[im stuck]

i reacently had a crash down a country lane, i have told the insurance company the events what happened and also took photos. my problem is that they are saying that i have to prove that i had managed to stop before the third party hit me as im not accepting the 50-50 claim. the third party are saying that we were both moving in opisted directions. i know i had stoped when she hit me but im struggling to prove this. i have a theory, not sure if its correct thou, if a stationary car is hit by a moving car then the glass from the moving car will have showered the stationary car.

if anybody can comfirm my thoery that would be great or if anyone has any advise :)

[Snowball]

The problem here is that the glass from the moving vehicle, which showered the stationary vehicle, would most probably have had a similar showering effect if both vehicles were moving; i.e., the sudden stopping of the vehicle which showered the glass, and the other vehicle (yours and stationary?) would still be positioned the same to each other.
You say that you took photographs. Your description of the collision leads me to understand that you both met each other "head on". I think that your relative positions on the road may possibly be more helpful.
Hope you get justice.

Regards, Snowball.

[wagolynn]

I think the confirmation you are looking for will be in the airbags memory. You may have to contact the airbag manufacturer for access to the data. I think your body shop can reset the air bag computer but I am not sure if they can read its memory but it is worth asking.

I follow your reasoning about the glass but I cannot see a way to prove where the glass ended up, unless, it shows in your photograph. The glass in the moving vehicle would carryon after impact, due to inertia, at about the speed at impact. Thinking about a stationary car, I think the windscreen glass would tend to fall out onto the bonnet again due to inertia. The glass would have been stationary with the car until impact, the car would be pushed back but (if the glass shattered at impact) the glass would try to stay where it was i.e. it would appear to move forward relative to the car. The whole thing is more complicated if the glass breaks after the car starts to move back, it could end up inside the car and with laminated glass, its doubtful it would be as clear as above.

If you had stopped, did you stop in the middle of the road, or did you try to make room for the other vehicle by pulling off the road? If so that may be something to mention.

Good luck anyway.

[Snowball]

There is no mention that any airbags were deployed, so would there be any information in the memory? If there is, although I don't know what it would be, it still would not prove whether that vehicle was stationary or moving forwards.

If one vehicle was stationary, it could have been pushed backwards slightly, depending on force of impact and whether its brakes were held on during the impact, but there isn't going to be any physical evidence to prove this.

I still feel that the position of the two vehicles immediately after the impact is the most reliable factor, but were photographs taken before any of the involved vehicles were moved?

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by Snowball

There is no mention that any airbags were deployed, so would there be any information in the memory? If there is, although I don't know what it would be, it still would not prove whether that vehicle was stationary or moving forwards.

The air bag memory records things like speed, throttle position, brake pressure, g forces and engine rpm, if what I read is correct. It stores about 60 min worth of data on a last in last out basis. The problem is access to this data and its format differs for the different air bag manufacturers.

[Snowball]

But, even then, would it register any forced reverse movement by the impact? Reading the post, I have concluded that proving one vehicle to be stationary is an important factor in deciding blame, and I cannot imagine any onboard computer memory that would disclose this information.

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by Snowball

But, even then, would it register any forced reverse movement by the impact? Reading the post, I have concluded that proving one vehicle to be stationary is an important factor in deciding blame, and I cannot imagine any onboard computer memory that would disclose this information.

Hi snowball; I don’t see why negative g cannot be measured. The manufacturers record all this data I think primarily to defend them if anyone sues over deployment or non-deployment of airbags. There is some stuff about this at - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/...fe/1235819.stm

[Snowball]

wagolynn, I can see what you are getting at but, for the measurement of G-forces, in simple terms isn't this done on the principle of relating a fixed "sensor point" to the movement of the vehicle? This would mean that, in the event of the vehicle being hit head on from stationary, the sensor would still react as travelling forwards in relation to the vehicle.

Surely the negative G-force would come into play if the vehicle is hit from the rear.

The only way I can visualise the electronics being able to measure a vehicle being pushed backwards is by some part of the transmission system detecting a sudden reverse action to the normal direction of rotation, and relaying this to the computer.
Have they reached this level of sophistication in the production of road vehicles?

Reading the article that you refer to, it does seem as though we are being denied a lot of information that may be useful in the event of an accident.

[Rolebama]

There are some cars currently equipped with the recorders Wagolynn refers to. Some will record data relevant to road speed, time, gear selected, engine rpm, location info, fuel consumption and airbag info, Others will record some of these factors, others will include other data. I know of at least one manufacturer who relies on the data to approve or reject warranty claims relevant to engine damage.

[smudger]

It really annoys me that some drivers will tell lies to their insurance company (even to the police) that can make them out to be the innocent party, even when they actually caused it!

What makes it even worse is, they get away with it, leaving the other party out of packet:mad:

[wagolynn]

Originally Posted by smudger879n

It really annoys me that some drivers will tell lies to their insurance company (even to the police) that can make them out to be the innocent party, even when they actually caused it!

What makes it even worse is, they get away with it, leaving the other party out of packet:mad:

Your insurance company says do not admit liability, technically, they can refuse to pay if you do.

[im stuck]

first off all i would like to thank everyone who has tried to help out :)
i still havnt got any further though :confused:
and also to reply to the above comment. some insurance companies do not take into account what was said at the scene (as ive been told by them ).
this is because i could have been making them say this
.:mad:

thnx guys :D