Rear ended :(

I must admit i used to think like Fox, but now sadly i am of the opinion that insurance co's would not suddenly put everyones policy down if no one claimed, so **** it, if you get injured get a claim in.

And take the free hire car, because whatever it is, it will be new with 4 decent tyres and provide transport.

The insurance industry in this country is beyond help in my opinion.
 
[TW]Fox;16790206 said:
The problem with 'whiplash' is it isn't easy to prove it exists. All you really have to go on is the persons word. I could walk into A&E now, claim I've just had an accident and I have whiplash, and they couldnt prove I didnt!
Click to expand...

this is half the problem

theres no way to physically see the muscle soreness caused by whiplash. It wont show up on an x-ray or MRI etc..

as a result everybody who is pranged from behind claims whiplash, injury or not.
 
[TW]Fox;16790261 said:
It's just the whole fact its the first thing everyone thinks of that just winds me up. Within hours of the accident happening, before he had any idea how it would affect him in the future, he's already on about 'whippy compo' :(
Click to expand...

That I do agree with, in general :(
 
Reminds me of an accident one of our work vans was in. Two young blokes and an old fella. Massive strong van and it got rear ended by a Clio. Barely a dent. Both young blokes in hospital and 4 weeks off from work with pending claims. The old fella shook his head and got on with the day's work.
 
[TW]Fox;16789210 said:
That is entirely the point in outfits like Helphire. They handle everything for you.

Your insurer will either:

a) Simply hand it over to a helphire style outfit anyway
b) Treat you like a fault claim - give you a 1 litre Polo, spend ages faffing about before eventually sending you to a recommended repairer, removing your NCB and THEN deciding to reclaim from the third party.

Why take the risk?
Click to expand...
Because you have been involved in an accident (your fault or not)
the other persons insurer will want your details, so your insurer will soon find out anyway.
 
eatcustard said:
Because you have been involved in an accident (your fault or not)
the other persons insurer will want your details, so your insurer will soon find out anyway.
Click to expand...

Please stop confusing the issue. You will notice I expalined he must inform his insurer but thats all he should do. Simply informing the insurer the accident has taken place is not the same as letting them handle it for you!
 
Dogbreath said:
It's "compensation" only in name. No amount of money could compensate for a debilitating injury that could last the rest of your life. Likewise, how does money "compensate" (i.e. offset, balance out) for a slightly achey neck for a few weeks? May be a fat wallet has some kind of pain relieving effect hitherto unknown to science.
Click to expand...

It doesn't, plain and simple. It's a money making scam everyone's try and get into since everyone else is doing it. Twice I've had whiplash from being rear ended. I didn't ask for money just for the sake of it. I took it easy a few days and the pain dissapeared. I didn't need to 'claim' for it to go away.
 
regulus said:
Twice I've had whiplash from being rear ended. I didn't ask for money just for the sake of it. I took it easy a few days and the pain dissapeared. I didn't need to 'claim' for it to go away.
Click to expand...

Haha, well you obviously didn't have whiplash did you. You had a sore neck.
I've been suffering from the pain on 1 side of my neck for a month now, not for just a few days.

I drive for a living and at the moment driving for 20 - 30min is uncomfortable - pain in my neck, shoulder and back.
Spending all day at work, like I did after the accident made it nearly impossible to fall asleep due to the pain.
Which has meant I haven't been able to go to work for an entire month - fortunatly I still live at home otherwise I have no idea how i'd manage with bills.
 
Last edited:
Fox I don't get it, you're complaining about 'whippy compo' and the effect on insurance premiums, then go ahead and recommend Helphire, who along with other accident management companies charge an absolute fortune for their 'services', and you're also a strong advocate of temporary cars being of the same standard as the damaged car.

The argument that the 3rd party should pay extra so you don't suffer a loss of 'enjoyment' of your nice car in the intervening period is much the same as the money paid to compensate for one's loss of enjoyment of a pain-free life - albeit no money will make you better but it often comes in useful when people are suffering.

Yes people manage, but as has been mentioned, it often affects sleep, comfort at work, and just makes life a lot harder - with the important part being through no fault of their own. Also I would guarantee that in a large number of cases, people would trade their 'whippy' compo for not having suffered the injury in the first place without hesitation.

And also, a lot of it is principle - the originating tort law principle that if someone causes you injury through their negligence then they should be held responsible for their actions. The payment of a sum of money is a reflection of that principle in the only way possible when dealing with injuries to the person as of course no amount of money will stop the pain and suffering the injured party experiences.
 
Last edited:
It's not the same thing at all. I beleive that in the event of a non fault accident, you should not be excessively disadvantaged as a result of somebody elses negligence.

This means you should get:

a) A car similar to yours to use whilst yours is repaired
b) Access to medical assistance if required
c) Financial recompense for any out of pocket expenses including loss of earnings

I do not beleive in financial compensation unless it's for something very specific, ie you are seriously injured in a life changing way.

You do not receive financial compensation for the loss of your car - you are simply provided with another. It is equivilent to being offered medical care for your 'whiplash'.
 
Helphire will give him a car similar to his ST, which he pays to run increased purchase, insurance, tax etc over a lower model of car.

The insurance company will give him something cheap and crap because it saves them money.

He has chosen to run this car and why should he be removed of this choice through no fault of his own.
 
[TW said:
Fox]It's not the same thing at all. I beleive that in the event of a non fault accident, you should not be excessively disadvantaged as a result of somebody elses negligence.
Click to expand...
That's the crux of it really - unfortunately there is no way to 'replace' the disadvantaged health and enjoyment of their life that the third party has caused through their negligence alone and unfortunately even with today's technology no amount of medical care will do that, the medical care just tries to mitigate the suffering, much like giving someone a Nissan Micra mitigates the fact they can't travel around but doesn't replace the enjoyment they derive from their more expensive, nicer car. (apologies to any Nissan Micra drivers btw lol)

In a strange way, I have no doubt that if there was an expensive means of restoring someone's health rapidly to the prior state you'd be wholly in favour of it - the current system of damages simply acknowledges that unfortunately such a situation does not exist and the only realistic alternative is to place a 'reasonable' monetary amount on the 'suffering' caused as a token of compensation and acknowledgement of the injured parties loss of full enjoyment of their life during the injured period.
 
I guess the financial relief can pay for physio treatment or as some type of "treat" to improve the situation. However I do agree with the disdain people have towards blame/claim culture it is quite sickening. However if the OP feels that he's been injured enough to warrant some financial relief then so be it, let the law be his discretion/judge & jury.

Whilst I promised myself never to make a claim, when I t-boned a car that pulled out in front of me, other than bruises I was pretty much ok, but the bike was a write off, and I was offered injury compensation without even asking for it. I have to say I took it as it was nice to receive a bit of cash for a) losing my bike which upset me a lot b) helped pay for some of the physio I had to have c) meant I could save towards a bike.
 
[TW]Fox;16787785 said:
I'm not sure I understand what the money is going to do for you. Will it make the ibruprofen work any better? Will it make the pain go away?

If it causes you loss of earnings then I completely agree, you should be paid the earnings lost without a doubt. But beyond that? Sometimes life hurts.

You don't get 'compensation' for having your car damaged, so why should you get 'compensation' for being caused a bit of pain that doesn't stop you working?

I honestly think we need to sort this sort of rubbish out. If you suffer 'whiplash' the third party insurer should pay for private medical treatment for you, and your loss of earnings, and not a penny more.

However much you care to admit it I bet the cash signs started flashing in your mind the second you felt the first twinge.
Click to expand...

I dont thing you get it, paying out on injury claims is the cheap option - the bill for my mums simple bit of whiplash many years ago is probably in the hundreds of thousands by now - if insurers where paying for the long term issues due to these minor accidents and claims you can bet insurance would be vastly more.

A few grand early doors and you have closed the case and not had to pain for any treatment down the line as it was 'settled' all those years ago.

Of course people will take the michael with the claims but then that happens in any walk of life so its hardly something to be surprised about.
 
Freefaller said:
I guess the financial relief can pay for physio treatment or as some type of "treat" to improve the situation. However I do agree with the disdain people have towards blame/claim culture it is quite sickening. However if the OP feels that he's been injured enough to warrant some financial relief then so be it, let the law be his discretion/judge & jury.

Whilst I promised myself never to make a claim, when I t-boned a car that pulled out in front of me, other than bruises I was pretty much ok, but the bike was a write off, and I was offered injury compensation without even asking for it. I have to say I took it as it was nice to receive a bit of cash for a) losing my bike which upset me a lot b) helped pay for some of the physio I had to have c) meant I could save towards a bike.
Click to expand...


Which is the right way to look at it.

If i thought for one second that if in a hypothetical world Admiral insurance had no injury claims one year they would say "hello customers all premiums are now down 10%" , i would be all against claims for minor injury.

But that would not happen, they would just be happy with the increased profit.

This country has gone too far down the compensation for everything road now to turn back, so if you have an injury i cant see any point in disadvantaging yourself by not claiming in the current insurance climate.
 
Is there any thread where a crash has happened and it doesnt turn into a wiplash compensation debate?!

Unlucky dude, hope it all gets sorted soon! At least it seems like a simple case... him in the wrong and his insurers paying out :)
 
I find it hard to believe people are refusing to see that whilst £3k or so might not make whiplash go away, the financial relief it would provide would go some what to making up for the fact you have had it inflicted upon you, even to a house bound stay at home mum with no loss of earnings to demonstrate.
 
I've already demonstrated that I have been rear-ended twice before, and not even claimed for the (superficial) damages to my car/trailer, let alone for any personal injury - so I am not your typical claimee looking to lie for a relatively small amount of cash. I can understand why some people are upset with those taking this **** out of the system, however it is never possible to tell with absolute certainty.

Yes, as it has already been stated - medical care for a lot of issues is no good - ie. there is nothing that can be done for whiplash other than a bit of physio, which you'd get under the NHS anyway if your GP deems it necessary. The point is, that if you've been forced to suffer through no fault of your own, the person at fault or their insurance company can't make it go away, so they must compensate with another means - money makes the world go around, and if you can replace your suffering with a bit of ease elsewhere, this helps.

If I was given a choice of this happening and even £10k of compo, or the choice of it never happening, I'd take the latter - no worries with baby, no sore neck and sleeplessness for what is likely to be weeks or even months, no aches, no insurance to sort out, no faffing about with bodyshops, and no odd coloured bumper afterwards.
 
Last edited:
It's the fact that you already know its time for some whippy compo just 6 hours after the crash.

I doubt people would be so against it if this was a week later.

sleeplessness for what is likely to be weeks or even months
Click to expand...

See what I mean? None of this has happened yet but you are going on about at as if its a certainty.... admit it, you thought 'awesome, whippy compo!' the second you hurt the crunch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom