What should we have done differently?

Scrummy Mummy · Post by **Scrummy Mummy** » 19th May, '08, 09:42

On January 25 (yes, 4 months ago) husband arrives home having had slight bump in car.

He was driving through Geylang in the rush hour, was nosing out of a side road and a van seemed to leave him a gap to go, he went, and then the van moved and so he hit the side of it.

There were a couple of deep scratches on our car (which were so minor we haven't bothered to have them fixed) and no apparent damage to van.

Driver got out, ranted a bit in Hokkien, husband apologised, driver took photo of our car on his phone but drove off without exchanging details while husband was scrabbling for paper (in a bit of a flap).

After he got home we discussed whether there could be issues. We took photos of our car, discussed whether we should report this to the police but decided they wouldn't be interested, and that obviously the other guy would have hung around if it was an issue.

So now we've received a lawyer's letter. Claim of $1600 for damage to van, $450 as it was off the road for 3 days, plus about $1000 for search fees (not having got our details they had to do an LTA search) and lawyers fees.

Now the damage is one thing and it was, technically, our fault (though I'm not convinced it was $1600 worth), but if they guy had waited we'd have exchanged details, paid, no $1000 in extra costs. I'm planning to pass this onto our insurance company to sort out, but am basically bloody furious. I feel like we're being rolled over but I know that if we get lawyers involved on our side it becomes "he said, she said" and we just run up even bigger costs. It feels like a huge con job.

So (apart from (1) not driving into people (2) never assuming courtesy on Singapore roads) what should we do differently next time?

Aliya · Post by **Aliya** » 19th May, '08, 10:31

Take his details if you can or at least take a photo of his licence plate. If the driver drove off without obtaining your details (as he is required to by law) then i do not see why or how you are then liable for his costs incurred for obtaining a search etc. My mate SJ and her husband have both been in accidents - she had a woman drive into the side of her and then try to claim SJ did it - physycally impossible but it took about a month for the insurance company to decide this after initially accepting the other woman's argument and her husband was on his motorbike and was actually swerved into by a taxi who took a huge chunk out of his leg and who then tried to charge him for taking him to the hospital AND claimed the accident was caused by him.

My view in Singapore - take no prisoners and take lots of photos.

Pinklepurr · Post by **Pinklepurr** » 19th May, '08, 10:52

Agree with Aliya, take photos if at all possible. Photos of your car damage, their car damage, the position, the road, everything around you. Definitely get the number of the vehicle and note down the time and place etc. I know of a few people who others attempted to rip off by saying that more damage was done than happened in their accident. (One tried to claim damages on the other side of the car when the accident was in a clear space and nothing touched the other side of the car!) Only their photos helped to clear the situation.

Lili Von Shtupp · Post by **Lili Von Shtupp** » 19th May, '08, 11:08

Long live the camera-phone. Shoot first, ask questions later.

Kooky · Post by **Kooky** » 19th May, '08, 11:17

Well the first place he went wrong was in believing anybody in Singapore would be kind enough to let him out.

(And it's no better here. Have times changed that much since we last had a car?)

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 19th May, '08, 13:07

Bit late to take photos 4 months after the thing happened.

As for search fees, I think it costs a nominal sum of money to search the costs through the LTA or onemotoring website, something like $5 or $10. You could question said lawyer, however, more than likely, getting your own lawyer would cost more.

Sounds like this bloke is trying to fleece you. You now have options, from total denial (did the other guy take photos?) through to outrage and refusing to pay a cent (driver didn't swap details, van drove off with no apparent problems, no police report filed).

Scrummy Mummy · Post by **Scrummy Mummy** » 19th May, '08, 13:25

I know. Part of me wants to fight this as a point of principle, but the sensible bit is saying what's the point if it costs more money ......

Lili Von Shtupp · Post by **Lili Von Shtupp** » 19th May, '08, 13:41

Just curious, as I don't really know how these things work. But if you let the insurance company deal with it, will they simply pay the man off and up your premium to cover the loss (and more)?

Scrummy Mummy · Post by **Scrummy Mummy** » 19th May, '08, 13:44

I need to call them tomorrow.

We'll lose our no claims bonus, but that should be less. I'm a bit worried they won't pay all the extras, but need to see.

Bloody annoying (to put it mildly!)

Burbage · Post by **Burbage** » 19th May, '08, 13:47

I would ignore the lawyer's letter. You do not have to pay a lawyer's letter. If they want the money badly enough they will take you to court, whereupon you will explain that the idiot pissed off without exchanging details. It is technically illegal to leave the scene of an accident until all formalities have been comepleted, so it will be interesting to see what a court makes of it. Turn up and defend yourself. Won't cost you anything.

Burbage · Post by **Burbage** » 19th May, '08, 13:51

OR

Pay the 450 bill for damage and tell them that if they want more you're happy to go to court and explain that the idiot pissed off without collecting details therefore he should be liable for the lawyer's fees and search fees, and if he's stupid enough to do it, the fee for your solicitor.

Burbage · Post by **Burbage** » 19th May, '08, 13:52

BUT

Do not pay the whole amount, no matter what you do. He's trying it on.

Burbage · Post by **Burbage** » 19th May, '08, 13:55

AND

Don't involve your insurance company. You have his lwyer's letter which means that the claim for damages has been set at $450. Pa that, it's probably less than your excess anyway.

Scrummy Mummy · Post by **Scrummy Mummy** » 19th May, '08, 15:31

No, the physical damage is $1600, the loss of use of vehicle $450, all the other crap brings it up to $2700.

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I get.

Can anyone recommend a good, reasonably priced firm of lawyers who can send a few letters back without it costing a fortune?

Tack · Post by **Tack** » 19th May, '08, 15:34

Burb, the damage to van claim is $1600 and the 450 is compensation for it being off the road. Or at least that's how I read it.

I do sympathise and yes, the answer is to photograph damage, car positions on the road (before being courteous to other traffic and moving aside) AND non damage. I've heard too many stories like this. You don't report an accident to the police unless there is injury, it involves a cyclist or pedestrian or government vehicle or in the case of hit and run. If the guy did not take your details then isn't he guilty of the latter? A bit late now for this but it answers the title query.

It would make me sick to roll over and pay everything but I would not want to get involved in a long stress fest here. Test him out as to how far he'll go by either offering less on a take it and forget it basis or get a lawyer just for an initial attempt to head him off. Good luck.

Edit SM beat me to it. Sorry no lawyer rec. Ask Aliya.

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 19th May, '08, 16:29

Oh, they are asking for $2.7k?

Just ignore the letter. Don't reply, and wait until they *try* to take you to court. The LTA has your insurance details, he should be claiming through his insurers and can get to yours easily enough.

Fuck him in other words.

saint · Post by **saint** » 19th May, '08, 17:47

So the letter you have received is from a Lawyer rather than the other driver's Insurance Company?

PJ · Post by PJ » 19th May, '08, 17:57

A search costs about $10 - had to do it myself when I had a motorbike 'hit and run' my car last year. He's taking the proverbial with $1000

Luckily I had memorised the number as I got out( to see if he was ok!) While I was getting pen and paper out of the car he took off.

I then reported him to the police - immediately after finding out my closest post. We did the letters to the insurance company through our car dealership (where I went for repairs). They eventually came back and agreed to pay us with something in the letter to the effect of him agreeing to pay but 'not admitting liability.'
There is a part in the claim form for compensation for being off the road too- I remember the insurance company lowering that figure in our claim against the motorbike rider. Can't remember what we claimed for but $450 for 3 days is way OTT as well.
My husband and I now carry a camera in the car...just in case there's a next time.

Your guy has effectively done a hit and run. I agree with Fat Bob - sit and wait.

Good luck.

Burbage · Post by **Burbage** » 19th May, '08, 20:35

Scummy Mummy wrote:No, the physical damage is $1600, the loss of use of vehicle $450, all the other crap brings it up to $2700.

The more I think about this, the more pissed off I get.

Can anyone recommend a good, reasonably priced firm of lawyers who can send a few letters back without it costing a fortune?

Go with option one then.

Fat Bob · Post by **Fat Bob** » 19th May, '08, 20:55

bloody hell, Burb and I agreeing on something, gotta be a first!

saint · Post by **saint** » 19th May, '08, 21:01

I few this to consider which make this look very dodgy or a con are

1) The driver has to advise his Insurance Company of a Notification of a Claim within 30 days of the occurrence followed by the completion of a Claims Form.

I personally don't think the driver has done this and any claim he has will now be timebarred.

2) Insurance recoverable repairs can only be carried out following the approval of either the other driver's Ins Co or your Ins Co.

Obviously theirs been no loss inspection carried out by his Ins Co. What makes it even more dodgy is the 4 month period since the occurrence. It would surprise me if he hadn't had "Another Occurrence" and he needs someone else to recover his costs from, namely you.

and finally,

3) No witnesses, no evidence and no admission of responsibilty from your part, his word against yours.

Just tell him to make his claim through his Insurance Company and you'll probably wont hear from him again in a hurry

Pinklepurr · Post by **Pinklepurr** » 19th May, '08, 23:58

I was looking up something else and came across this in my wanders, it is from the Police website under driving in Singapore, the first point is interesting in this case especially, I wonder if he did so since he took off from the scene?

What should I do if my vehicle is involved in a non-injury accident?
In non-injury traffic accidents, drivers must provide their personal particulars such as their names, addresses and vehicle registration numbers to the other party . Anyone who refuses to do so at the scene, must himself lodge a police report within 24 hours.

Otherwise, he will be committing an offence under the Road Traffic Act which is punishable with a fine of up to $1,000 or a jail term of up to 3 months. The police report would enable Police to conduct investigations into the accident to determine if any traffic violation has been committed.

You might also wish to note that on 1 May 99, Traffic Police and the General Insurance Association of Singapore (GIA) implemented a scheme to manage non-injury traffic accident reports. Under this scheme, motorists involved in a traffic accident need only lodge a Police report for the following categories of traffic accidents:
Injury case;

Non-injury case involving a government vehicle or damage to government property;
Non-injury case involving a foreign vehicle;
Non-injury case involving a pedestrian or cyclist;
Non-injury "hit-and-run" case.
For cases where a Police report is not required, motorists involved in non-injury traffic accidents are advised to lodge a General Insurance Association (GIA) report with their insurance company. The insurance company will determine the liability and fault after its investigation into the accident. If a traffic violation is suspected, the insurance company will also bring this to Traffic Police's attention so that we can further look into the matter.

Drink driving, driving without licence, driving without insurance coverage, and driving whilst under disqualification are considered serious violation cases. Hence, if a motorist suspects that the other party in the traffic accident has committed one of these offences, he/she should call Police immediately to report the matter.

Fresh Mint · Post by **Fresh Mint** » 20th May, '08, 04:57

Scummy Mummy wrote:
Can anyone recommend a good, reasonably priced firm of lawyers who can send a few letters back without it costing a fortune?

Write one yourself!

skank-la · Post by **skank-la** » 20th May, '08, 07:29

Compltetely ignore lawyers letter, only respond to insurance co claim done via insurance appraisal center

Scrummy Mummy · Post by **Scrummy Mummy** » 20th May, '08, 12:09

Just dropped by the police at Ubi and they said they wouldn't even have accepted an accident report at the time since no-one was injured.

They advised we get the insurance company to handle it since they'l investigate whether it's a try on before they pay out. Probably the easiest thing to do in the circumstances, annoying as it is. I'm not sure a letter from me would do much good, and lawyers' letters get expensive very quickly.

Other good news today so, so doesn't seem as bad now.........

The Singapore Forum

What should we have done differently?

What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?

Re: What should we have done differently?