Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Seth Brundle

Weepsie wrote: »

No they shouldn't. However, if there is evidence of dangerous driving against someone, not merely one word against another, it would need to be video evidence really, then there should be a facility where an insurer can review that and note it for policy renewal or even cancellation.

Too much is dependent on the whim of a garda's mood when reporting these days and even then you get vast inconsistencies in the same stations

A video won't necessarily provide evidence of who was driving. There would be so many appeals against an insurer doing this that it wouldn't be cost effective.
Furthermore the driver was not convicted or found guilty of an offence. It should be up to the gardai to enforce the law and the insurer to assign risk based on the outcome of any investigation.

average_runner

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

I incurred medical expenses and my rear shifter/brake lever had a part broken in it. The purpose of insurance is to put people back where they were prior to incident. That is what I am trying to do.
The tag 'claim culture' is unfair on genuine cases. The problem is bogus or exaggerated claims, some arising from staged events.

I am talking about the original post where no injuries occurred and not one where a person got injured

average_runner

Weepsie wrote: »

No they shouldn't. However, if there is evidence of dangerous driving against someone, not merely one word against another, it would need to be video evidence really, then there should be a facility where an insurer can review that and note it for policy renewal or even cancellation.

Too much is dependent on the whim of a garda's mood when reporting these days and even then you get vast inconsistencies in the same stations

Insurance company cant find someone guilty.

magicbastarder

Chiparus wrote: »

That is not for the guards to decide.

as above, i think we're talking at cross purposes here. i was referring to a post where (IIRC) someone suggested asking the gardai for insurance details relating to an incident where there was no contact and no physical damage.

AndrewJRenko

Weepsie wrote: »

No they shouldn't. However, if there is evidence of dangerous driving against someone, not merely one word against another, it would need to be video evidence really, then there should be a facility where an insurer can review that and note it for policy renewal or even cancellation.

Too much is dependent on the whim of a garda's mood when reporting these days and even then you get vast inconsistencies in the same stations

Seth Brundle wrote: »

A video won't necessarily provide evidence of who was driving. There would be so many appeals against an insurer doing this that it wouldn't be cost effective.
Furthermore the driver was not convicted or found guilty of an offence. It should be up to the gardai to enforce the law and the insurer to assign risk based on the outcome of any investigation.

The insurer doesn't have to prove who was driving. If the vehicle that they insure is being driven in a dangerous manner, that's an issue for the policy holder and the insurer. The policy holder could be asked to produce evidence that it was being driven by a different driver on a different policy if necessary.


I've reported drivers to insurers in the past and had reasonably positive responses from at least one insurer.

Chiparus

magicbastarder wrote: »

as above, i think we're talking at cross purposes here. i was referring to a post where (IIRC) someone suggested asking the gardai for insurance details relating to an incident where there was no contact and no physical damage.

The actual effect is that the guard will have to visit the motorist and ask for their insurance details.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The insurer doesn't have to prove who was driving. If the vehicle that they insure is being driven in a dangerous manner, that's an issue for the policy holder and the insurer. The policy holder could be asked to produce evidence that it was being driven by a different driver on a different policy if necessary.


I've reported drivers to insurers in the past and had reasonably positive responses from at least one insurer.

How did you find out the insurance company?

average_runner

Chiparus wrote: »

The actual effect is that the guard will have to visit the motorist and ask for their insurance details.

Can gardai give private information out?

magicbastarder

Chiparus wrote: »

The actual effect is that the guard will have to visit the motorist and ask for their insurance details.

but in this scenario, if you've nothing to claim against his or her insurance, why would the garda request that information or give it to you?

AndrewJRenko

average_runner wrote: »

How did you find out the insurance company?

By looking at the disc on the windscreen

AndrewJRenko

Chiparus wrote: »

The actual effect is that the guard will have to visit the motorist and ask for their insurance details.

Can't they look up the motor tax database?

tuxy

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Can't they look up the motor tax database?

Would that work? I just put in random info when I tax my car online.

AndrewJRenko

tuxy wrote: »

Would that work? I just put in random info when I tax my car online.

I assumed they would have cross checked it, but maybe not. I guess it could be out of date also, if you changed insurer during the tax year.

They were supposed to be getting access to the insurance databases for ANPR in the cars.

If you know the address, then you could pay a visit and check the disc.

ED E

Limerick RPU were doing lookups with the mobility project so presumably they have the db in a somewhat usable state now.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

By looking at the disc on the windscreen

Ok, so u gave them video evidence. Was just wondering

Kaisr Sose

tuxy wrote: »

Would that work? I just put in random info when I tax my car online.

It makes no sense to enter incorrect information. I thought you had to provide it, though I knew there was no correlation/verification due to no linkage in systems . Maybe they need to look at tightening that loophole

CramCycle

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

It makes no sense to enter incorrect information. I thought you had to provide it, though I knew there was no correlation/verification due to no linkage in systems . Maybe they need to look at tightening that loophole

Its not verified, has to be correct the first time but I haven't even looked up the number since, just made it up.

average_runner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Can't they look up the motor tax database?

Also there is restrictions on what Public Services have access to other databases. I don't think we have that good of a system here.

I know my insurance details aren't in the tax database as my tax is up before my insurance and I would move insurance most years

Chiparus

average_runner wrote: »

Also there is restrictions on what Public Services have access to other databases. I don't think we have that good of a system here.

I know my insurance details aren't in the tax database as my tax is up before my insurance and I would move insurance most years

That was a problem before and guards were seizing cars that were insured but the 'computer said no'

CramCycle

Chiparus wrote: »

That was a problem before and guards were seizing cars that were insured but the 'computer said no'

Which is why I have my insurance documentation in your car. I thought you were meant to be but am unsure.

buffalo

CramCycle wrote: »

Which is why I have my insurance documentation in your car. I thought you were meant to be but am unsure.

I'm not sure if that's a typo, or you've insured Chiparus' car for him/her.

Chiparus

Chiparus wrote: »

That was a problem before and guards were seizing cars that were insured but the 'computer said no'

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0503/698472-gardai-database/

homer911

The Executive Express bus was parked outside the petrol station on the N11 inbound again this morning, email of complaint gone in. Its an accident waiting to happen as the bus forces cyclists off the cycle path, and vehicles exiting the petrol station have their view of the traffic obscured

GlennaMaddy

Same situation at a petrol station in north county Dublin, except there are no parking signs erected by the council outside. I've rang the offending company, spoken to the manager and the practice stopped for a few months.

I've also spoken to the manager on duty in the petrol station, who say it's not their problem, but each time I remind them they can refuse to serve the driver, and also remind them that a petrol station licence comes up for renewal and the public have a right to object.

5uspect

Came across the aftermath of cyclist who was doored this morning along Dolphin Road along by the Grand Canal. He was down on the ground and the motorists in the car were attending to him. Looks like a young lad in the back swung out the back door into the cycle lane.

He was bleeding a bit on his forehead and they seemed to have called an ambulance. I didn’t hang around once I knew the people in the car were genuine. Spotted the ambulance a few minutes later.

AndrewJRenko

homer911 wrote: »

The Executive Express bus was parked outside the petrol station on the N11 inbound again this morning, email of complaint gone in. Its an accident waiting to happen as the bus forces cyclists off the cycle path, and vehicles exiting the petrol station have their view of the traffic obscured

One of their buses jammed up Leeson St Bridge while coming out of town this evening.

5uspect

5uspect wrote: »

Came across the aftermath of cyclist who was doored this morning along Dolphin Road along by the Grand Canal. He was down on the ground and the motorists in the car were attending to him. Looks like a young lad in the back swung out the back door into the cycle lane.

He was bleeding a bit on his forehead and they seemed to have called an ambulance. I didn’t hang around once I knew the people in the car were genuine. Spotted the ambulance a few minutes later.

F'away off with your coats is what I'd be saying there while waiting on the "bus". Ask for insurance details and see how quick they'd be to lay on the coats. Maybe I'm being harsh on them.

average_runner

5uspect wrote: »

Came across the aftermath of cyclist who was doored this morning along Dolphin Road along by the Grand Canal. He was down on the ground and the motorists in the car were attending to him. Looks like a young lad in the back swung out the back door into the cycle lane.

He was bleeding a bit on his forehead and they seemed to have called an ambulance. I didn’t hang around once I knew the people in the car were genuine. Spotted the ambulance a few minutes later.

If they called an ambulance, there must be some serious injuries, otherwise its people wasting our money yet again

magicbastarder

whose call is it as to whether he suffered serious injuries? plenty of people are involved in accidents where the adrenaline masks how seriously injured they are.

stoneill

average_runner wrote: »

If they called an ambulance, there must be some serious injuries, otherwise its people wasting our money yet again

Who decides on what a serious injury is?
Bleeding from the head is serious even if there not much blood. Concussion, compression, fractured skull, swelling brain, various levels of consciousness, who knows?