Non-fault accident but still "at-fault" - Page 3



Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Thread: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Brampton
    Posts
    947

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Forum Sponsor
    Found the link to your thread on the '401 got rear-ended'. Do you have any updates?

    I would even escalate this to the media, CBC Marketplace, CTV W5, try and reach out to journalists. If word got out that if you're found 0% at-fault for a collision, you can later be found 20% for 'Bodily Injury' claim that's absolutely absurd.

    The silver lining is that anyone who's involved in a collision where they're not at-fault, ALWAYS has to do the song-and-dance with the 'Letter of Experience'.

    Even drivers who have the temporary ADLS license suspension have to explain that it shouldn't affect their rates. Your rates should be not be affected because its <25%.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West Toronto, GL1500
    Posts
    4,997

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    We have a provincial election not too far away.

    Go to the all candidates meetings and point out the absurdities.

    The topic in the OP

    The limits one can claim

    The court restrictions

    The fact that you have to use up benefits you paid for before the injuring party's insurer has to pay out.

    No diminished value, a kick in the groin if you trade your car in while relatively new or have a market value clause in your lease.

    Make a list and demand answers.

    Unfortunately this isn't a one party screw-up

    The big pill to swallow is that the insurance company's profit track records are based on the hosing the "No-fault" system brought about. A change in the system means a decline in profits and they will fight that tooth and nail.

  3. #43
    slowbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,797

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by iFly55 View Post
    Found the link to your thread on the '401 got rear-ended'. Do you have any updates?
    The Obuds for my insurance had the other insurance co. lower it to 10%. I know it doesn't mean much but I'm hoping the lower % means the insurance companies properly don't rate me on it.

    I then asked them for a letter confirming this was as far as they would/could go in the matter incase I wanted to continue with the Obuds complaint.

    Quote Originally Posted by iFly55 View Post
    I would even escalate this to the media, CBC Marketplace, CTV W5, try and reach out to journalists. If word got out that if you're found 0% at-fault for a collision, you can later be found 20% for 'Bodily Injury' claim that's absolutely absurd.
    I reached out to probably a half dozen. The CBC got back to me and we spoke at length over the phone. They called me back later the same day to say it wasn't a story for them. Didn't really interest them enough, though they were flabbergasted when they checked the website on how to make an insurance Obudsman complaint.
    -Matt
    2000 VFR800 INTERCEPTOR

    2005 VFR800 Interceptor (sold)
    1997 VFR750F (SMIDSY victim)
    1986 VFR750F Honda Interceptor (sold)
    1986 VF500F Honda Interceptor (sold)


  4. #44

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by walhalla View Post
    I have had one accident and it is much the same story. The police report said it was not my fault the other person was even charged, but my insurance company's "investigation" said it was my fault

    Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk
    AFAIK insurance companies are held to the Fault Determination Rules in the Insurance Act when it comes to assigning fault. They attempt to cover every situation and figure out fault for each, but of course that's not really possible, so sometimes you get funky situations. Ombudman might be the way to go.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    York
    Posts
    5,460

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by drumstyx View Post
    AFAIK insurance companies are held to the Fault Determination Rules in the Insurance Act when it comes to assigning fault. They attempt to cover every situation and figure out fault for each, but of course that's not really possible, so sometimes you get funky situations. Ombudman might be the way to go.
    This is correct. The police are not able to assign fault and they should not be trusted for insurance advice. They've lied or been incorrect to me several times.

    Having the police say one thing and insurance say another is a different situation than what this thread was about.
    2009 Aprilia RS125 (14k, just rebuilt for the 3rd time) | 1987 Porsche 944 N/A 5 spd (300k, Miller MAF) | 2007 BMW X3 6 spd (176k)
    PM to buy some ACF-50 rust protection spray.

  6. #46
    slowbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,797

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Yeah what walhalla is mentioning is incorrect and way off topic and not related to my situation at all. It's been mentioned already in this thread that insurance companies decide who is at fault not police.

    However, my situation shows that the fault determination that insurance companies use is flawed and there is little to nothing the insured person can do about it.
    -Matt
    2000 VFR800 INTERCEPTOR

    2005 VFR800 Interceptor (sold)
    1997 VFR750F (SMIDSY victim)
    1986 VFR750F Honda Interceptor (sold)
    1986 VF500F Honda Interceptor (sold)


  7. #47
    nakkers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    St Kitt's mainly, London, ON sometimes
    Posts
    2,659

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by slowbird View Post
    Yeah what walhalla is mentioning is incorrect and way off topic and not related to my situation at all. It's been mentioned already in this thread that insurance companies decide who is at fault not police.

    However, my situation shows that the fault determination that insurance companies use is flawed and there is little to nothing the insured person can do about it.
    Do you know or can you confirm by having a 10% fault has any impact on increasing your premiums upon renewal or if you go elsewhere? That would be the concern I'd have.

    If it doesn't, then I wouldn't spend much more time on it.

  8. #48
    slowbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,797

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by nakkers View Post
    Do you know or can you confirm by having a 10% fault has any impact on increasing your premiums upon renewal or if you go elsewhere? That would be the concern I'd have.

    If it doesn't, then I wouldn't spend much more time on it.
    The impact this 10% at fault has had for me so far is:
    When I was calling for insurance quotes the companies (TD for example) were counting it against me. I have an old car MVC that I'm at fault for and a minor speeding ticket. They would count the 10% as an at fault and that would push me over and I was deemed too "high risk" to insure.

    Mitchell and Whale insurance was the only decent company that was quoting me without the 10% at fault but they wanted a letter of experience. However, my insurance company at first refused to provide me with one. It wasn't till I went to the Obuds that they sent me the Letter but not until after my policy had renewed.

    So the answer to whether or not this 10% is going to effect my premiums is a soft "yes". Even though the % is lower than what they are allowed to use against me, the insurance companies don't seem to care and do it anyways.
    With the letter of experience I should be ok (if I don't encounter any issues sending it to them) but I won't know for sure till renewal comes up.
    -Matt
    2000 VFR800 INTERCEPTOR

    2005 VFR800 Interceptor (sold)
    1997 VFR750F (SMIDSY victim)
    1986 VFR750F Honda Interceptor (sold)
    1986 VF500F Honda Interceptor (sold)


  9. #49
    Riceburner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Stuck in Reality
    Posts
    5,571

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Can't you get quotes and coverage and then cancel current policy/company? Or too risky if the quote is wrong?

  10. #50
    slowbird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,797

    Re: Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

    Quote Originally Posted by Riceburner View Post
    Can't you get quotes and coverage and then cancel current policy/company? Or too risky if the quote is wrong?

    I thought the last time I tried cancelling a policy before the renewal date I was threatened with an early cancellation fee.
    -Matt
    2000 VFR800 INTERCEPTOR

    2005 VFR800 Interceptor (sold)
    1997 VFR750F (SMIDSY victim)
    1986 VFR750F Honda Interceptor (sold)
    1986 VF500F Honda Interceptor (sold)


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •