Bil has given himself whiplash on purpose

[tartenjane]

Found this out yesterday and still not sure what I should do.

Bil's car failed the mot, so he waited until someone was tailgating him slammed on the breaks and claimed a badger ran out into the road. This was fake. But the car driving too close was real and it went into him causing damage. It will cost too much to fix his car, so he's hoping to get the insurance payout for the car and a whiplash.

Its more really a wwyd?

OP doesn't say the whiplash is fraudulent. She says BIL got it on purpose, not that he's faking.

BIL is an ass. Driver who ran into him is an ass for driving too close too.

I doubt there's anything OP can do about it though. Unless she has some proof he set it up on purpose. Ideally the driver who ran into him would still be held liable for the accident and BIL would be found guilty of dangerous driving. Can't see how that would happen though.

Oops. My mistake. Misread it.

Still feel he's a dishonest so-and-so who deserves everything he gets though.

However, I have less sympathy for the other driver now, who was ultimately too close.

Yes and you can blame insurers for that Poundingthestreets, not BIL.

Are you aware that claims like this were severely restricted in terms of costs as of 1 April 2013. Google it...LASPO and also fixed costs in PI claims.

The costs of running such claims have been brought down years ago. The insurers have chosen not to pass on the savings they have made to you and have continued to increase premiums despite saying the restrictions on these claims would save money.

Have a go at your insurer.

So if tailgaters dont travel alone and may have innocent children in the car THEY SHOULD NOT TAILGATE. It is on the tailgater who has no idea what the car infront will do but has the choice to keep a safe distance.

Fucking hate tailgaters so no sympathy there to be honest.

Your bil won't go far in his crime career if he mouths off about his actions. Twat.

However I wouldn't dream of reporting a family member in these circumstances and to do so anonymously is to me worse than the crime.

SuitsYou I am pleased to read those morons who take up my breaking space can be seen as liable if I ever go into the back of them. I do very much drive like 'Miss Daisy' with two hands on the steering wheel at all times and leave large breaking distances but no end of times I have to break suddenly because of idiots overtaking from several cars behind then swerving in and taking away any safe breaking distance I have - always find I have to break and quite quickly to give myself any sort of breaking distance protection from these morons, because frankly they are the ones most likely to cause a collision in front that I have to stop for.
I've a discovery now so I pity the fool that I do ever hit...
OP no advice I'm afraid, whilst I agree that fraud does need reporting I also feel you need evidence to report it and for it to be taken seriously, unless you can prove what he did was on purpose you may be better leaving it to the insurance and watching his claim crumble as his story doesn't stack up

Whether he stopped on purpose or not, the person who hit him is still entirely responsible for their own actions. They were tailgaiting, they were too close, they hit the car in front. Tough luck, really.

I frequently push my brakes so my lights go on when someone drives to close! But I don't drive without an MOT or insurance!

too

I always feel a bit ambivalent about the tailgaiting hate on here, in that I hate tailgaiters, but I also think driving all the time in a state of expecting a car to suddenly brake unexpectedly is a tad unrealistic. Of course, if you are driving with due care and attention, and so forth, that's what we should all attain to do- but there are times where stopping is more expected (coming up to a roundabout) and times where it is less (driving briskly on a country road, on a drive up ramp to a motorway) and someone slamming on the brakes in these situations is likely to cause a pile up. If I'm entering onto a busy motorway junction, with say 10 other cars, it's almost impossible to drive slow enough and to leave a good distance between the cars in front, at some point you have to accelerate enough to get a good speed up. That's why fraudsters do indeed target these types of scenarios and brake on motorway ramps, because they know the vast majority of people will be trying to keep up with the traffic and will just accelerate into them.

Also, screeching to a halt is awful, but so is wondering if the car behind is going to smash into you and your children.

We are on a very crowded island, and more or less no-one I know leaves 2 chevrons apart or whatever it is in the rush-hour run. Absolutely no-one leaves enough room in the rain. Not the 'right' thing to do, but what lots of human not perfect people do and it is incredibly morally wrong to then try to profit from that, even if the other person is at fault as well. It is not made lesser, IMO, by their faultiness.

This person is an utter dick-head.

This is from motoringresearch.com

Home > Car News > Can you drive your car after an MOT fail if the old test hasn’t expired?

Can you drive your car after an MOT fail if the old test hasn’t expired?
February 1, 2016 Andrew Brady 13 Comments

Can you drive your car after an MOT fail if the old test hasn't expired?

The government has updated its guidelines warning motorists that they face prosecution if they drive their car following an MOT failure – even if its previous test hasn’t expired.

Some drivers put their car in for an MOT early to find out if any faults need repairing, mistakenly thinking they can use the vehicle until the old test runs out.

A lot of speculation exists around the topic online, with a number of sites claiming that drivers are within their rights to continue using a car with an in-date MOT certificate, even a tester has since deemed it unroadworthy.

But now the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) has updated its guidelines, saying: “You must not drive the vehicle on the road if it fails the test, even if the MOT hasn’t run out.”

It adds that the only exceptions are to drive to have the defects fixed, or to a pre-booked MOT appointment.

If you’re caught driving a car in a dangerous condition, you could face a fine of up to £2,500, a driving ban and three penalty points.

I am that so many posters on here are sympathising with your bil, regardless of the fault/responsibility of the car behind.

I don't think I could ever look him in the eye again.

Having experienced whiplash when younger, I think the BIL has learned the hard way what a shit idea this was already !

The tailgater is as much at fault as the OP's BIL, while the BIL didn't have a good reason to stop, the driver behind didn't know that, you can rarely see far enough ahead to know the driver in front won't have to stop suddenly, people who drive like wankers this are always running the risk the driver in front will have to suddenly stop - most people do hit the brakes when an animal runs out, even if it is "small enough to hit".

The tailgater was going to hit someone at some point, at least we don't need to feel sorry for the driver with whiplash. If it changes the behaviour of the tailgater to avoid other people being hit by them in the future, all the better.

If I was the OP, I wouldn't trust my BIL (and SIL) in the future as they clearly are moral free, but I wouldn't report them, as it is, it'd be your word against theirs that there wasn't an animal on the road, and as you weren't there and are only hearing this second hand, I can't see that this will go very far.

Usually garages won't release a car that's failed the mot ime. Friend of mine fell foul to this when it failed on middle back seat belt (never used) wasn't properly working and it took the garage nearly a week to get a replacement. Her old mot had two weeks left to run on it, but they said they couldn't release it.

I'm sure I read somewhere that insurance companies are clamping down hard on whiplash claims and requiring much more evidence, as there have been so many fraudulent claims in the past.

Her old mot had two weeks left to run on it, but they said they couldn't release it

They were lying. Not MOT station can ferish to release a vehicle. They can put it in writing that it dangerous to drive but they have no power to stop you driving away.

As for the newly realeased guidelines about failing an MOT whilst a previous one is still valid that is just a guideline. There is no way to actually revoke an MOT. Obviously you can still be done for driving a car in a dangerous condition but that applies whether you have a valid MOT or not. You could still be prosecuted for having a car in a dangerous condition one day after passing an MOT.

Not condoning his actions at all, but the car behind shouldn't have been tailgating in the first place.

It's wrong for him to break sharply intentionally but how can it be proved that's what he did? Moral of the story: Don't drive to close to the car infront.

I currently have whiplash from someone going into the back of me.
No matter how desperate I was for money I certainly wouldn't have put myself in this position.

Both BIL and tailgater are to blame but I feel getting into an accident is worse than being a bad driver (although maybe not by much)

I'd still report to IFB even if it would be hard for them to prove the fraud. At least my conscience would be clean.

clam

Those new guidelines were added late last year I believe and there were some discussions then about it being complete bollocks with no actual place in law. It transpires that as of Feb this year the DVSA have removed that wording. It simply states that if your car fails an MOT before its expiry date that you can drive it away. Obviously the usual caveats apply about dangerous condition etc. If you failed an MOT 2 weeks before expiry, drove it home and fixed the issues then you could drive round quite happily and legally for the next couple of weeks.

For those of you saying it's always the fault of the car behind that's not true. I was overtaken by a car on a quiet side road (no-one else around really) who slammed on their brakes as soon as they got in front of me. A very deliberate attempt to get me to hit their car. Luckily my reactions were fast enough to mean the car stopped centimetres from theirs so no accident was had. They just drove off then while I sat still with a pounding heart and adrenaline flooding through me with the shock.

My cat- this scam is happening time and time again, I'm sorry it happened to you, and astounded that those who do it have such support.

Thanks Helmet, this actually happened in the 90s before this became such a common thing. I find it unbelievable that people would be happy to potentially kill people just to gain a couple of grand.