NSW Corvettes

General Discussion Area => Corvette Related Chat => Topic started by: bootlegger on November 06, 2015, 08:38:15 PM

Title: court case
Post by: bootlegger on November 06, 2015, 08:38:15 PM
Some of you know I was involved in a pretty serious accident in my corvette with a car driving on the wrong side of the road last year.Even though the evidence clearly showed the other car was on my side and we had a head on the police decided to charge me.I was seriously injured and 15 months later am still having problems.Not only did I have the physical issues to deal with but also the fact that the guy I hit has a mate who is a retired cop who had significant influence in the polices decision to charge me.Without going into boring details the pokice fabricated and altered information. They continually played games even getting into the ear of the judge at my first court appearance.I finally had my two days in court and the judge ruled that the police got it wrong and I am completely innocent of the charge.Even though the judge ruled in my favor and the charging officer admitted to making up my speed of 120 the prosecutor wanted to continue with the hearing. Their own police forensic report showed at the upper end I was doing 62 in a 60 zone.I feel this is a hollow victory as the judge refused to accept that the police knew the real story and believed tyat they did their job properly so I wasnt awarded costs.The total cost to prove the pokice got it wrong $60000 and I have to wait a month to see if they appeal.Id really like to thank the people who stood by me and believed my story.To the ones who dropped me like a hot potatoe when the going got tough I understand your concerns and dont hold any grudges. You had your reasons and I respect that.Either way I hope I can get on with my life. The police are the lowest forms of life on earth. They really played dirty through all this. They should hang their heads In shame.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on November 06, 2015, 11:13:44 PM
Even though the judge ruled in my favor and the charging officer admitted to making up my speed of 120 the prosecutor wanted to continue with the hearing. Their own police forensic report showed at the upper end I was doing 62 in a 60 zone. I feel this is a hollow victory as the judge refused to accept that the police knew the real story and believed that they did their job properly so I wasn't awarded costs. The total cost to prove the police got it wrong $60000 and I have to wait a month to see if they appeal.

Unbelievable! I'm glad to hear that you were found not guilty despite the best efforts of the police to have you hung, drawn and quartered. What possible grounds would the prosecution have to appeal?

On top of $60K in legals, you also have a written-off Corvette and I guess medical expenses.

Was this hearing in a Local Court before a magistrate?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on November 07, 2015, 06:46:27 AM
Yep Graham local court. This female prosecutor hung onto this case for three court appearances. She didn't even want to let it go when the magistrate said I was innocent. To the point she called up the expert police forensic investigator and told him to somehow show how I was speeding. He said it's possible I was speeding but the science said I wasn't.
If there is a way for her to think she can get me they will appeal.
I really don't know where to go from here. I borrowed the money to do this. I reckon I need at least another ten to take on his insurance.
They won't want to give me what it will cost to replace my car.
They too will try and wear me down.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on November 07, 2015, 01:43:16 PM
My guess is they would most likely appeal if the magistrate had awarded costs against them and, from what I read on the web for NSW local court hearings, that only happens when the magistrate decides that the prosecution effort was malicious or incompetent, or both. (Your legal team could confirm that or otherwise.)

In your case, from what you say, I think the magistrate gave the prosecution a free ride.

As for insurance companies, I reckon they will use any excuse to avoid paying up and the ambivalent nature of the magistrate's finding may encourage the other party's company to deny your claim and tell you to fight them in court -- knowing full well that it is uneconomical to do so.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on November 07, 2015, 05:29:32 PM
the judge ruled that the police got it wrong and I am completely innocent of the charge.

Congratulations on getting that sorted. Is there any way for you to claim any recompense for being innocent?
If it cost you $60k, you should sue the pants off them.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on November 07, 2015, 07:23:27 PM
Hi
I sent you a pm
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Scott on November 09, 2015, 09:38:33 AM
Wouldn't your insurance company cover your car, then ream the other guy, since it's been proven in court you he was in the wrong?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on November 09, 2015, 09:44:37 AM
Wouldn't your insurance company cover your car, then ream the other guy

Hmm, interesting; does insurance also cover court costs related to your car in an accident?

I guess it's all in the PDS fine print.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Scott on November 09, 2015, 11:42:32 AM
I reckon I need at least another ten to take on his insurance.
They won't want to give me what it will cost to replace my car.
They too will try and wear me down.

Insurance will cover the car, not the court stuff. I was referring to this.  His insurance will pay out to replace the car, then get the $$$ back from the other guy.  As he's not at fault and they have someone to regain the money from, it shouldn't affect his future premiums. (In theory)
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on November 12, 2015, 11:21:47 PM
I dont insure my cars. I had a broker out a few years ago to give me a quote for my collection. After telling ms the premium was thirty grand a year I just decided to cover myself.
Im a beater so any damgae I can fix.
Ive had to repair a car my wife ran into a whike ago.. when the owners tried to tell me they wanted to go through their insurance I gave them an ultimatum. I fix their car. I buy them and identical car and they give me theirs or if they werent happy with the repairs done I woukd still buy the another car and keep theirs.
I did the repairs and ive never seen them again.
If you factor in that ive never had a prang at all in thirty years I can lose a car now and again.
Having said all that I spoke to his insurance company yesterday and yes they are playing hard ball claiming they are not responsible. 
I rang their solicitor and told him the judges findings. He changed his tune a bit when I told him I had the money behind me to fight.
It doesnt seem right that I had to fight the police and now them. At least in the civil court they have to weigh up their position. They lose they pay all my costs.
I was always innocent. The guy was driving on the wrong side of the road. Its hard for them to ignore that.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 14, 2016, 08:55:38 PM
Well finally things are starting to move regarding my claim for the car. An assesor was sent out last week to see if it could be repaired.
He deemed it too far gone so now they plan to fly a valuer from qld to put a number on it.
I made it pretty clear that I wont put up with any games.
Its enough to buy another one or they can deliver one at my doorstep.
Considering what the insurance company is now spending im pretty sure they haved worked out who is liable for the accident.
Gee I hope things start turning around soon. I really miss driving my vette.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on April 14, 2016, 11:28:15 PM
Gee I hope things start turning around soon.

So do we, mate.  You are way overdue for a win.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Scott on April 15, 2016, 07:52:00 AM
Well finally things are starting to move regarding my claim for the car. An assesor was sent out last week to see if it could be repaired.
He deemed it too far gone so now they plan to fly a valuer from qld to put a number on it.
I made it pretty clear that I wont put up with any games.
Its enough to buy another one or they can deliver one at my doorstep.
Considering what the insurance company is now spending im pretty sure they haved worked out who is liable for the accident.
Gee I hope things start turning around soon. I really miss driving my vette.

Sounds like good news, finally! 
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 15, 2016, 07:19:55 PM
I can see this going on for a long time yet. Its a fair bit of money now to replace A 425 hp coupe.
I just hope I get enough to bring another one in.
I know they are going to lowball me.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on April 15, 2016, 08:30:09 PM
my fingers are crossed for you buddy  :thumb:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 16, 2016, 05:16:06 PM
Thanks. It seems lots of people have their fingers crossed for me. The sad part is this could happen to anybody.
I'm thinking of displaying the wreck at the GM day at Penrith next weekend with a signboard explaining what the lowlifes did.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Lefty on April 16, 2016, 06:22:40 PM
You may want to consider waiting for your payout.
Then tow it around behind your new car, to all of the meets?
Good to see this loving forward and trust you get a solution,
Lefty
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 16, 2016, 07:43:33 PM
Ill take what you say on board but I cant see how anything negative from the insurance company will eventuate.
Its still will take a bit to get it there. I need to see if my mate will lend me his tilt tray to get it over.
Ive got whole pile of paperwork to submit to the police integrity unit and the ombudsman next week.
It will go knowhere. At least I might rattle the old boys club a little.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on July 28, 2016, 11:00:28 PM
Tomorrow is two years since I had my accident.  Even though I have proven that the other guy was fully to blame I still havent received one cent for my car or anything else for that matter.
Its pretty frustrating.  AAMI know im at a disadvantage and they are just playing hard ball. I simply cant afford to employ a lawyer.
Ive made initial contact with the insurance ombudsman and the Police Integrity commission.
What really p#isses me off is the other guy has had his personal injury claim refused based on the documents I submitted to my third party insurer.
Im kinda thinking im on my own with this one.
Hopefully ill get another car one day. In the meantime I just have to keep staring at whats left of the one I have.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on July 29, 2016, 09:49:01 AM
Thats so SO WRONG Bootlegger :(  How much damage we talking about , pic ?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on July 29, 2016, 09:33:33 PM
 Its totalled im afraid . Everything is trashed from the dash forward. I did price out the parts to rebuild it. It just got out of hand. I stopped at $40000. Plus labour
I just want to buy another one.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 19, 2016, 08:04:42 AM
So AAMI have deneid liability on my claim for the car. It seems the judges ruling in the criminal court that the other guy caused the accident doesnt count.
Now I have to start all this stuff again.
Cruel people hide behind their jobs to destroy a normal persons life.
This decision is purely money based and has nothing do with the truth.
They are just calling my bluff.
Off to court we go.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on August 19, 2016, 09:25:34 AM
So AAMI have deneid liability on my claim for the car.
Off to court we go.

Best of luck with that, give it as much publicity as possible. You'll be surprised how quick they change their minds in the face of bad publicity.

Throw up a post on their facebook page and post the link here; I'll attack them too. lol

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Reklaw on August 19, 2016, 10:31:10 AM
Here's a pic of Bootlegger's 'Vette. This was taken during a "reconstruction", thats why the white car is unscathed.

(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o477/Reklaw327/FB_IMG_1471563483570_zpsjr5rhhvb.jpg) (http://s343.photobucket.com/user/Reklaw327/media/FB_IMG_1471563483570_zpsjr5rhhvb.jpg.html)

Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on August 19, 2016, 10:36:29 AM
So AAMI have denied liability on my claim for the car.

What's their excuse?

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 19, 2016, 03:15:31 PM
There attitude is they believe I caused the accident.  I asked for a reason why and they remarked we dont need to give you one.
All they have is the initial police report that claims I was doing 120kph at the point if impact.
Two forensic investigators (mine and the polices ) both agreed my speed was no more than 62.
With this bit of inormation the magistrate said the accident wasnt my fault. The other guy was fully on my side of the road. I had no chance.
For whatever reason AAMI wont accept his ruling.
This whole deal is really wearing me down. I just want to get on with my life.
I wont back down. Just have to keep plugging away at it. Its a shame its going to cost more money for everyone.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on August 19, 2016, 04:08:23 PM
I would do two things.
One go to my local member of parliament and complain. And write to your federal member as well.
Tell him or her that your next stop is A current affair and then go there.
 Stir some sh#t you will be surprised how things will develop.
When you get to news program first thing tell them you have just been to your local member.
And them lay all you evidence out too them.
Insurance companies are on the nose rite now. I bet they will run with it.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on August 19, 2016, 04:42:42 PM
what a crying shame , don't only because a lovely vette is damaged but more so that its getting it fixed has come to this for you  buddy  :tears:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 19, 2016, 05:30:49 PM
There attitude is they believe I caused the accident.  I asked for a reason why and they remarked we dont need to give you one.
All they have is the initial police report that claims I was doing 120kph at the point if impact.
Two forensic investigators (mine and the polices ) both agreed my speed was no more than 62.
With this bit of inormation the magistrate said the accident wasnt my fault. The other guy was fully on my side of the road. I had no chance.
For whatever reason AAMI wont accept his ruling.
This whole deal is really wearing me down. I just want to get on with my life.
I wont back down. Just have to keep plugging away at it. Its a shame its going to cost more money for everyone.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on August 19, 2016, 08:09:47 PM
I would do two things.
One go to my local member of parliament and complain. And write to your federal member as well.
Tell him or her that your next stop is A current affair and then go there.
 Stir some sh#t you will be surprised how things will develop.
When you get to news program first thing tell them you have just been to your local member.
And them lay all you evidence out too them.
Insurance companies are on the nose rite now. I bet they will run with it.
Bfit

I reckon that's a good plan exactly as stated.

It might also be worthwhile checking if the Financial Ombudsman Service can help (but they won't get involved if a court case is pending.)

ACA has had many successes getting justice for the little guy when big companies are playing tough.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 19, 2016, 09:56:54 PM
I have to get all this in writing from them before I go off and cause a whole pile of trouble.
The financial ombudsman is funded by the financial institutions that we complain about such as AAMI.
They are a toothless tiger.
I have  to  be very careful as both my personal injury claim and the one for the car could affect each other.
Its a minefield Im afraid.
There is so much to learn. One thing I have learned out of all this is you are very much on your own.
Everyone thinks only of number one.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on August 20, 2016, 12:30:06 AM
The financial ombudsman is funded by the financial institutions that we complain about such as AAMI.
They are a toothless tiger.

I can't speak for the FOS, but the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman is funded by the telcos, and they hate copping TIO fines, so these industry-funded watchdog things can work.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 20, 2016, 08:01:12 PM
I really dont t know what to do next. My solicitor is telling me to back off the Finacial ombudsman. Im  going to wait a little more before I start something that may blow up in my face.
They play this game all the time.
Their plan is to wear me down and take a lowball offer because ive had enough.
They reduce their costs by somehow getting you to accept that you have a percentage of blame for the accident.
It usually involves them trying to prove you didnt take any evasive action to avoid the collision.  Not swerving or braking means you are partly to blame.
If you have a crash on a corner or in a round about the best you can expect to get is 50% of your claim.
The insurance term is "knock for knock".
This contributory negligence is negotiated by the insurance companies.
They just pay you out normally for the insured amount and you are none the wiser that even though you believe you were not at fault the industry has decided otherwise.
Im sure at the end of the year they just get together and divvy all the money amongst themselves.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on August 20, 2016, 11:29:05 PM
My solicitor is telling me to back off the Finacial ombudsman.

You're paying for his advice, so best to follow it.

These things usually boil down to a battle of the wills. He who holds out  longest usually wins. Insurance companies have been known to settle on the steps of the courthouse on the day to avoid the case being heard.

Of course it all costs money, and they have plenty of it.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on August 21, 2016, 08:37:03 AM
Insurance companies have been known to settle on the steps of the courthouse on the day to avoid the case being heard.

Of course it all costs money, and they have plenty of it.

Do they pay for your solicitor costs or is that something you negotiate on the steps?

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on August 21, 2016, 01:59:46 PM
Do they pay for your solicitor costs or is that something you negotiate on the steps?

As there is no judgement involved, costs would have to be part of the negotiated figure.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: stingray on August 22, 2016, 11:04:10 AM
It appears that the initial police report of 120kph, maybe the AAMI insurance is using this and ears are blocked to everything else that is said.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on August 22, 2016, 09:45:58 PM
I agree they are basing their decision on what they have and dont seem to be open to listen to what has transpired.
I have spoken to their solicitor and im getting the impression everything hinges on his advice to AAMI.
My solicitor last week gave him an ultimatum to make a decision either way so court proceedings could start.
I honestly think he doesnt know what to do.
The irony of all this is initially my green slip insurer admitted liability before I went to court.
They agreed to pay the other driver $250000 for a broken  ankle.
After I won I sent them the forensic report, the court transcript and a statement from me on how the police behaved.
They rang me two weeks ago and told me they have held onto the money as they now believe he is to blame.
What i still dont understand is the other drivers insurance has paid all my medical bills.
For whatever reason this has become a total train wreck. It was all supposed to be textbook for everyone.
Frame the westy hoon. Get him to plead guilty with a misleading brief and watch the houso go down just like on today tonight.
I guess they didnt realise who they were fxxking with.
I have spent seventy grand so far. I can only imagine what everyone else has spent.
Oh and if you do a deal on the steps before you go into court you dont get your costs. As was mentioned you may be abke to negotiate it but it doesnt work out that way normally.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on October 08, 2016, 11:01:53 AM
Well AAMI finally formally denied liabilty. They claim I was speeding and driving in the dark.
Considering it was found in court that not to be the case I really cant understand their logic.
I went and saw my solicitor on Thursday.
Now we have to start all over again.
Im sueing them now.
Im pretty frustrated.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on October 08, 2016, 11:04:43 AM
Sorry to hear that buddy :(  Must be very draining on you and the family !
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on October 08, 2016, 01:20:38 PM
Considering it was found in court that not to be the case I really cant understand their logic.

They're stalling and hoping you'll go away.

I went and saw my solicitor on Thursday.
Now we have to start all over again.

This is what they expect most people won't do.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on October 08, 2016, 02:39:20 PM
My solicitor just looked at me and said "did you honestly think they woukd pay you?".
its been real hard on my family. Im not the same person anymore.
Its seems the people that work in this industry dont have families of their own.
Its all their way and they know it.
Anyway ill keep plugging away at it.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on October 08, 2016, 03:28:16 PM
Now we have to start all over again.
Im sueing them now.
Im pretty frustrated.

I can only imagine your frustration, but suing an insurance company is probably going to cost a motza.

Has your solicitor sought a barrister's advice on grounds for a suit, and the likelihood of success based on similar cases?

Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on October 08, 2016, 05:11:28 PM
I spoke to my barrister as well. He is mystified at the insurance companies position.
He said they cant win this.
I dont believe anything is a certainty in the legal world. The judges make a decision on a whim.
You get one that sees things your way you win.
It seems the plan is to try and negotiate a deal I will eventually take after they try and scare me into not proceeding to court.
If ive spent money on a legal team we are going to court.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on October 08, 2016, 05:21:27 PM
Okay, here's hoping that it goes your way.

Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 15, 2017, 10:18:47 PM
Well I would love to say this is all done and dusted and im hunting another Vette but the powers to be continue to drag it on.
I submitted a letter of demand with after looking at current prices and getting a quote  to ship a car out  gave a replacement value.
Off course AAMI sent there own valuer out.
Well after sitting on that valuation for almost twelve months its come back at over a third less than what I can buy another car.
The irony of all this is the valuation included several big block cars for sale. All of which were at the value I served to them.
Now they are saying they want to settle.
I guess they will try and lowball me some more.
Gee I would like a fair go.
If anyone knows of a 66 coupe for sale it seems things might be getting closer. Ill co sider anything atm.
Dave
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on February 17, 2017, 03:57:40 AM
Quote
Gee I would like a fair go

Reckon you're well overdue for a fair go in this matter.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 18, 2017, 12:31:50 AM
Thanks mate. One day maybe.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: metalhead on February 18, 2017, 04:16:55 PM
Sorry to hear about the continued dramas. Did you not have agreed value comprehensive insurance?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 19, 2017, 09:28:49 PM
I choose to self insure. Im quite prepared to accept the consequences of that decision and if the accident was my fault I would accept the loss.
The fact is the other guy was found liable in court and therefore either himself or the  insurance company should pay.
When he bought his policy the aggreement he had with them was to be covered in an at fault accident.
Well it doesnt seem to be the case.
The reality is if I was fully insured the policy for an agreed value would be far less than what the replacement value is now so I would have been at a disadvantage when requesting the amount the car is truly worth.
Ill keep plugging away at it.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: metalhead on February 20, 2017, 11:08:10 PM
Fair enough. Would you still do that? Seems you could have avoided a lot of the dramas for a couple hundred $ a year?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 22, 2017, 09:58:12 PM
No I havent altered my attitude toward being fully insured. The last quote I had to insure my collection was thirty grand.
You add that up over the last 20 years ive been at it and I can dump a car every now and again.
My biggest issue is why shoukd I have to claim on my policy when the other guys insurance should be paying.
Its not right that my insurance has to spend their money using their solicitors to recover the money.
I do have third party on someon the ones I drive a lot.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on February 23, 2017, 08:20:29 AM
I do have third party on some of the ones I drive a lot.

I have one car insured with Ryno and one with LSV Lumley's. It's cheaper to diversify than have them lumped into one. The full comprehensive on each was cheaper than Shannon's third party so you may want to shop for quotes and see how you go. They're only weekend drivers and having two cars, I told them I drive them fortnightly at most and the premium is cheaper for low use vehicles.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: MY081 on February 23, 2017, 09:36:15 AM
I suppose the good thing about self insuring is if you wright off some bodies ncrs c2 worth maybe $130,000 the law will let you enter a payment plan at say $50 a month . It happen all the time .Ray
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on February 23, 2017, 09:48:07 AM
I know some one who`s vehicle was out of insurance cover ,wrote off a new BMW 4 day from being purchased .
BMW was not insured the owners son took it out for a drive before there company paid the insurance .
End result $ 10  a month payment.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on February 23, 2017, 07:21:47 PM
I know some one who`s vehicle was out of insurance cover ,wrote off a new BMW 4 day from being purchased .
BMW was not insured the owners son took it out for a drive before there company paid the insurance .
End result $ 10  a month payment.
Bfit

 
Dead son  :toetapping:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 27, 2017, 11:20:02 PM
Although  it seems far from over  Im finally making some headway with the insurance company. They are talking of settling for the car. If all works out i can finally get going again. Its been almost three years.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on April 27, 2017, 11:44:33 PM
Sounds like some good news at long last.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 27, 2017, 11:45:34 PM
Yep i hope it doesnt go pear shaped. Ive plaid pretty hard ball with them.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on April 28, 2017, 11:51:17 AM
you were looking for a 66/67
there is one in WA NCRS compliant 95 plus .  very nice BB car, worth a look at is your want an excellent vehicle
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 28, 2017, 11:20:03 PM
Any links to it? Is it a coupe? I dont want a roadster.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on April 28, 2017, 11:47:00 PM
https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/results?q=(And.Service.Carsales._.(C.Make.Chevrolet._.Model.Corvette.)_.State.Western%20Australia._.CarAll.keyword(1966).)&area=Stock&vertical=car&WT.z_srchsrcx=makemodel
There's two .the white one is the best
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on April 30, 2017, 07:40:54 PM
So do we, mate.  You are way overdue for a win.

Fingers crossed for you bud !
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 30, 2017, 10:41:10 PM
Thanks. Ive got everything crossed.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on April 30, 2017, 10:56:20 PM
I just managed to open that link for the big block coupe. You know they have tried everything to lowball me for my car.
Ill tell them tomorrow  to buy this one for me. Lets see what they say?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on May 01, 2017, 01:44:36 AM
Thanks. Ive got everything crossed.

... except your eyes, I trust.  :smilegrin:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 01, 2017, 03:43:13 PM
The guy that hit me must have been crossed eyed. After all this time he still maintains he was on his side of the road.
A complets numbnut
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 01, 2017, 04:15:29 PM
what country is he from.
bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 01, 2017, 10:03:09 PM
He is Scottish. About 61 or 62. A bus driver who admitted to have just come off a 12 hour shift. He had been up since 4 in  the morning and was heading home at 5.
Im not putting the guy down by saying this but it was obviuos as he spoke in court he wasnt very bright.
The guy stuffed up. He just wouldnt accept it.
Even though now its obvious he has lost this he still wants to go to court for his personal injury.
If he loses he is up for costs. Around a 100 grand.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 01, 2017, 10:35:51 PM
Even though now its obvious he has lost this he still wants to go to court for his personal injury.

Doesn't CTP insurance cover that?

With the new car, get quotes from LSV Lumley's and Ryno; these guys aren't that expensive and it'll save you a world of hurt.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 02, 2017, 05:34:46 AM
I   wonder about insurance companies .
I was run into at a traffic lights  some years back, I'm  7 or so cars back in the line when in rear ended.
I'm pushed into the car in front of me , and it into the next car.
Cops book the guy who caused it all,
And the NRMA  finds me at fault and cancelled my insurance.
 Figure that one , anyway I could not get insurance after that for quit a number of years.
Saved me a lot of money
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 02, 2017, 10:18:37 AM
Ctp does cover your injuries regardless of blame up to 5000 dollars.
This guy is now going for a payout. The Ctp insurers have to admit i caused the accident for him to win lotto.
Sadly for him thats not the case now. Even though he has a no win no fee lawyer he still has to cover the costs of the ctp i surance companies costs.

Regarding your rear ender. The insurance  probably blamed you for the accident as they reckoned you shouldnt have been so close to the car  in front.
You knkw if you have an accident in a roundabout both drivers share the blame
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 02, 2017, 10:25:22 AM
Ctp does cover your injuries regardless of blame up to 5000 dollars.

Is that all? Damn, they're robbing us blind.  There was a news story recently of a mob that robbed millions from CTP with fake events they staged, pushing up our premiums. How many events would they have to stage to receive millions?

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 02, 2017, 11:10:53 AM
Insurance is another form of gabling, your betting on having an accident and getting a winfall, they are gambling you wont, so they can keep your premium with no winfall payout.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 02, 2017, 11:15:20 AM
you're betting on having an accident and getting a winfall, they are gambling you won't

I'm betting I won't be the cause, however as seen here, I'm also betting an insurance co. will try to rip me off if I'm not insured and I'd rather they battle my insurance co. than putting me through the ringer.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: metalhead on May 02, 2017, 12:23:50 PM
I'm betting I won't be the cause, however as seen here, I'm also betting an insurance co. will try to rip me off if I'm not insured and I'd rather they battle my insurance co. than putting me through the ringer.

s
Yeh, that's my approach also.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on May 02, 2017, 12:24:26 PM
Even though he has a no win no fee lawyer ...

What people seem to fail to realize about those mobs is that their win fee is enormous to cover all of their losses.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 02, 2017, 12:31:18 PM
Ctp does cover your injuries regardless of blame up to 5000 dollars.
This guy is now going for a payout. The Ctp insurers have to admit i caused the accident for him to win lotto.
Sadly for him thats not the case now. Even though he has a no win no fee lawyer he still has to cover the costs of the ctp i surance companies costs.

Regarding your rear ender. The insurance  probably blamed you for the accident as they reckoned you shouldnt have been so close to the car  in front.
You knkw if you have an accident in a roundabout both drivers share the blame
When I heard his  engine I pushed the brake as hard as I could reflex action .Cops measured my wheel  makes and said I was 12 feet from the car in front of me. He pushed me vehicle 32 feet, according to the police report. They estimated he was doing 50 MPH in a 35 zone when he hit me, this was in 1968.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 02, 2017, 01:33:31 PM
Bob you are showing your age now - that was back in the pencil, ruler and eraser days. And of course when police were of HIGH integrity and who's word was the last measure of truth, justice an the ..... Oh hang on I heard that in some kids TV show back in the sixties, maybe it does not apply here in Oz........
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 03, 2017, 07:43:48 AM
Is that all? Damn, they're robbing us blind.  There was a news story recently of a mob that robbed millions from CTP with fake events they staged, pushing up our premiums. How many events would they have to stage to receive millions?

s

The insurance pays up to 50000 without question. If your injuries are worse they may continue to pay especially if you arent to blame.
I went well and truly over five grand.
What baffled me.is the other guys insurance footed my bill even though at the time the police had charges against me for the accident.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 03, 2017, 07:47:58 AM
When I heard his  engine I pushed the brake as hard as I could reflex action .Cops measured my wheel  makes and said I was 12 feet from the car in front of me. He pushed me vehicle 32 feet, according to the police report. They estimated he was doing 50 MPH in a 35 zone when he hit me, this was in 1968.
Bfit

The Insurance  companies find any loophole to reduce their costs. As i mentioned if you have an accident in a roundabout they will assume both parties are to blame regardless of what the police say.
The term is called "knock for  knock."
In your accident they probably decided to share the burden between each other  for the pile up blamimg each car that ran into the back of the other.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 03, 2017, 08:08:05 AM
What baffled me is the other guy's insurance footed my bill even though at the time the police had charges against me for the accident.

I think that's how CTP works and why it's compulsory. Injured people can't be left in the lurch with high medical bills, even if they walked in front of your car and it's their fault. This is why the fines are heavy for driving around uninsured/unreg.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 03, 2017, 08:38:14 PM
People.arent i the lurch if you have an accident with an unregistered car. The nominal defendant covers the bill.
If you hit a roo or any other wilflife and get injured you are covered under this scheme as well.
You arent covered for domestic animals.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on May 03, 2017, 10:27:50 PM
Big changes to the operation of CTP commencing December this year in NSW:

https://www.sira.nsw.gov.au/green-slips/ctp-green-slip-reforms
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 03, 2017, 10:36:02 PM
Reduce the cost of green slips, fn bullsh#t  the last time I heard that green slips when up, and up,and up.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on May 03, 2017, 10:47:52 PM
I remember when the green slip system was introduced. It removed the monopoly for CTP from the then government-owned GIO. Rego prices did drop considerably for a while and then rose to new heights as the profit-seekers took control.

Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 04, 2017, 07:43:00 AM
Rego prices did drop considerably for a while and then rose to new heights as the profit-seekers took control.

Yeah, the rego price did drop but the difference was soaked up by the price of the green slip. They sold it to us by saying the total cost will be the same, you just have to pay them separately. That lasted for a year or so then the insurance companies started upping their fee and the increase was faster than the rego increases; no surprises there. There's more insurance companies but each has to make yearly profits to please their shareholders.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: MY081 on May 04, 2017, 09:15:44 AM
Figure this one out my son (28 years old ) Green slip in Sydney $1300 moved to Orange for work Green slip renewal next year $375 . How does that work . Ray
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 04, 2017, 09:19:12 AM
Figure this one out my son (28 years old ) Green slip in Sydney $1300 moved to Orange for work Green slip renewal next year $375 . How does that work . Ray

The rates are calculated by the  no. of claims in the area; more claims in Sydney, you pay higher rates.

In Albany WA, it's a few hundred bucks for the lot. Of course the road works budget in WA is nowhere near what it is in other states so their rego is cheaper too.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 04, 2017, 04:31:17 PM
Thats BS, my home town is as dear as Sydney, theres only 25 people there. 500kms from Syd.

And ?..?.... there maybe more claims in Syd, but that should be tempered by the number of people living there - 5million

And And ?..?... What if I still lived in "Kickatinalong" but only ever drove in Mogo where the cost is very small.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 04, 2017, 05:35:52 PM
Thats BS, my home town is as dear as Sydney, theres only 25 people there. 500kms from Syd.

Is the crime rate as high? There must be a reason it's as high as Sydney. I have one car garaged at my sisters place 100km from Sydney and the CTP slip is significantly cheaper. Go to any greenslip calculator and try it for yourself, type in your postcode, then try another postcode at other suburbs more remote or more metropolitan and compare the price differences.

http://www.greenslips.nsw.gov.au/


What if I still lived in "Kickatinalong" but only ever drove in Mogo where the cost is very small.

In the calculator link above, it asks where is the car garaged; it doesn't matter where you drive it, so it may also have to do with the theft rate in that suburb of your garage.

Your insurance premium will vary depending on your car’s ‘home’ postcode. Some areas are safer than others and insurance companies may take this into account when calculating your premium. Cars parked in off-street carports, garages and secure parking bays may carry a lower risk than vehicles parked on streets and in unsecured parking areas.

It’s important to make sure you inform your insurance company if your circumstances change (e.g. you move house); in some cases, it may even reduce your premium if you move to either a safer neighbourhood or to a home with a lockable garage.


https://www.comparethemarket.com.au/car-insurance/how-is-car-insurance-calculated/

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 04, 2017, 05:58:53 PM
Kickatinalong Should have high rates as out there you can get lead poisoning without the petrol burners
Straight from nature via the mines
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: RHD.68.l89 on May 05, 2017, 07:01:34 AM
Does the CTP in NSW cover theft and damage? It shouldn't. It should only cover personal injury. Property damage and theft will be covered by your insurance policy on top of the CTP as demonstrated by the above court case. Someone living in Kickatinalong will have low CTP rates because there is a low injury claim rate per capita in the shire.  Victoria has a component of our registration (the BIG part) to cover CTP but it doesn't cover property.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 05, 2017, 08:15:03 AM
Does the CTP in NSW cover theft and damage? It shouldn't. It should only cover personal injury.

You would think so but it's not the case, for instance I don't see how the age of my vehicle covers personal injury. Where are the stats that show older cars are in more (or perhaps less) accidents involving human injury?

Primary factors used by the insurers and which affect greenslip prices are as follows:

        Geographic region
        Type of vehicle
        Age of vehicle
        Vehicle performance
        Age of vehicle owner
        Age of vehicle drivers
        Driving history

        - Number of traffic offences
        - Number of demerit points
        - Number of years licensed

        Claims history

        - Level of insurance and no claim bonus
        - Number of at fault claims


http://www.greenslips.com.au/about-greenslips/setting-prices.html

Geographical Zones:

http://www.greenslips.com.au/about-greenslips/geographical-zones.html

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 05, 2017, 02:29:29 PM
Ive tried writting an editorial and twice lost it, there has been more added - food for thought.

Stevo your list is right on it - they set parametres to suit themselves, increase rates = less payouts.

But you are wrong, the age of a vehicle is directly proportional to injuries.

Newer cars have built in safety, engines go under, side anti intrusion bars, safer body shells, air bags, set belts/retractors, steering compression plus + +.
All these make most accidents non-fatal, of course people will till try to have the biggest accident.
Dont forget the number of cars on the road in 78 is a fraction as compared to today.

BUT - one thing that should have nought to do with CTP is "level of insurance and no claim bonus".
I went to pay CTP  at a Ins branch at Wethetill Park, she checked her screen, said I have no Ins with them, correct, she said "that" CTP was
for a person with Comp Motor Vehicle Ins, I had to pay MORE. Crap I said -  Ins and CTP were separate and had nil to do with each other,
this hecame heated and the argument became fists including staff and a another customer (he's the reason they now have bolted down
chairs there) thank god Stocklands security are slow and useless. That was many years ago.

The advent of even more insurance companies trying to get their snout in the "Golden Goose" trough that is CTP is ludicrouse.
They say (Govt) that more Insurers means we have choice, to a degree correct, untill you delve in and find who owns or "underwrites"
these new compnies.

Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 05, 2017, 02:50:48 PM
Newer cars have built in safety, engines go under, side anti intrusion bars, safer body shells, air bags, set belts/retractors, steering compression plus + +.
All these make most accidents non-fatal, of course people will till try to have the biggest accident.

Ah yes, I forgot about the driver, I was thinking you got CTP more so to insure those you might hit but then again the grilles (or lack thereof) on modern vehicles are also more pedestrian friendly.

of course people will till try to have the biggest accident.

Yep, with all the modern features people are more blasé about safety and take more risk.

It's a race between engineers producing bigger and better idiot-proof features and the universe producing bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: MY081 on May 05, 2017, 02:52:11 PM
Hell Doug now Im worried to drive my prehistoric horseless carrage !!!
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 05, 2017, 04:50:57 PM
A thought
You don't insure a rifle that could hurt some one or even worse, but a car mmm
Just  thinking outside the rectangle
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 05, 2017, 04:57:24 PM
You don't insure a rifle that could hurt some one or even worse

You better keep that to yourself, gun owners will track down the person that gave insurance companies that idea.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 05, 2017, 05:08:51 PM
I believe that the cars should not be insured at all . The driver should be insured. However that would be more cost effective for us the population and voter, the insurance companies and government would not collect as much cash out of the people they are there  to look after our interest of.
 :hi: :banghead:
Bfit
Who pays out when a police chase goes all wrong?
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 05, 2017, 05:16:14 PM
Who pays out when a police chase goes all wrong?

I remember back in the 80's, a guy I knew from school stole and smashed a car, the insurance co. kept writing him letters to cough up for damages and they eventually gave up. He had no job, etc. a lost cause.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 05, 2017, 07:12:17 PM
Yes - the easy way is to declare yourself bankrupt, could be for as little as 12 months, Ive only arms length experience, but seems a way to get out of your responsibilities or at least to get out of the grip of creditors. Not sure it is a good thing.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 05, 2017, 07:37:15 PM
Your wrong Bfit. You actually insure yourself against hurting others.
Think about it!
The only way "they" can quantify and controll it - is by attatching it to a "registered vehicle"
That way no matter who drives it - there is coverage.

Saves the litergation that was against both insurance companies and drivers.

With CTP the focus  became insurance companies, flush with money, whilst Joe Drive  may be a hick from Wollongong with nothing - just bad luck!

Big win for drivers untill insurance  companies realised that the Golden Goose trough was starting to cut into gross profits.

AND SO ! The rules, regs, inclusions, disclusions,  Post Code white washing started.

GOD Help the motorist because the Insurance Company wont.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on May 05, 2017, 08:16:44 PM
I don't agree , if you have a licence then you would have insurance .
One insurance for all your cars ,
It would work ,Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Lefty on May 05, 2017, 10:06:19 PM
Bfit, I agree.
You can't drive more than one car at a time.
If every licensed driver had insurance, every car being driven by a licensed driver would be insured.
Then the risk would be insured.
The commercial oportunity for insurers would be reduced, but I think premiums would increase, as currently there are more cars than drivers.
I don't think things will change.
Lefty
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on May 05, 2017, 10:26:57 PM
Exactly - at my home we currently have six vehicles, but two drivers.

But your idea is quiet feasible, in fact could be workable, but to be fair - it shoud be one size fits all, after all I've driven in just about every post code in NSW.

The fact that I've not injured anyone - Oh ummm (if you discount lolly pop men, SydHarb Bridge toll collector, noxious window washer at lights) those
are of course fair game. So my rate would be the same if dr

                   Sry lot  sorry lost power.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Lefty on May 06, 2017, 05:34:47 PM
Wow, that killed the thread!
Lefty
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 26, 2017, 11:41:26 PM
Its finally over. Now i can get my arse back in a vette. Thank fxxk for that.
Sorry to torture you guys with this over the last couple of years. Its three years in july since i had the accident.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on May 27, 2017, 07:40:45 AM
Its finally over. Now i can get my arse back in a vette.

More info?

Have you now got a vette or did they give you a lump sum to go away?

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: metalhead on May 27, 2017, 07:55:52 AM
Good news!
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on May 27, 2017, 02:54:13 PM
Great to know that dogged persistence against the odds has paid off.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on May 27, 2017, 10:16:17 PM
Ive got one hand tied behind my back. I have the wreck and i can do something about it. Im happy.
Thats pretty much all i can probably say.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on May 29, 2017, 07:48:33 AM
 :thumb: :thumb: :thumb:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on June 29, 2017, 08:35:30 AM
Well you woukd thinj my thread on this topjc would be over. Well a sherrif turned up and served a summons on me.
The guy I had the accident with wants to sue me.
Now i start all over again.
I thought when hjs i surance fi ally settled with me all this crap was almost over.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on June 29, 2017, 08:59:03 AM
The guy I had the accident with wants to sue me.

lol.

Are you saying that because you won, his insurance co. is now hounding him to pay and he wants you to pay for his error?

Fat chance, if his insurance co. has found him at fault, I doubt the law will see it any differently.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on June 29, 2017, 10:45:06 AM
The guy I had the accident with wants to sue me.

Good grief! What's in it financially for him? He wants to try to recover his excess?

Makes no sense to me.



Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on June 29, 2017, 01:33:14 PM
Some people are easily led by sharp lawers.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on June 29, 2017, 09:48:26 PM
He wants the money for his injuries and my insurer is refusing to oay.  Its complicated but his solicitor is pushing this and thinks they can get it out of me.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on June 29, 2017, 10:05:13 PM
Before political correctness became the fashion, I'd have said that you must have killed a Chinaman in a previous life.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on June 29, 2017, 10:28:27 PM
Im kinda feeling like the chinaman atm im afraid.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on June 29, 2017, 10:32:24 PM
All i can think is i havent been playing ball all along. Most people fold and take whatever deal is the easiest route. For some reason i have dug my heals i  and bucked the system.
Its hasnt been going to plan for them from the start.
They shouldn't have lied about what happened. Its that simple.
KARMA
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Shane Finn on June 29, 2017, 10:42:29 PM
Since you're gonna need a lawyer anyway for defence, I'd think about counter suing them.

Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on June 29, 2017, 10:45:32 PM
One would think the other side would be reading this forum
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on June 30, 2017, 08:51:56 AM
He wants the money for his injuries

Isn't that what CTP insurance is for? If they don't believe his claim is valid it probably isn't. He sounds like an idiot.

s
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on June 30, 2017, 09:17:22 PM
As i said its messy and my greenslip insurer stuffed up. What they did has to be undone somehow.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 10, 2019, 08:35:17 AM
Well finally its over. Total cost for this folley 280 grand .
Nobody had the balls to go to court again tomorrow so its was all settled amongst the lawyers.
Im not happy that i didnt get to have my fight and prove the other guy stuffed up but if the financial settlement is anything to go by the other side knew they woukd lose.
Hopefully i can clear my mind of this sh#t and finally get my Corvette fantasy back.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: metalhead on February 10, 2019, 08:50:02 AM
What a hassle! Glad it finally worked out in your favour.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Jethro on February 10, 2019, 08:50:48 AM
Onwards and upwards :)
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on February 10, 2019, 10:17:33 AM
 :thumb:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on February 10, 2019, 11:51:47 AM
Quote
Total cost for this folley 280 grand

Good grief! Who paid that?

Good to hear you're shot of it, at last.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on February 11, 2019, 06:16:00 PM
Thanks everyone. Its been a.long road. Anyway now to get back into a vette.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: sirfixalot on February 11, 2019, 08:58:14 PM
Talk is cheap when do you actually see some $$$$ in your pocket years ago I got awarded $400 in court thought happy days 7 days to pay they don't pay up you don't get paid had to then get the sheriff to collect
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on February 11, 2019, 09:11:24 PM
Quote
you don't get paid had to then get the sheriff to collect

These days the Sheriff charges for every visit. Mate of mine is chasing a large debt from a non-paying customer. (His debt collector, who I know, says he intends to write a book titled "999 Debtor Excuses I Have Heard Over 30 Years in Collections".)
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bootlegger on March 23, 2019, 02:48:33 PM
Talk is cheap when do you actually see some $$$$ in your pocket years ago I got awarded $400 in court thought happy days 7 days to pay they don't pay up you don't get paid had to then get the sheriff to collect

No i got paid. It more than covered my legal bill.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on March 23, 2019, 02:52:37 PM
No i got paid. It more than covered my legal bill.

Fantastic.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on March 24, 2019, 11:39:33 AM
Thats good to hear, still a pity the lying two face bastards did not get jailed.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on March 24, 2019, 06:20:34 PM
Do you mean gaoled.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: Vettech on March 24, 2019, 06:33:39 PM
I think everyone out there knows exactly what I mean,,
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on March 24, 2019, 08:14:00 PM
Americans are invading everything .
They speed colour incorrectly
They short sell a gallon by two pints.
Bfit
Title: Re: court case
Post by: gtc on March 24, 2019, 08:58:06 PM
Quote
They speed colour incorrectly

-- but they usually spell 'spell' correctly.  :tongue:
Title: Re: court case
Post by: bfit on March 24, 2019, 09:45:11 PM
I was hoping to get vettech on that one.
Title: Re: court case
Post by: StephenSLR on April 05, 2019, 11:47:58 AM
-- but they usually spell 'spell' correctly.  :tongue:

But they keep misspelling spelt, earnt, learnt, burnt, etc. as spelled, earned, learned, burned.

s