driver #1 a second time! Who is a fault for ALL the damage to driver #1? The insurance companies of #2 and #3 both are and need to determine what percentage of damage to #1 was done by each one.

The second scenario would be for car #2 and #3. The insurance company for car #3 is responsible for all the damage to the rear of car #2 but only partly responsible for damage to the front end of car #2 because car #2 hit car #1 first and caused front end damage to their own car. Then car #2 was pushed back into the back end of car #1. Whew!!! Even this "simple" scenario can be enough to get someone confused. Hopefully this gives a little better understanding of how insurance claims work when there are multiple cars involved. :smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
YES!!! It can get pretty complicated and drawn out because each insurance company wants to limit their liability. What typically happens in a multi-car accident is each insurance company wants to know HOW MANY IMPACTS a driver felt. Here is a simplified version of a multi-car accident involving only 3 cars: The very front driver, (#1), slams on brakes to avoid a deer on the interstate. Driver #2 does not stop in time and hits the back of #1. a second or two later, driver #3 doesn't stop in time and hits driver #2. This impact causes driver #2 to move forward again and hit driver #1 a second time! Who is a fault for ALL the damage to driver #1? The insurance companies of #2 and #3 both are and need to determine what percentage of damage to #1 was done by each one.

The second scenario would be for car #2 and #3. The insurance company for car #3 is responsible for all the damage to the rear of car #2 but only partly responsible for damage to the front end of car #2 because car #2 hit car #1 first and caused front end damage to their own car. Then car #2 was pushed back into the back end of car #1. Whew!!! Even this "simple" scenario can be enough to get someone confused. Hopefully this gives a little better understanding of how insurance claims work when there are multiple cars involved. :smile:
I always got a kick out of this, especially in no fault states like NY. The drivers get upset because "no one is at fault" as far as the state is concerned (unless intoxicated, reckless driving, or some other offense). And they get upset because they don't realize that no matter the state law, Insurance companies have to determine fault to determine liability, therefore the responding police officer generally assigns fault through their police report.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
My understanding if it's no fault, if an officer gives a ticket, or insurance decided you are are fault that insurance company has to pay.
If you rear end someone, it's pretty much automatic at fault, following too close.
I was just in a 3 car pile up in my HRV, car in front stopped suddenly, slammed on their brakes. I slammed on my breaks, stopped 2 feet short of hitting them. Van behind me rear ended me, car behind van rear ended them.
So I wasn't at fault, the van behind me was at fault for rear ending me (had to pay for the rear of my car, and front repair of their van)
The car behind the van would need to pay for the repair of the back of the van, and front of the last car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
Some states have "No Fault" insurance which is an unfortunate problem when you are not actually at fault. As I understand it, when one is involved, in an accident, in a state with "no fault" coverage, it doesn't seem to matter who caused the accident. Unfortunately, I believe this causes insurance rates in those particular states to be higher than those that don't have "no fault". Virginia is not a "no fault" state.

On the other hand, in Virginia, one doesn't have to carry any insurance coverage. If they pay DMV fees for the right to drive, they simply take the risk of causing an accident and being sued for the damages. Also, the cost of repairs to their vehicle are at their own expense. If you choose to carry liability coverage only, damage you cause to someone's property is covered but not the damage to your own vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
It gets really confusing, because I'm by no means involved with the Insurance side of things, but my two accidents involved my insurance company going after the other vehicles insurance company. Even though I live in a no fault state.

First accident involved someone turning right, from the left lane to go down a side street. My car sat for over a month because their insurance company hadn't received any communication from the driver. After 30 days from their first attempt, their insurance company finally authorized repairs. They provided a rental car for the entire time (42 days total if I remember correctly).

Second accident, I only had liability coverage, car switched lanes to pass a stopped CDTA bus, drove into the rear quarter of my car. No tickets issued, but her insurance company paid for my vehicles repair. Of course both times my rates went up as well (even though obviously the accidents weren't my fault).

That's why this whole no-fault thing is confusing. IS it no fault for injury only, as in I can't sue the other driver for my medical bills? If it were truly "No-Fault" then wouldn't I, if I got into an accident, file a claim with my insurance company irregardless of the other driver or any outside factor, and they would pay the claim, and adjust my rates accordingly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
125 Posts
It gets really confusing, because I'm by no means involved with the Insurance side of things, but my two accidents involved my insurance company going after the other vehicles insurance company. Even though I live in a no fault state.

First accident involved someone turning right, from the left lane to go down a side street. My car sat for over a month because their insurance company hadn't received any communication from the driver. After 30 days from their first attempt, their insurance company finally authorized repairs. They provided a rental car for the entire time (42 days total if I remember correctly).

Second accident, I only had liability coverage, car switched lanes to pass a stopped CDTA bus, drove into the rear quarter of my car. No tickets issued, but her insurance company paid for my vehicles repair. Of course both times my rates went up as well (even though obviously the accidents weren't my fault).

That's why this whole no-fault thing is confusing. IS it no fault for injury only, as in I can't sue the other driver for my medical bills? If it were truly "No-Fault" then wouldn't I, if I got into an accident, file a claim with my insurance company irregardless of the other driver or any outside factor, and they would pay the claim, and adjust my rates accordingly.
It appears to me that your insurance carrier settled the claim for you and then they filed the claim against the other carrier to recover what they paid out on your claim. That may not be such a bad thing, especially if your insurance carrier treats you well. Typically the two companies will have differing amounts for which they will pay out but will eventually come to an agreed amount even if they have to go to arbitration with each other through a panel of arbiters from other insurance carriers. These arbiters are claims handlers themselves and they look at all the known facts and make a judgment on the final payout. This should not hurt you in any way. Years ago, instead of arbitration, I had to review auto damage claims sent in by other carriers when they handled the claim for their insured. I had to go over the claim line-by-line and compare with our estimate of damages. Quite often I would discover lots of simple "double charges" on their estimate for the same thing, such as charging twice for undercoating, hazardous waste disposal charges, tow fees.

Even for me it could get confusing and at times, with pressure being put on to settle and close out claims, mistakes were made. Not a perfect science industry. Early on, in my personal dealing with the body shops, I was tested quite a bit by shops that had no idea what my experience was. They would present repair labor hour times to me hoping I would have no clue and just approve what they wanted to be paid. Once I gave them my background, i.e. 25 years as a body shop owner and combo body man/painter/frame repairman would they back off and negotiate reasonably with me. Its the nature of the the damage repair industry! Just like young kids pushing parents to find out how much they can get away with, the shops are always pushing to find new things to get paid for in hopes that there would be no resistance. That's why, most of the time, if a shop writes an estimate of damage, the insurance company estimate is typically less. The shops write from a "worst case scenario" and the insurance company writes from a "best case scenario". When all is said and done, there is usually a "middle of the road" the shop and insurance company come to agree on for the final bill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
It appears to me that your insurance carrier settled the claim for you and then they filed the claim against the other carrier to recover what they paid out on your claim. That may not be such a bad thing, especially if your insurance carrier treats you well. Typically the two companies will have differing amounts for which they will pay out but will eventually come to an agreed amount even if they have to go to arbitration with each other through a panel of arbiters from other insurance carriers. These arbiters are claims handlers themselves and they look at all the known facts and make a judgment on the final payout. This should not hurt you in any way. Years ago, instead of arbitration, I had to review auto damage claims sent in by other carriers when they handled the claim for their insured. I had to go over the claim line-by-line and compare with our estimate of damages. Quite often I would discover lots of simple "double charges" on their estimate for the same thing, such as charging twice for undercoating, hazardous waste disposal charges, tow fees.

Even for me it could get confusing and at times, with pressure being put on to settle and close out claims, mistakes were made. Not a perfect science industry. Early on, in my personal dealing with the body shops, I was tested quite a bit by shops that had no idea what my experience was. They would present repair labor hour times to me hoping I would have no clue and just approve what they wanted to be paid. Once I gave them my background, i.e. 25 years as a body shop owner and combo body man/painter/frame repairman would they back off and negotiate reasonably with me. Its the nature of the the damage repair industry! Just like young kids pushing parents to find out how much they can get away with, the shops are always pushing to find new things to get paid for in hopes that there would be no resistance. That's why, most of the time, if a shop writes an estimate of damage, the insurance company estimate is typically less. The shops write from a "worst case scenario" and the insurance company writes from a "best case scenario". When all is said and done, there is usually a "middle of the road" the shop and insurance company come to agree on for the final bill.
The arbitration part makes a lot of sense.

As a former body guy myself (with much less experience), I get the estimating stuff. Adjustments, all of that fun stuff. Not to mention insurance companies and body shops working out deals on certain jobs etc... It's the nature of the business. For example writing for a door skin, but the shop repairs the skin instead of replacing it. The insurance can only write for so many "hours" for a repair before the skin becomes the more cost effective repair, due to the nature of the particular repair, a shop may elect to repair the door (or maybe the skin was backordered). There is an art to the shop/adjuster negotiation process that most customers don't get the chance to see.

It's crazy how different two different estimates can look for the same repair. So much can be hidden. (or missed).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
Wifey's Insight--I live in the state of confusion!!!!!

Seriously, one should learn to slow down or even get off at the nearest exit in conditions like the Iowa scene. Scary!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,340 Posts
Discussion Starter #15 (Edited)
YES!!! It can get pretty complicated and drawn out because each insurance company wants to limit their liability. What typically happens in a multi-car accident is each insurance company wants to know HOW MANY IMPACTS a driver felt. Here is a simplified version of a multi-car accident involving only 3 cars: The very front driver, (#1), slams on brakes to avoid a deer on the interstate. Driver #2 does not stop in time and hits the back of #1. a second or two later, driver #3 doesn't stop in time and hits driver #2. This impact causes driver #2 to move forward again and hit driver #1 a second time! Who is a fault for ALL the damage to driver #1? The insurance companies of #2 and #3 both are and need to determine what percentage of damage to #1 was done by each one.

The second scenario would be for car #2 and #3. The insurance company for car #3 is responsible for all the damage to the rear of car #2 but only partly responsible for damage to the front end of car #2 because car #2 hit car #1 first and caused front end damage to their own car. Then car #2 was pushed back into the back end of car #1. Whew!!! Even this "simple" scenario can be enough to get someone confused. Hopefully this gives a little better understanding of how insurance claims work when there are multiple cars involved. :smile:
Okay, got it so you don't ever want to be the last car in the chain and you better hope the car you rear end doesn't touch the other cars down the line. ;):D
On the other hand, in Virginia, one doesn't have to carry any insurance coverage. If they pay DMV fees for the right to drive, they simply take the risk of causing an accident and being sued for the damages. Also, the cost of repairs to their vehicle are at their own expense. If you choose to carry liability coverage only, damage you cause to someone's property is covered but not the damage to your own vehicle.
Probably don't have any assets worth suing for if they couldn't even afford insurance in the first place...
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top