Hit by a car

The only winners are the insurance companies in my experience.

 

If you put a mirror up round here, the refuse collectors will push a wheelie bin into it and smash it.

 

That's because most claimants blindly accept the first thing the insurers say. The following is not just speculation, this is based on more than 10 years in the insurance industry, writing the software that insurers use.

Inside the insurance company, there are multiple 'layers' of people you can encounter. When you make a claim you will encounter the first layer. Barely trained claims handlers that do nothing more than take some basic details from you and record them in their claims system. At this point some software will apply various predefined rules, and come up with either a recommendation to make an offer, a recommendation to reject, or a recommendation to request further details (I'm oversimplifying, but that's generally it). A team of junior claims adjusters will work through the lists of what the software has recommended, cast a casual eye over each case, and choose to either accept what the software suggests (based on its predefined rules), or do something else. If they accept, then it goes into the system, the system will automatically print the letter telling the claimant what's happened (or add the case to a list for the call centre staff to call the claimant), and then the majority of claimants will accept this first decision, then its a case of settling up and case closed. If the claimant does not accept, then the fact that the claimant did not accept is recorded, and the system uses that new information to re-evaluate the case based on its predefined rules.

So that's the general gist of it (oversimplified of course). So what are these predefined rules? That various between insurance companies and even policies. But generally, based on statistics from previous claims, there are is a banding of offer value based on the stage of the offer and the likelihood of it being accepted. The offer value at each stage is some fraction of the estimated amount they'd have to pay out if the case went to court and the court ruled in the claimant's favour. Again, oversimplifying: Lets say you make a claim for £1000. Keeping it extra simple, lets say it meets all the criteria to guarantee that some offer will be made. So you make the claim for £1000. The computer applies its predefined rules and bandings, and it might recommend to the claims adjuster that they make an offer of £100, because, according to its stats (lets say) 90% of claimants accept the first offer. The system will have set a 'reserve' for the full £1000, meaning that £1000 has now been set aside by the insurance company in case they have to pay the full amount (again, oversimplifying, because in reality they would also set a reserve for estimated legals costs and various other bits). That means that if you are one of the 90% that accepts the first offer, you'll get £100, the insurers get to reallocate £900 (£1000 reserve minus £100 payout) which is good for the underwriter's reserve fund and ultimately their profit. Now lets say you don't accept it. Now the system has to move you up to the next banding. A slightly more well trained claims adjuster will pick up the case at this point, but the software will still make the recommendation to them. Some predefined rules will say that of those that get to the second offer, only 60% accept, and the only place after that is the court, which is costly. The goal then is to try to increase the ratio of people that accept the second offer, while minimising the offer value. Clever software does this based on calculations based on stats, but the claims adjuster (as the job title suggests) has the ability to adjust the figures based on their discretion, having spoken to you and gauged your tone. They can still only make an offer within a range defined by the software, or they can refer the case to someone with more authority to overrule the computer, as indeed they will have to do if you stick to your guns and threaten to let it go to court.

The insurance companies, like any of the Guild Of Thieves members, are driven solely to maximise the amount of money they can take off you and keep, so they don't like paying out. They have become very specialised in the art of milking people and have a pretty good understanding of human nature. Their data allows them to pit cold logic against the erratic and irrational thinking of someone who by the the very nature of situations that result in a claim, may not be thinking clearly. Its an unfair fight, and its the only reason the insurers always win.

 

Whilst you're at the bike shop get some decent brake blocks for the front wheel. Before fitting the wheel clean the brake contact area up with a spirit based cleaner or meths. Basically you are aiming to be able to do an "endo" if needs be.

 

@clueless1

I wasn't very clear in what I meant when I said they are the winners. I was just off to work, so had to be quick.
I can see what you are saying totally. The point I was trying to make was the same as yours, that many people just accept an offer without fighting.
Is that me?? Not a chance!
Let me explain further.....
When I hit a bus many years ago, the driver said it was his fault and told me to park up. We both parked our vehicles, and then he said it was my fault.
Like in Janes case, the angle of damage was proof enough for me to be confident of a win.
To cut a long story short, the insurance company said 80% his fault, 20% mine. I said thats rubbish, and it just means we both lose our no claims. I said it couldn't be my fault because I had the right of way (a dual carriageway). He said it was a decision from the claims manager and he has never known him to be wrong.
I replied that he must be in this case, and I am taking this one to court!
They phoned back after 10 minutes, and said '100% his fault'.
I said 'So this is the one time he has been wrong then?' . He said 'He is usually right' Yeah.......'RIGHT'
I just thought to myself that both companies would have been quids in if I had accepted. I won despite the fact that the bus driver had a 'witness'!! I asked him what he had seen? He said 'the bus was pulling out of the bus stop layby and I had come down the road and hit him. Which was pretty much true. I said 'that suits me just fine'. The thing he didn't say , was that the bus (doing a coach service), was actually dropping off in the wrong drop off point, and was in fact doing a U-Turn!!!

 

I wish I could, but the mirror would be smashed that same day I expect. Its a small but busy estate, and it just wouldn't work. I also get people parking opposite the drive, but not really a problem now there is just my car on it (drive is 2 cars wide).
I have seen those mirrors used, but mainly in the countryside/little villages in the sticks.

 

Unfortunately, our LPA is granting PP for where that is not possible, I'll take a pic and post tomorrow, as I've been sitting indoors all day waiting to receive an elderly disabled neighbour's delivery.

 

I think from the, "bike on the pavement point of view," is that its likely to be travelling faster than your average pedestrian, unless of course the cyclist has dismounted and is pushing the bike.
We have lots of crazy bike tracks around here, some where they are shared space with pedestrians, but there are always signs to that effect, equally when that ends, as it often does, there are signs saying"cyclists dismount".
Of course none of them do, but that dont make it right.

Arn't those wide angled mirrors made of plastic?

There are a few road junctions I can think of where a mirror would come in handy, but the local authorities dont fit them, in many cases its a matter of edging out until you can actually see, particularly with the roads being littered with abandoned/parked cars.

 

It's very common here to have mirrors to see when exiting a driveway or lane ... at the expense of the person wanting to do so, but it is cheap enough if one wants to see where you are going or what may be going to hit you ...

 

Jane, I hope you feel better now.

Regardless of who was at fault I would guess that the amount which could be claimed by either party is unlikely to be more than their excess and almost certainly would hit their next premium.

Unless you exchanged details at the time Jane ,whereas you do know where the driver was at the time and assuming that he lives there, you have a way of identifying him, he does not have your details and therefore doesn't have a way of contacting or identifying you. On that basis I think you can assume he won't be taking this further either.

Usually following any incident, especially resulting in either injury or damage, it's human nature to want to absolve ourselves and so blame the other party but most accidents are just that; a combination of two events which could have been avoided. The positive consequence is that most people adjust their behaviour to avoid a repeat in future. The negative consequence is when the need to blame is pursued and no-one learns anything.

Best wishes, I think for your own wellbeing you've made the right decision to learn and move on.