Japanese traffic signals and other driving fun

[Yokohammer]

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]

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?

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. Maybe you can explain why you would accept that? I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.

I actually hoped, in vain it seems, that my insurance company would support me as a customer, a 2 policy customer I might add. Even today after nearly 2 months, I find no one can give me an answer. 2 months for a decision that a UK insurance company could make in 2 days, that I am sure.

I have however learned a lot in the process, the various methods the natives employ to cut their losses, or better. Eye opening...

[chibaka]

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 ~

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.....

[wagyl]

I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.

The answer to this has already been posted:

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]

I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.

The answer to this has already been posted:

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.

[Yokohammer]

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.....

Yep, and that's why I totally get where you're coming from on this. There is considerably more than the 10% at stake. The only people who benefit are both insurance companies who get to jack up the premiums for both parties, thus getting extra money for several years after the event.


~ Tapatalking ~

[Samurai_Jerk]

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.

I get where you're coming from too, dude. However, I still don't understand why you seem so surprised by all of this. The no-100%-fault-in-car-accidents truism about Japan is one of the first ones I learned here. As for the logic, I've already given you an explanation

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]

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....

[Samurai_Jerk]

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!?

[wagyl]

I*d be interested to hear what you would do if it happens to you.

The answer to this has already been posted:

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.

Ahh, so your question is if I had already involved my insurance company in the matter, and despite giving them my version of the facts they went with the standard practice of "if the engine is running then the minimum you will be liable is 10%" and I was hoping for 0%. In that case (i.e. in your case), if you want to enforce your insurance company to only accept a 0-100 liability split, I am not even sure if you have the right to question that under your contract (I suspect that by contacting your insurance company you in effect hand over all decisions to the company, in return for getting repairs done), but even if you did have that right, the only way to enforce that would be by lawyering up and suing your insurance company. Which will cost you more than the increase in premiums over the next few years. And might not be successful. I would make the decision that it was riskier to fight and more effort, and say very rude words (and maybe vent online) but I would take no further action. Not because I am a doormat, but because I choose my battles and recognise when effort will not be rewarded. Pragmatism.

So in brief: if futile, I roll over. Like a lion, which might be a big pussy, but one which wins most of the battles it chooses to participate in. Unless in involves a dentist from Minnesota.

There is no shame in walking away from a pretty certain failure, especially if futile. If you think that is being a pussy, you are setting yourself up for constant disappointment in life. You might even say that the West refused to be a pussy and involved itself in military action in Afghanistan, even if futile. Thirteen years and countless amputees and dead servicemen in their prime later, are you sure that you really want to look at everything as "if you don't stand up to the line to get a punch in the nose even if your position is futile you are a damn pussy!"

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.

Edit: I was mistaking you with Canman on the number of claims before insurance gets difficult issue. But I did see some ancient posts involving you and the 10% liability issue from your previous accident.

[chibaka]

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.

There you go, 100 ~ 0% is in fact possible, and it's by no means automatic that both parties share, although by far the most common outcome.

That wasn't me, I had questions regarding lawyering up over a bike crash. I was T-boned, guy didn't stop at a stop sign. Still in progress actually and in that case he apologized, put his hands up and, so far at least, his insurance has covered everything.
The irony is a young dude with tattoos on his knuckles did the right thing, little old lady on the other hand..... yeah, naive I know.
That one the police had me at 10%, his insurance said different.

[wagyl]

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.

[chibaka]

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.

Like I said, not automatic, however apportioning blame based on the cost of the repairs is odd... oh hang on.
The criminal charge thing sounds plausible, I was actually asked how severely he should be punished, think I mentioned a vice and sensitive parts of anatomy but never heard the outcome

As for this one, her repairs are far less than mine, what difference that makes i don't know.

[wagyl]

The cost of repairs is a factor because it is a fight over whether your insurance company pays 10% of a, say, 150,000 Yen bill or 0% of it.
In other words, how hard do they fight, how much do they spend, to avoid paying 15,000 Yen?
Especially so if you are liable to pay the first 50,000 of any claim.

It is galling to you that they don't seem to have it in their heart to spend any small amount to avoid that payment to her, but 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. You are also in a position of strength: you get repairs to your car without having to browbeat her insurance company, who will listen to you even less than your own will.

You should also be aware that this 10% liability tradition has not appeared in a vacuum: it is based on a history of past court decisions where the court has found that if you are in a state where you are/can be mobile, you might have anticipated danger and moved to avoid it. If that sounds ludicrous (and in many cases it is) then the solution is to get your wife to encourage the Diet to legislate. Good luck!

[Russell]

... 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."

Same here. My body can't process alcohol anymore. Probably has something to do with aging.

But I call it unfortunate, since wine combines so well with Mediterranean food.

Beer can be replaced by the non-alcoholic version, but not as good, though.

[Wage Slave]

Agreed. I feel it unfortunate because I used to really enjoy boozy meals and hanging around in bars but it just isn't so much fun any more and yes of course physically it is far harder.

Interestingly this time back in London I found that for the first time I got the point of and enjoyed a single glass of wine or a beer with dinner. Hope yet perhaps.

[matsuki]

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.

The system is global but as you say, the predetermined 10% fault is more of an in Japan thing.

The few fender benders I was involved in stateside, there wasn't a negotiation of fault between insurance companies, it was basically a determination of fault by YOUR insurance company based on the police report and interviews with the involved parties. (They're the ones responsible for making sure you get paid and deciding if your rates need to be raised or not) From what I understand, if there's a dispute between insurance companies on fault %, that's their battle to fight and doesn't affect your rates. (and why should it? If your insurance backs you and theirs is just being difficult or dragging their feet, that's not exactly the best representation of your safe driving...which is what they are supposed to be basing your rates on) You also have to consider situations where the asshole at fault doesn't have insurance, money, let alone a license...so even if they are 100% at fault, your insurance is going to be stuck covering your ass. Should you be penalized for their lack of driving prowess and insurance?

But then again, TIJ, where you can go to jail for not being able to defy physics and avoid hitting a suicidal idiot with your car....yet I've never seen a train operator be similarly charged for turning a jumper to mush. As you say, the legislation needs to change and I think if it was proposed, most drivers here would support it...but the only chance of it getting brought to the forefront is if some jiji politician with enough genki gets screwed by the current situation and decides it's worth his time.

[chibaka]

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.

[Samurai_Jerk]

The irony is a young dude with tattoos on his knuckles did the right thing, little old lady on the other hand

No he did the stupid thing. The old lady is doing the right thing.

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.

You're not fucking getting my point, dude. I don't think anyone is saying you shouldn't try or that you're wrong in thinking it's reasonable to assign 100% blame in some cases. It's your childish attitude (or at least the childish way you're presenting it in writing) that's got some us wondering what your problem is.

[Wage Slave]

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.

[Samurai_Jerk]

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.

Me too but I wouldn't expect everyone to see the situation the same way I do or for the other party to roll over and take it anymore than I would.

[kurogane]

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.

[matsuki]

Maybe he should play by the local rules...start calling up her family, friends, and work and call her out

[chibaka]

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.

Simple fact is I'm actually doing nothing. 2 months have passed and except getting my car fixed, I know nothing else. Snippets of information only when WE contacted THEM. Of course the experts here say it's a forgone conclusion I will be fucked for 10% ~ 20%, if so why does it take so long? Honestly anyone here would be able to make the decision in 20 minutes, it's not like anyone died.
On Tuesday her insurance asked me to fax (yes latest technology) a copy of my shaken sho. 2 months after the accident, 2 weeks after I got my car back. That was after I called HIM. Talk about Japanese efficiency.
I estimate the damage to 2 cars is only 40万円, not sure how much work they need to do clear that, although based on the driving I witness here daily, they probably have a backlog
When someone gets off their arse and proposes something, then maybe I will be stubborn, as apparently would others.

[matsuki]

How do you guys deal with conbini's during the lunch rush? On far too many occasions I've rolled into an conbini during lunch and have been confronted with the parking lot full of jackoffs who want to spend the entire break there, eating, smoke, doing whatever, in their car. Last week, after 10 mins, I just gave up and left. Sometimes, waiting isn't even an option as your car will be blocking the sidewalk/traffic. Happened again today, but this time I waited about 5 minutes, then decided to just park, blocking about 3 of them while I went in and made my purchases. Sure enough, during the oh so long 2 minutes I was in there, one of them decided he wanted to leave...I was expecting some crazy rolling r's and whatnot as he walked up to the entrance...but he just turned around when he saw I was just in and out. Obviously, this is eventually going to lead to confrontation but watchugonna do?

[wagyl]

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.

[Coligny]

Just go wearing this...

image.jpeg

Bonus point if you arrive in a Totoya Isis...

image.jpeg

I'm sure they are drinking pure bleach at the water cooler of their marketting dept...

The Totoya Platana is another pearl...
The platane is a tree found on the side of most french roads destined originally to provide shadows and seizures (due to the alternance light/shadow) to horse carriages users. It has been for decades the most efficient driver killer. Because, countryside road at 90kph speed limit+ rain+ tree trunks every few meters just next to the roadway=very violent death

[Samurai_Jerk]

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.

[matsuki]

Coligny, you're getting lazy...where is my terrorist soundtrack?

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.

There are other conbini and an actual supermarket on that commute but they are all on the opposite side of the street..usually a pain since there are so many idiots parked illegally, making a right will block traffic....and the store requires interaction with those idiot KBs....but point taken, once it fails to be convenient, why waste time and money. As of tomorrow, bored housewives here I come. (and probably better bento...though we'll see about that)

[Coligny]

Combinis are like highway stops for regular roads...
Where you park to take a break, a leak, a smoke and a coffee...
By definition if you shop at a combini (twice the price / half the size) you might not be used to the cheap places from the hood... Because you are not from the hood... So there's a good chance you came by car...
Locals going to combinis are a special breed, either on a different timezone or just going for tobacco.