I think Fox is more concerned as a motorist at the number of people who immediately jump on the 'whippy compo' bandwagon if their car is in a 5 mph car park prang to be fair.
car crash
- Thread starter maddog
- Start date
I think Fox is more concerned as a motorist at the number of people who immediately jump on the 'whippy compo' bandwagon if their car is in a 5 mph car park prang to be fair.
People don't think about the increase in their, and everybody elses, premiums due to such claims. All they see is pounds signs. (I was and still am referring to the false claimants....)
Even then, money won't fix his wrist and the NHS is still free as far as I'm aware, so no medical costs.
Loss of earnings. But apparently everyone on this forum knows for a fact that the OP won't suffer any of that whatsoever.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
I have been injured through no fault of my own, but thanks for the assumption I've not been.
It was a complete nightmare for several weeks and very annoying. I'm still here though, and a pile of whippy compo would have acheived nothing.
His own wife was driving and caused it! It wasn't as if some boy racer came out of nowhere and wrecklessly crashed into the innocent OP is it?
Despite the fact that he's stated quite clearly that he doesn't get paid for time off
To be fair I'm actually amazed you can even claim if you are in the car thats at fault. Makes life easier for the cash for crash brigade though, they just need to hire a 10 seater minibus and drive into a wall, no need to even involve a third party 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,870
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
What is the official OCUK line in an accident before making a claim I wonder?
Whiplash - No
Ligament damage - No
Broken bones - No
Broken Spine?
Amputation?
Coma?
Dead?
Brain injury?
I see things quite black and white in this.
Legitimate claim backed by expert medical report = evidence. I mean who is to argue with that?
p.s. The wife here may have no claims protection? In which case then what are people's thoughts then?
Whiplash - No
Ligament damage - No
Broken bones - No
Broken Spine?
Amputation?
Coma?
Dead?
Brain injury?
I see things quite black and white in this.
Legitimate claim backed by expert medical report = evidence. I mean who is to argue with that?
p.s. The wife here may have no claims protection? In which case then what are people's thoughts then?
Unless the injury is life changing or there is credible loss of earnings I don't think you should be able to claim cash for anything for an injury. Payment for phsyio or other treatment absolutely, reimbursement of proven loss of earnings, sure.
Compensation? No. It takes ages to arrive anyway usually long after you've recovered and it doesnt make the pain go away. And it doesn't cost the guilty party anything anyway - they've got a claim regardless of whether its a claim to fix 2 cars or a claim to fix two cars and some whippy compo.
All that happens in the long run is everyone else pays for it. And the proportion of claims for things like whiplash that are fabricated or exagerated must be huge. We joke with the name 'whippy compo' but the very fact there exists a slang nickname for it highlights what a routine thing it's become for many following even the slightest of parking taps.
Elsewhere in Europe they deal with this better than we do.
Compensation? No. It takes ages to arrive anyway usually long after you've recovered and it doesnt make the pain go away. And it doesn't cost the guilty party anything anyway - they've got a claim regardless of whether its a claim to fix 2 cars or a claim to fix two cars and some whippy compo.
All that happens in the long run is everyone else pays for it. And the proportion of claims for things like whiplash that are fabricated or exagerated must be huge. We joke with the name 'whippy compo' but the very fact there exists a slang nickname for it highlights what a routine thing it's become for many following even the slightest of parking taps.
Elsewhere in Europe they deal with this better than we do.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 7,774
- Location
- Under the Hill
[TW]Fox;19943702 said:
It's still not really relevant that it was his wife driving though.
Personally I'm a bit annoyed with the false claims and staged accidents driving up prices, however I have absolutely no issue with those genuinely injured receiving reparations for their injuries.
That her insurance will go up regardless
Protected NCB doesn't mean 'no cost increases if you have an accident'
This is the problem, this guy has a broken wrist FFS. Something that can be seen in black and white on an X-ray and something not even the "whippy compo m8" team on here can dispute being quite seriously debilitating.
I sprained my wrist really quite badly a few years ago - I could not carry out my normal duties in my job for over three weeks - I was fortunate enough that being the family business, I was paid regardless, but how many working class people can really afford to throw three weeks pay away on principle? You're probably looking at longer for a broken wrist, too.
What I would say to the OP is that as long as it isn't going to cause an argument between you and your Wife, then go for it - you need to cover your time off work and the law says you are entitled to compensation, so do it.
No, compensation won't turn back time, but it'll pay for decent medical treatment, it'll cover the money lost as a result of travelling to doctors, physio, hospital, loss of earnings and there will be a chunk left at the end of all that to compensate you for your suffering.
This is the point of compensation, because you can't just magic this stuff away there is compensation instead.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,870
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
[TW]Fox;19943702 said:
I fail to see the relevance of the person at fault.
People claim against their partner all the time, every day, it is as common as claiming against the other driver. There are no prejudice against it, none. Nobody will blink an eyelid.
You are not saying "sorry love, its your fault, give me £5k out of your pocket."
She makes a statement admit fault.
Insurance company admit liability. They make offer.
Negotiate.
Settle.
Done.
Nobody has to go to Court.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,870
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
[TW]Fox;19943720 said:To be fair I'm actually amazed you can even claim if you are in the car thats at fault. Makes life easier for the cash for crash brigade though, they just need to hire a 10 seater minibus and drive into a wall, no need to even involve a third party
It makes no difference if the injured party is INSIDE or OUTSIDE The car.
Come on Fox, you are always so logical...I am sure you see this!
Caused by his own wife. It just seems so ridiculous regardless of how legal it might be.