Big Red Bus rear-ended in Sheffield

[george mills]

 --- Phil Payne <quattro at isham-research.com> wrote: >

>> But it also implies poverty, and that's my problem.
>> I have to recover
>> my uninsured loss - my own policy requires I pay the
>> first n00 of any
>> claim, my fault or not.  She didn't look as if she
>> had two pennies to
>> jingle in her pocket.

>don't think it will be a problem....as long as she has
>3rd party insurance her company will pick up the bill
>so it's them you chase not her

>Glad to hear it's slight damage and more importantly
>all concerned walked away

>Remember the going rate for whiplash is about 3k so
>check your neck for aches and pains

>Mike

Yes, it is important that all walked away. The rest is just stuff you
have to do. Your last sentence, Mike, is basically admitting to fraud
if indeed you didn't have an acceleration/deceleration injury, ie.
your head snaps back and then goes forward in recoil (so-called
whiplash injury). Given the robust head restraints on Audis this would
be a no brainer if set up properly. The insurance biz in Canada is
trying to get a 'no fault' clause into play. There are a few provinces
that are now using this scheme. Basically everything stays the same,
ie. the insurance company for the person at fault in a given accident
still has to pay the other party for expences incurred to repair car
and any proven physical damage to the beings in the car. The insurance
premium of the person at fault goes up as usual as it should be.
However, this type of insurance does not allow for "pain and
suffering" which many people seem to think is "Ah...time to pay off
the mortgage." It's too easy to fake this, and given the moral
attitudes of some folk in today's world, the rest of us are paying
through the nose to keep them paid as they remain "disabled." I do
some of this insurance work and I must say I get pretty disgusted.
So...I guess that's why I'm standing on the soap box, eh? :)

Geo