Rear end car accident advice - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

FlameOn · 10-03-2013, 11:18 PM

So my brother got into a car accident in my parents vehicle. It was a super low speed accident at a yield sign. What happened was he ended up stopping at a yield sign behind a much older van (1994 rusting bucket) that is stopped for traffic, traffic completely passes and my brother in a lapse of judgement lets go of the brake but did not accelerate yet and bumps into the other vehicle at < 10kph.

Everything seems normal afterwards, driver of the van and his wife get out and are fine. There is no damage to either vehicles, no paint scratches, no bumper dents or deformation, nothing. We took pictures of the impact area and bumpers on both vehicles exchanged phone number and insurance (in case anything came up) and left. Fast forward two weeks the van owner comes back and calls us and complains to us now that his wife hasn't been able to sleep since the accident, the hubcap on his one of his wheels has fallen off and his brake warning light has since come on since the accident. These claims seem very suspicious to us considering they came so long after the accident and don't at all seem to be anything that's related to the very slow speed rear end that my brother got in.

My brother lives and works out of town so he had told them he wanted to pay for things outside of insurance since he didn't want to claim my parents insurance (lives in NYC so doesn't own a car, or any insurance. Was only back briefly for a visit. Was this a mistake). They want to meet up to get us to pay for the above damages. My brother and I are sure all the hubcaps were on the car when we had left the scene since we did a walkaround of their car but we only took pictures of the impact area and bumper on their car.

Question for CP, has anyone been in a similar situation with questionable post accident claims like this? My brother and I both think it's this sounds very scammy given the timing if everything and the damage that they are claiming given there was no damage on the initial impact. Is there a time limit on claiming damage following an accident? Should we still even attempt to settle things out of insurance at this point? Or should we just force them to go through an insurance adjuster? My experience for this is usually when people go out of insurance you get the other party to get you a bunch of quotes from auto body shops (probably because there is no visible damage), but these guys don't even seem to have tried to do that and are just claiming vague damages.

Any advice anyone has would help. Thanks!

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:27 PM

Time limit is 2 years and you're pretty much screwed. It will be very easy for them to make a claim and your insurance company will pretty much have no choice but to pay.

Edit: and it's not really the physical damage you have to worry about because even if you do pay them out for the physical damage they can still sue for their injuries and they'd probably want to go through insurance for that.

zamler · 10-03-2013, 11:31 PM

If these people did not go out and fill a police report, then they have nothing. Tell them to pound sand.

Oling_Roachinen · 10-03-2013, 11:35 PM

It's the injury you need to worry about it, I mean there's probably much more knowledgeable people on this topic but with an injury I'd say let the insurance take care of it, unfortunately.

And injury symptoms can occur awhile after the accident or progressively get worst, which makes it hard to tell the difference between a scam or actual injury.

Have they talked about how they want to settle it? It might be worth it, and again seek more advice, to hopefully call their bluff and tell them to take it up with insurance and hopefully they didn't follow all the rights steps.

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

If these people did not go out and fill a police report, then they have nothing. Tell them to pound sand.

That's not true at all. They can still report it.

zamler · 10-03-2013, 11:40 PM

Then let them. If there is no damage, and the pictures of both cars back that up, then they still have nothing.

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

Then let them. If there is no damage, and the pictures of both cars back that up, then they have nothing.

There doesn't need to be damage for there to be an injury.

Cuz · 10-03-2013, 11:42 PM

This is a reason that public insurance isn't that bad. In BC, ICBC has what they call a low velocity impact program. Essentially, when someone is rear ended, if the collision does not meet certain requirements, then the parties are not entitled to any injury payouts. So if there is little to no damage, the claims adjusters will not believe that someone was legitimately injured from the collision.

zamler · 10-03-2013, 11:44 PM

There has to be some kind of evidence that the impact caused injury. No damage to vehicles, so what do they have? Their word? What was the speed of the impact? 2? 10? 0? If it was me I would ask the people for doctors reports, estimates from shops about damage to their van etc.

Not many shops will put their neck out and say a hubcap is falling off and there are brake problems from an impact that caused zero damage to either vehicle.

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuz

This is a reason that public insurance isn't that bad. In BC, ICBC has what they call a low velocity impact program. Essentially, when someone is rear ended, if the collision does not meet certain requirements, then the parties are not entitled to any injury payouts. So if there is little to no damage, the claims adjusters will not believe that someone was legitimately injured from the collision.

That sounds like an idiotic program to me. It should be up to a doctor, not an insurance adjuster to determine if a low speed accident caused an injury or not.

Cuz · 10-03-2013, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puckluck2

There doesn't need to be damage for there to be an injury.

True, but with modern vehicles being designed to crumple and painted bumpers, the likelihood of a collision with no damage (especially no paint damage) causing an injury is quite small.

zamler · 10-03-2013, 11:50 PM

It's not idiotic, it prevents frivolous claims and scams. Either way you don't start handing people money because they say they got hurt when you tapped their bumper, assuming that's what happened.

Get all the details from them, tell them you'll take all the information to your insurance company and make a decision. You'll know right away if it's a scam. If they have doctors visits, repair estimates and the like then you can decide how to proceed.

Oling_Roachinen · 10-03-2013, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuz

True, but with modern vehicles being designed to crumple and painted bumpers, the likelihood of a collision with no damage (especially no paint damage) causing an injury is quite small.

Yeah, I think we can agree that it's a fishy situation at best. Still wouldn't be something I would want to get involved in without my insurance or real legal advice.

Hopefully, they are just trying to milk FlameOn's brother and will back down if they find out he wont just hand them some cash.

Edit: I'd just be very very careful dealing with them without going through insurance. It's going to depend on how much they are asking for as well and if they were just asking for you to replace the 20 dollar hubcap it would be an easy decision but the injury changes things. If it's a real injury, I'd be afraid not to go through a lawyer or insurance. If it's a fake injury I'd be afraid of handing them some money even with them signing some papers that a lawyer didn't draw up and having them coming back a week later saying how their grandma in the backseat is hurt now too...

Cuz · 10-03-2013, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puckluck2

That sounds like an idiotic program to me. It should be up to a doctor, not an insurance adjuster to determine if a low speed accident caused an injury or not.

In certain cases, yes it can be idiotic. When I lived in BC, I was rear ended and it caused me to have back pain that did require physio. In spite of having a legitimate injury backed up by reports from my physiotherapist and doctor, because my accident did not meet the requirements, I was denied my injury claim (the physio was covered, except for a $15 fee per appointment). However, I do agree with the program because it ultimately prevents people from defrauding the insurance system.

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cuz

In certain cases, yes it can be idiotic. When I lived in BC, I was rear ended and it caused me to have back pain that did require physio. In spite of having a legitimate injury backed up by reports from my physiotherapist and doctor, because my accident did not meet the requirements, I was denied my injury claim (the physio was covered, except for a $15 fee per appointment). However, I do agree with the program because it ultimately prevents people from defrauding the insurance system.

I am kind of bitter because I was injured in an accident and basically got nothing for what I consider a pretty long lasting injury. They little money I got will not cover the pain medicine for the rest of my life let alone anything else.

While I am sure there are people who do scam it shouldn't mean that innocent people who are actually injured eat the short end of the stick. My injury was considered "soft tissue" at the time but I have developed osteoarthritis in my wrist over the years because of that accident and I think that is worth a whole lot more than $4500 lousy dollars. It doesn't bother me a whole lot right now but I can just imagine how it is going to feel when I am 50.

puckluck2 · 10-03-2013, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

There has to be some kind of evidence that the impact caused injury. No damage to vehicles, so what do they have? Their word? What was the speed of the impact? 2? 10? 0? If it was me I would ask the people for doctors reports, estimates from shops about damage to their van etc.

Actually that is exactly what they do. The insurance would rather pay someone $5000 or whatever the limit is now than to fight it out in court.

Jacks · 10-04-2013, 12:05 AM

I'd talk to a lawyer and make sure that if you give them anything that they sign something absolving you of anything in the future, otherwise take it to insurance. Never admit guilt, some people are legitimately hurt but plenty are scammers. I've watched someone get bumped by a vehicle, they were fine but after talking to their friends for about 30 seconds they dropped to the ground like they were shot claiming an injury. An ambulance was called and the paramedic was rolling his eyes.

Slava · 10-04-2013, 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by puckluck2

That sounds like an idiotic program to me. It should be up to a doctor, not an insurance adjuster to determine if a low speed accident caused an injury or not.

A doctor as in a chiropractor/massage therapist/physiotherapist/etc. who has a bias of compensation? A family doctor who will record that the person presents with back/neck pain and refers them for some physio/chirp/massage? What can possibly go wrong...

Northendzone · 10-04-2013, 07:20 AM

you might want to check with the insurance company involved, but i beleive that you can file the claim and let it run through the insurance company, and then repay the insurance company.

i would not meet this guy somewhere and pay cash to him.

I'd sure like to know how a low speed accident causes a vehicle to lose a hub cap but yer causes no visible damage....not to mention if the driver is tooling around town with his brake light on?

How do you really know if his wife sleeping issues really related tot eh accident?

DuffMan · 10-04-2013, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Everything seems normal afterwards, driver of the van and his wife get out and are fine. There is no damage to either vehicles, no paint scratches, no bumper dents or deformation, nothing. We took pictures of the impact area and bumpers on both vehicles exchanged phone number and insurance (in case anything came up) and left. Fast forward two weeks the van owner comes back and calls us and complains to us now that his wife hasn't been able to sleep since the accident, the hubcap on his one of his wheels has fallen off and his brake warning light has since come on since the accident. These claims seem very suspicious to us considering they came so long after the accident and don't at all seem to be anything that's related to the very slow speed rear end that my brother got in.

!

This is what I'd be worried about. I have a friend who had a brief altercation with a guy on a motorcycle, and he ended up tapping him in the helmut and told him to move.

FF 2 years, and the guy sues for everything, neck pain, back pain. can't work, cant sleep, has ED, loss of enjoyment of life due to ED, wife has loss of enjoyment of life due to his ED, she gets depressed, can't work etc etc. Basically they had no jobs before the accident and looked at him as a lottery win, plus to be declared unable to work and get on workers comp. for the rest of their lives.

My friend fought it for about 10 years, paid uselsss lawyers, 10 of 1000's of dollars for nothing. Eventually his lawyer retired and he was about to start it all over again. He eventually paid the people 50k which was what they sued for to begin with.

It sounds like these people might be the same kind of losers, and I'd bet she's already been to the doctor to start documenting her woes since the accident.