Hot Topics | |
---|---|
wagyl wrote:chibaka wrote:wagyl wrote:Yep. it costs them more in legal fees to hold out for 0% than it does to cave in for 10% (especially if most of the 10% cost of repairing her car is covered by your excess)
What legal fees would they be? Endless unnecessary meetings with tooth sucking and green tea?
I am so confused by you Chibaka. You seem to think that you live in a universe where you can always get your way by negotiation between the parties. Do you always get your way?
Yokohammer wrote:Re: the insurance fault sharing game.
I'm not 100% sure on this (see what I did there?), but even if you accept only 10% fault I think your insurance premiums go up and you end up paying a substantial amount before your premiums go back down to wherever they were previously, and then you lose a year or more until your premiums drop to the level they would have been had they not gone up. This was not the case a few years ago, but now your premiums go up even if your car is damaged by a rock kicked up by another car, for example, or if your car is stolen.
~ Tapatalking ~
chibaka wrote:I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.
wagyl wrote:For future accidents, if you are firm in your goal to hold out for 0% liability, you are not in that case using your insurance at all, and there is no need to involve your insurance company in the transaction. You are, however, on your own in dealing with her insurance company, in that case. Also, if you are in fact later found to be partially responsible, there is the chance that by not involving your insurance company from the start, you have voided your insurance, and you will be liable to pay the 10% or whatever yourself from your own pocket.
wagyl wrote:chibaka wrote:I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.
The answer to this has already been posted:wagyl wrote:For future accidents, if you are firm in your goal to hold out for 0% liability, you are not in that case using your insurance at all, and there is no need to involve your insurance company in the transaction. You are, however, on your own in dealing with her insurance company, in that case. Also, if you are in fact later found to be partially responsible, there is the chance that by not involving your insurance company from the start, you have voided your insurance, and you will be liable to pay the 10% or whatever yourself from your own pocket.
chibaka wrote:Yes that*s what I understand. Which pisses me off as I have 2 policies with them. As far as I am aware, if my insurance pays out, any percentage, my premiums will increase next year, actually they told me I*d lose 3 years rating. If I pay the x% damage I won*t suffer next year, but who knows, TIJ.
So, that*s why I want them to support me, which they said they would do, but not to 0% liability. That*s what I assumed I*d paid for, live and learn.
*** excuse the asterisks, old laptop has wrong keyboard setting.....
chibaka wrote:Don*t be, I do not always get my way, far from it, but when I believe in something I will make a stand, not roll over. The simple fact is I did nothing to cause the accident, there was nothing I could do to avoid it, apart from staying home that is. I see no reason, using my logic or anyone else*s, why I should pay for damage to my car AND HERS, or lose my insurance rating next year and get increased premiums.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:
Anyway, I would probably take your stance in this situation because it doesn't take much effort or cost anything to be stubborn but stop acting so naive.
chibaka wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:
Anyway, I would probably take your stance in this situation because it doesn't take much effort or cost anything to be stubborn but stop acting so naive.
Yes, a flaw on my part I know, assuming the best in people and ending up getting fucked. Not the first time....
chibaka wrote:wagyl wrote:chibaka wrote:I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.
The answer to this has already been posted:wagyl wrote:For future accidents, if you are firm in your goal to hold out for 0% liability, you are not in that case using your insurance at all, and there is no need to involve your insurance company in the transaction. You are, however, on your own in dealing with her insurance company, in that case. Also, if you are in fact later found to be partially responsible, there is the chance that by not involving your insurance company from the start, you have voided your insurance, and you will be liable to pay the 10% or whatever yourself from your own pocket.
Doesn't answer my question. You just state for future accidents if I am firm about it. I'm asking you, if someone hits you and there was no way on earth you could avoid it, would you roll over like a pussy or try, even if futile, to support your case?
For information if it happens again, I know exactly what I'll do. Then of course if I follow the natives lead, you will question my morality.
wagyl wrote:
Another anecdote: I was the passenger in a friend's car which was t-boned in the front passenger door at a stop sign (the other driver did not stop at the stop sign). Both vehicles were moving at the time of the accident, the car I was in was further into the intersection than the other one. The driver of the car I was in did hold out and did manage to get a 0% liability through negotiation between the insurance companies. But in that case, the insurance company was prepared to do that, it appears that yours is not. I don't know if it had an influence or not, but his insurance company and the insurance company of the other driver was in the process of merging at the time.
Wasn't it you who had some questions some years back about the number of accidents you can have in a year before things get messy with insurance? Maybe I am thinking of a different poster, but I thought you already had broad experience in the motor vehicle accident insurance field here.
wagyl wrote:Indeed: you have been told of this 0-100 liability split before. It does however require that the insurance company agree to it. Other potential factors were the amount of damage to the two cars (i.e. whether his insurance company saved a lot of money by not paying even 10% of the damage of her car, and whether that saving was worth going to the extra negotiation effort) and also I am not sure whether the other driver ended up facing criminal charges or not.
Yokohammer wrote:Wage Slave wrote:... On the other hand, drinking isn't an option but I've more or less completely given that up. Just got bored with it unfortunately.
Completely given up here. Not a drop in 5 years and don't miss it.
But I wouldn't call it "unfortunate." I prefer to think of it as "growing up."
wagyl wrote:in a system where you assign all decision making power about the claim to the insurance company (and that system is global, not just in Japan) you are in a position of extreme weakness.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:chibaka wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:
Anyway, I would probably take your stance in this situation because it doesn't take much effort or cost anything to be stubborn but stop acting so naive.
Yes, a flaw on my part I know, assuming the best in people and ending up getting fucked. Not the first time....
So you never heard that it's all but impossible to get 0% fault in a car accident in Japan before this or that you should never accept blame in a car accident anywhere!?
chibaka wrote:The irony is a young dude with tattoos on his knuckles did the right thing, little old lady on the other hand
chibaka wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:chibaka wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:
Anyway, I would probably take your stance in this situation because it doesn't take much effort or cost anything to be stubborn but stop acting so naive.
Yes, a flaw on my part I know, assuming the best in people and ending up getting fucked. Not the first time....
So you never heard that it's all but impossible to get 0% fault in a car accident in Japan before this or that you should never accept blame in a car accident anywhere!?
Actually there are 2 anecdotes in this thread about getting 0%, now compare the population of FG with that of Japan, that's pretty good odds.
Would be nice to make it 3, not holding my breath though.
Wage Slave wrote:Good grief. Give the guy a break - All he's trying to do is see if he can hold out for a better deal. In the circumstances I would do and do do the same.
Wage Slave wrote:Good grief. Give the guy a break - All he's trying to do is see if he can hold out for a better deal. In the circumstances I would do and do do the same.
kurogane wrote:Wage Slave wrote:Good grief. Give the guy a break - All he's trying to do is see if he can hold out for a better deal. In the circumstances I would do and do do the same.
Maybe he is being stubborn, but even having to consider paying up for being rammed is pretty fucked up. I'd be roiling. Even allowing that the skivey old cunt is not doing anything many wouldn't his insurance company is appalling.
wagyl wrote:Most people will not be taking a car to a convenience store. As for me, convenience stores are for when other stores are not convenient, that is, for after other shops are closed. They are rarely my first port of call, and especially so if I am in a car. You are probably better off at a normal supermarket. More parking spaces, fewer yankiis, more bored housewives. And the prices will be better and the range of goods wider.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:wagyl wrote:Most people will not be taking a car to a convenience store. As for me, convenience stores are for when other stores are not convenient, that is, for after other shops are closed. They are rarely my first port of call, and especially so if I am in a car. You are probably better off at a normal supermarket. More parking spaces, fewer yankiis, more bored housewives. And the prices will be better and the range of goods wider.
Plenty of people who live in places that don't have multiple convenience stores within 500 meters in any direction arrive by car. As a matter of fact last time I visited a buddy of mine who lives in the 'burbs I was pretty surprised by just how much foot and vehicle traffic the conbini near his house was getting when I stopped off to get a six pack for his BBQ. I've never seen one that crowded in central Tokyo except on 3-11.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests