Incident on 403 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Incident on 403

kurtrules

kurtrules

Well-known member
Hi Guys,

Had a question.

The following happened a couple of hours ago on the 403. Hit a mangled shopping cart hurtling down the highway after it hit the car in front. I was with my family driving home after a nice dinner. Wedding anniv today. Car was 2018 CX-5 GT

I could have swerved, but I decided against it at that moment because of highway speed

It looked like a mangled shopping cart. It damaged the bumper (shot a hole the size of a fist through it), ripped off the beading atop the right fender, cut some wiring underneath (probably the fog light) and there is water dripping ever so slightly. From the first examination, it seems like the windshield fluid reservoir has a leak. But it could also be coolant.

I drove a few km, before taking an exit and stopping safely. Did not want to stop on the highway. Thankfully the tire is safe because god knows what would have happened in case of a tire burst.

Called CAA and towed the car home.

I plan to call insurance in the morning. It's no fault of mine. Will the deductible still be charged? Anything else to be aware of before making the call? Is it even worth it considering the deductible (500$)?

It's happened the 1st time; new to this.

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
In harsh black and white you were out driving your vision and had a single vehicle collision.

In reality I would haven't done any better. Good that you made it home.

Sorry the incident spoiled the celebrations.
 
Your deductible will most likely be charged should you choose to repair via insurance. It wont be cheap based on the damage you have reported so far.

Not sure what car you were driving but headlights alone are not cheap. Add a bumped to paint and possibly wiring etc. plus labour.
I say you are at min $3-4K of repairs.

Others on here may know but I would see if you can try to make a claim with MTO or whomever is responsible for that section of the HWY.
Same idea as a pot hole and rim damage claim in City of Toronto.
 
oioioi said:
Your deductible will most likely be charged should you choose to repair via insurance. It wont be cheap based on the damage you have reported so far.

Not sure what car you were driving but headlights alone are not cheap. Add a bumped to paint and possibly wiring etc.
I say you are at min 3K or repairs.

Others on here may know but I would see if you can make a claim with MTO or whomever is responsible for that section of the HWY.
Same idea as a pot hole and rim damage claim in City of Toronto.
Click to expand...

Thanks, it was a CX-5. Updated the post.

No damage to the lights. Main and Fog.
 
kurtrules said:
Pics added

View attachment 65812

View attachment 65813

View attachment 65814
Click to expand...
Even if it’s covered you’ll now have a claim record you’ll have to report if you jump insurance companies for the next 6? Years.

Sometimes doing some napkin math makes it better to swallow the loss or just live with the damage. Claim would also diminish your value on resale or trade in.

Personally I’d get a quote from a body shop asap and then make a decision if you can live with the eye sore or not. If not, do you care about the implications of filing a claim (as noted above).

Glad everyone is ok.
 
Last edited:
The leak is definitely the washer fluid tank. I have a CX3 and that is where mine is located. It extends down almost to the bottom of the fender in front of the wheel. I would expect this damage to be in the $3-4K range for the new bumper skin, washer tank, fender flare, paint and affiliated labour. That really bites and unfortunately the collision was not your fault. Swerving to avoid could have resulted in far more damage and may have involved other vehicles.
 
Last edited:
I have the same generation CX5 in the same colour. Word of advice if you are going to repair - keep a close eye on the result because the paint is very hard to match. I would ask up front if they think it will be an issue.

The situation sucks in all directions and sorry you have to deal with this. It is nothing more than an inconvenience and thankfully no one was hurt. Good luck with your next steps.
 
JZ67 said:
I have the same generation CX5 in the same colour. Word of advice if you are going to repair - keep a close eye on the result because the paint is very hard to match. I would ask up front if they think it will be an issue.

The situation sucks in all directions and sorry you have to deal with this. It is nothing more than an inconvenience and thankfully no one was hurt. Good luck with your next steps.
Click to expand...
Good shops will usually make up the color from a color code based on the VIN number. Especially if its a recent/common car.
Did they do this with yours?

Also once the color is made up they should paint a small sample card and compare against your car and adjust accordingly if needed.
 
www.car-part.com for the bumper cover and other parts you need. Find the bumper in the same colour to avoid painting. Will come out much cheaper this way.

And you are 100% at fault in the eyes of insurance. This is a collision claim, not comprehensive. As mentioned earlier your rates will go up, and the value of the car will go down.
 
Ugh, sorry to hear that. Unfortunately you hit a stationary object in the road so this will be a single vehicle accident. If something fell of a truck or ran out into the road you may have a better chance, but in this instance...it was laying in the road, and you hit it.

Good luck on the repairs, paint matching is a b$@ch regardless of car and especially if it's got the nice metallic flake in it.
 
Glad you're ok. As others have said, object was stationary so insurance considers this a collision with you 100% at fault and you pay deductible. If it was moving, that would be a comp claim with no deductible. Link below discusses animal collisions but clearly lays out how stationary vs moving are treated very differently.


" For example, in Ontario collision with a live animal is covered under comprehensive coverage and is considered a not at fault accident (it should not impact your premium). Collision with a dead animal would be treated as a collision with any other object and would be covered under collision. This would be an at fault accident like any other and could impact rates."
 
Thank you for your replies everyone, appreciate it.
Update - the car is running fine; the windscreen washer tank is almost empty - took 12 hours to drain 80% of the fluid.
It is not a coolant leak, which is a relief.

I understand that this would be a collision claim, however, I am still unable to wrap my head around the "stationary object" theory. After looking at the video multiple times, I deduced that it was most likely a mangled shopping cart which rolled out in front of me, so I had no option.
Kindly help me understand why this would be considered at fault, so that I can take a well-informed decision.

I have called a repair shop, recommended by a fellow member here. Will be going there for an estimate at noon.
 
kurtrules said:
Thank you for your replies everyone, appreciate it.
Update - the car is running fine; the windscreen washer tank is almost empty - took 12 hours to drain 80% of the fluid.
It is not a coolant leak, which is a relief.

I understand that this would be a collision claim, however, I am still unable to wrap my head around the "stationary object" theory. After looking at the video multiple times, I deduced that it was most likely a mangled shopping cart which rolled out in front of me, so I had no option.
Kindly help me understand why this would be considered at fault, so that I can take a well-informed decision.

I have called a repair shop, recommended by a fellow member here. Will be going there for an estimate at noon.
Click to expand...
If the car in front of you hit it and it was spiraling across your lane and you hit it, it would be comp as you can't be expected to miss a moving object (same as a moving animal). As it was not moving, you are supposed to drive with enough care, control and vision to miss things sitting on the road. I'm not judging you, it was crap situation and watching the video, I was distracted trying to figure out why cars in lanes to the right were slowing down and putting on blinkers. They took some of my attention away from your lane.

TL: DR Not everything has lights. Driver has responsibility to miss any stationary object on the road.

EDIT:
From watching your video, object moved some when car in front of you hit it but stopped before you hit it. I don't know where insurance draws the line on moving/stationary in that case. Without the video, you could argue that it was still moving when you hit it. I doubt insurance would believe you as that costs them money.
 
JZ67 said:
I have the same generation CX5 in the same colour. Word of advice if you are going to repair - keep a close eye on the result because the paint is very hard to match. I would ask up front if they think it will be an issue.

The situation sucks in all directions and sorry you have to deal with this. It is nothing more than an inconvenience and thankfully no one was hurt. Good luck with your next steps.
Click to expand...
I was told the same by a body shop. IIRC it has to do with slightly different paints used in the factory for the metal bits and the plastic bits, possibly curing temp differences.

It would have been nice to see what the object was but doing a loop back and stopping at night wouldn't be a good idea. Does your insurance have a one time forgiveness? I did a write off 30 years ago and the renewal wasn't that painful.

It wasn't a pothole so MOT will tell you to go after whoever had an unsecured load. The crap those morons cause is grossly understated. It would be interesting to know if the police could let you know of other victims. The video doesn't show where the object ended up after you hit it but probably in a lane further right.

Is this a possible DIY if you could find colour matching parts at a wrecker. I did that with a dented door on an Uplander. $2000 quote from the body shop, $500 door from the wrecker and it bolted on in a couple hours, factory paint.
 
kurtrules said:
Thank you for your replies everyone, appreciate it.
Update - the car is running fine; the windscreen washer tank is almost empty - took 12 hours to drain 80% of the fluid.
It is not a coolant leak, which is a relief.

I understand that this would be a collision claim, however, I am still unable to wrap my head around the "stationary object" theory. After looking at the video multiple times, I deduced that it was most likely a mangled shopping cart which rolled out in front of me, so I had no option.
Kindly help me understand why this would be considered at fault, so that I can take a well-informed decision.

I have called a repair shop, recommended by a fellow member here. Will be going there for an estimate at noon.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, we are all guessing as to it being stationary or moving slightly and the only person that can answer that is your adjustor. You have the video, you can show it to them.

They can, and very well may, say that you didn't take any evasive action at all and just hit it as that's how it looks in the video.

But in the end, the ONLY entity that can decide how to treat this is your insurance.

Yesterday, my mom somehow hit a curb on her way to church...she blew out the front steering wheel airbag, and her side curtain airbag...minimal damage under the car from what I saw.

I'm waiting to see if the insurance writes off her Qashqai or not. It appears to be some trim, wheel fender black piece, valence underneath, and some scratches.

But the steering wheel and upper lining trim blew out with 2 airbags activated. Dad was able to drive home as it was 100m, but they called insurance so now it's all in the hands of the adjusters.
 
GreyGhost said:
If the car in front of you hit it and it was spiraling across your lane and you hit it, it would be comp as you can't be expected to miss a moving object (same as a moving animal). As it was not moving, you are supposed to drive with enough care, control and vision to miss things sitting on the road. I'm not judging you, it was crap situation and watching the video, I was distracted trying to figure out why cars in lanes to the right were slowing down and putting on blinkers. They took some of my attention away from your lane.

TL: DR Not everything has lights. Driver has responsibility to miss any stationary object on the road.

EDIT:
From watching your video, object moved some when car in front of you hit it but stopped before you hit it. I don't know where insurance draws the line on moving/stationary in that case. Without the video, you could argue that it was still moving when you hit it. I doubt insurance would believe you as that costs them money.
Click to expand...
I was once told that if the object was touching the ground when you hit it, it's an at-fault collision, whereas if it was in the air before hitting you, then it's a no-fault claim - for example, a rock falling off a dump truck and either hitting your car directly vs. bouncing off the ground and you "running into it". Would have to check the latest fault determination rules though, unless the one that @GreyGhost quoted is the only pertinent one. Maybe check with your agent/broker, but don't ask your insurance company directly if you're not sure what you want to do yet.
 
@mimico_polak , I hope your mother is ok.

This may be a silly question but I’ll regret if I don’t ask - Once I call insurance, they send an adjuster, and then it’s deduced even after the footage, that I am at fault, can I at that point choose not to go ahead and file a claim. Will that affect insurance?
 
Relax said:
I was once told that if the object was touching the ground when you hit it, it's an at-fault collision, whereas if it was in the air before hitting you, then it's a no-fault claim - for example, a rock falling off a dump truck and either hitting your car directly vs. bouncing off the ground and you "running into it". Would have to check the latest fault determination rules though, unless the one that @GreyGhost quoted is the only pertinent one. Maybe check with your agent/broker, but don't ask your insurance company directly if you're not sure what you want to do yet.
Click to expand...
The problem with the fault determination rules is they apportion fault in multi-vehicle collisions. I think the legal framework for this situation resides elsewhere. I quoted belair as it was easier than finding the original source. I suspect the path to the source is to find the document that shows what comprehensive insurance covers. Anything not in that document would be covered by collision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom