crash for cash

Isn't leaving the scene of an accident illegal. Can't your daughter get her prosecuted and report the "instructor" (if he's a registered one) to whoever oversees these things? I'd also thoroughly check out any doctor who alleges she's injured. I thought the police had to be called to any injury accident - or it least it must be reported to them. Did the "instrucotr" leave the learner in charge of the car - and on a mobile phone?

Re. insurance, I thought 3rd party stuff is bound to be covered - "road traffic act" minimum?

Nevertheless, it's a cautionery tale.

IANAL

As long as you have the legal minimum insurance (ie third party) you're covered.

Yes, but that's not really the issue. If it is a fraud attempt (and it does look like one), the OP isn't the prime target, it's his insurance company which is being defrauded. However, he could lose his no claims discount as a result, which would make him a secondary victim.

Given the circumstances as described, I'd be inclined to report it to the police.

Mark

My daughter has legal and no claims protection on here policy.

If the car had L plates, that shifts the duty of care towards your daughter.

When driving slowly, you are expected to maintain enough distance to be able to stop safely if they dead stop. In any case, you are expected to be at least two seconds driving time behind them.

That is unprofessional, as they should know that the insurance companies say never accept blame at the scene; just exchange details.

Just to be clear. I presume that she was no longer driving at this stage (I cannot imagine a situation where the instructor would even permit it whilst the learner was driving).

Had she exchanged details? It seems so, as they had your address. Had you said you were injured? If details had been exchanged and there was no claim of injury at the time, it seem perfectly legal to leave the scene.

I believe that the classic whiplash fraud involves the criminals hitting you from behind. I think the learner would have had to reverse into you for any blame to be allocated to her, in this case.

Only if you haven't exchanged details, and even then I think that you are allowed to report it to a police station at the earliest opportunity (which might be reasonable if there were any fear for personal safety).

What is the accusation against the instructor? As far as I can see the only fault is in terms of trying to get an allocation of blame, rather than just exchanging details. If instructors got punished every time learners stalled a call, there wouldn't be many left. I don't see any claim that the instructor left the scene before exchanging details.

That's for protection of the injured party, although the insurers may cast doubt on the seriousness of the injury if the injured party leaves the scene apparently uninjured.

Note. As it may not be well known, the NHS make a charge for treating RTA victims.

I understand all about whose gets the blame, when hitting someone up the rear. What I am discussing is the rather odd immediate action from the 'learner' driver in this case.

The 'learner' left before details were exchanged. My daughter was talking with the 'instructor' while the 'learner' was on her mobile. She departed saying nothing to my daughter.

In message , David Woolley writes

Not quite true. The scam which received recent publicity involved criminals who deliberately braked unexpectedly, relying on the usual principle that "the driver who runs into the back of you is guilty".

Whilst this is true of normal driving conditions, it was only the alertness of a group of employees in an office overlooking a roundabout who exposed the scam. They noticed that the same man was involved in numerous "accidents" where someone ran into the back of him. In some cases the someone was a co-conspirator. The fraud was against the insurance companies, yours and mine!

He cleverly chose a roundabout, because the second car waiting to enter sees the first car drive off, and because the before following him will instinctively glance to the right in order to give way. He then stopped abruptly, taking advantage of the fact that the following driver was mainly concerned with traffic from his right.

That was the reason a roundabout was chosen, because when entering a two way road the driver following him would have to check for oncoming vehicles from both directions. There are also less likelihood of witnesses than there would be on a straight road, but he didn't know about the office workers. ;-)

This particular incident may not have been a scam, but it sounds suspicious...

Having just spoken to a pro driving school instructor, he said no matter what, with a rear shunt, it is now the practice for the driver of the vehicle hit to claim 1000 for whiplash whereby a doctors assessment is NOT required. I also assumed that was a part of the teaching/learning process. He also stated that he would leave the learner seated in the vehicle and deal with the perpetrator himself. Also there was no law against the driver leaving the scene if uninjured.

When on test, if this type of accident occurred, the person being tested has to do all the dealings (this I assume if not injured)

O snip

I was certainly unaware of this. Does it make any difference who was at fault? And how do they get the money? Credit card before they sew your hand back on? And if there's no money, then no treatment? Doesn't sound like the NHS I know.

Perhaps if you were unable to speak English they would treat you for nothing.

Rob Graham

That might of been true of one UK gang. I was thinking more generally and in particular about an episode of "Law and Order" that featured the whiplash scam . I can't remember the details, but I think it involved two vehicles, one to the front to make the victim do a sudden manoeuvre and one to the rear that then shunts them. I believe staged accidents involving an innocent party are a common scam, worldwide.

Although it is clearly criminal to deliberately provoke an accident, it seems to me that the victims are always guilty of driving without due care and attention.

Incidentally there was a rear end collision outside my office once which was caught on CCTV and clearly showed the front driver reversing. He still kept arguing his case for a long time, even when presented with the evidence.

Sorry, I switched to the specific case of the sudden stop on a roundabout in this paragraph.

It looks like it can only be made through the insurer of someone found to be at fault.

It's a scam. Police report this happening all over the country, to an increasing extent. Take advice from the local police.

I was in an airport car park when the reverse occurred. It was very busy, and there was a queue of cars circulating until someone decided to come out.

The car started reversing out, and to give him more room the two cars in front of me started reversing towards me. I had to reverse pretty sharply to avoid being hit, but unfortunately the guy behind me had slower reflexes or was just unaware of the reason for the shuffle and I messed up his front bumper. Rather than try to argue it out with the guy in front I decided to pay for the damage.

He got it fixed cheaply and when we went to find him with a cheque we were entertained by him and his wife to tea and biscuits. :-)

Very interesting. You learn something new every day.

Rob

Is it also true that the person who makes the 999 call for an ambulance to an RTA is charged (I think) £15? This seems unfair if you're just a passer-by. Or is the victim charged? Or is it all just an urban myth? I think I heard it on the box.

Chris

In message , Mark Opolo wrote

That's why you leave it all up to your motor insurance company who will deal with it.

In message , snipped-for-privacy@proemail.co.uk writes

On the one occasion when I called 999 for police when I hit a stone wall on a country road and my immobilised car blocked half the road, the cop who arrived insisted on calling an ambulance to check out my lady companion who was shaken and complained of chest pain. They took us to hospital where they took an ECG etc, and decided that the pain was from being thrown against the seat belt. There was no NHS charge, but my insurance paid for BUPA visits for massage due to slight whiplash discomfort.