Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Bil has given himself whiplash on purpose

194 replies

tartenjane · 21/02/2016 21:45

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 posts:
Helmetbymidnight · 22/02/2016 15:55

Mm the usual tactic is to pull in front of you on the motorway but quiet roundabouts are the place many do it- start to pull away then slam on brakes.

PoundingTheStreets · 22/02/2016 15:55

SoThatHappened - thanks for the link.

Doesn't alter the fact BIL is a dishonest twat, and a criminal one at that, although truth be told it's highly unlikely he'd ever be prosecuted for it.

dangerous driving:
A person drives dangerously when the way they drive falls far below the minimum acceptable standard expected of a competent and careful driver; and it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.

Think most people would agree that deliberately trying to cause a collision in an unroadworthy car in order to make a financial gain falls well below the acceptable standard.

The other driver, otoh is guilty of careless driving, which is a lesser offence.

I can blame insurers for plenty of things, but I don't blame insurance companies for BIL's dangerous dishonesty.

LurkingHusband · 22/02/2016 16:01

This thread is a good advert for dashcams ...

TensionWheelsCoolHeels · 22/02/2016 16:11

YY Lurking, I deal with fraud claims for a living and cannot overstate just how bloody brilliant dash cams can be in these situations. I've seen a few cases where the dash cam footage nailed the case for us. It's an ever growing problem and dash cams used correctly, can help massively.

DinosaursRoar · 22/02/2016 16:12

LurkingHusband - given the info the OP has given, a dash cam wouldn't really help the tailgating driver all that much, other than showing they were clearly too close, the BIL braked and they then hit the back of them. A dash cam is unlikely to pick up the road ahead as well as both verges to show clearly there was nowhere a badger or other animal could be.

Sad the BIL will get away with it, but then as he's ripped his back/neck muscles, there's an element of not really 'getting away with it' - whiplash bloody hurts. Hopefully that alone will be enough to put him off the idea doing anything like this again in the future!

TensionWheelsCoolHeels · 22/02/2016 16:16

I have to disagree dinosaur - dash cam footage can give a lot of info and support a statement where someone feels the cause of the crash isn't straight forward. As I've said, I deal with these claims for a living, and often it's the little nuances, discrepancies and tiny details that can make a case.

It's not just a straight forward process when dealing with fraud cases - information comes from numerous sources, and dash cam footage, even if it doesn't look great quality, can actually be extremely helpful.

AyeAmarok · 22/02/2016 16:29

Here's hoping the car behind had one Tension

Although given this lovely guy of a BIL, according to the posters on this thread, made sure to check that there were no innocent children or passengers in the car behind before he slammed on his brakes in order to induce an accident, I'm sure he's made sure there was no dashcam there too.

Hmm
Adarajames · 22/02/2016 16:51

Id report someone, family or not, if I felt it was needed.
Am now thinking about where. Can I can find a decent but cheap dashcam, and how to remember to install it each time I go out as sure It'd be stolen if I left it in the car in this area!

TensionWheelsCoolHeels · 22/02/2016 16:54

If you check out Which's reviews you'll get an idea a to cost and quality, and links on where you can buy them.

RedHelenB · 22/02/2016 17:31

It would serve BIL right if the car behind him hadn't got any insurance! I seriously doubt BIL loked to see who was in the car behind - he's behaved selfishly and irresponsibly and I hope he loses out financially so he doesn,t behave that way again.

feellikeahugefailure · 22/02/2016 19:31

How exactly could a dash cam help? The tailgater was driving too close to stop in time when the car infront braked.

Unless the car infront had just overtaken or joined a dash cam wouldnt do anything other than show the car was tailgating.

specialsubject · 22/02/2016 20:12

hmm. so my policy of never starting to pull on to a roundabout until the car in front has DEFINITELY gone is worth doing, as someone has mentioned it is a crash-for-cash tactic.

I also never believe indicators until the car has actually started turning. Seen too many dopey buggers who don't signal, and car designs are now so crap that it is often quite hard to see an indicator that is in use.

as for tailgaters - 2 second rule AT LEAST.

still no sympathy for bozo BIL. But if he really does have whiplash, he's up for a lifetime of pain.

TensionWheelsCoolHeels · 22/02/2016 20:48

Feel, the right footage from a dash cam can show the manor of driving of a car in front, the behaviour of the driver prior to deliberately slamming on brakes, it can confirm who is in the car at the time & can also record the behaviour of the 'inducer' after the collision. All of this is really useful evidence when trying to prove fraud.

You seem to be under the impression that anyone driving too close is always at fault regardless of the actions on the car that intentionally slams on breaks for no justifiable reason. That simply isn't true. I've defended plenty of policyholders who were driving close enough or were distracted enough to be induced into hitting a car in front, and won enough cases to know that the person who deliberately induces an accident can and will be deemed fully responsible for an accident they intentionally cause for financial gain, irrespective of the fact the car behind was driving too close.

WhatALoadOfOldBollocks · 22/02/2016 21:19

Tailgaters are annoying, but it's completely unacceptable to slam your brakes on with the sole purpose of causing a rear end collision so you can get some cash from the insurance company for a new car!Hmm

Who do you think loses every time insurance companies pay out? We do! Insurance companies are there to make a profit, so the more claims they pay out for the more our premiums go up, even if we are fantastic drivers and never make a claimAngry. This is the sort of thing that's making me consider in-car cameras. I hate insurance fraud. If you see a tailgater pull over and let it pass. Don't be a twat and slam your brakes on to teach them a lesson! Hmm

Oldraver · 22/02/2016 22:08

There was a programme over the weekend about fraudsters with a case similar to this. Only they also had an accomplice in another car that stopped the person who crashed from moving over. The car in front slammed on the brakes with an empty road in front.

It was only as the crasher had a dashcam that it came to light. Bothe fraudsters got a suspended sentence

tiggytape · 22/02/2016 22:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

gandalf456 · 22/02/2016 23:05

I would make it known that I don't approve but I'd never report a family member

FoolsAndJesters · 22/02/2016 23:33

Gandalf. Not quite the same but what about reporting an older family member who was not safe to drive due to extremely poor eyesight. I was going to report my own Dad Sad fortunately, he decided to pay for a cataract op in the nick of time. I would have reported him though. What if he had not had the op and had killed someone. I would have felt terrible.

LifeofI · 22/02/2016 23:36

Tbh no i wouldnt report him because i HATE tailgaters. Wgat the hell do you get out of doing this to someone? They are trying to bully you to speed up and they wouldnt do it to police.
So i say good on your bil for taking that idiots insurance higher maybe he will learn to stop tailgating

LifeofI · 22/02/2016 23:43

I have been paid out when my car was vandelised and i was 1 week out MOT so it doesnt mean he will not get paid out and you already said he had 1 month MOT.

You dont need to report it to the police i have before and they did nothing

I dont know who people saying to report him will report ut to?
My sister had someone do this scam on her and the woman got paid out. Your word isnt proof.
And the idiot tailgater should learn not to drive up peoples arse.

AppleSetsSail · 23/02/2016 07:29

The fraudster deliberately caused at least 93 people to drive into the back of him over a number of years (using different cars and splitting the cash with the car owners).

Obviously, peddling one's services as such is insurance fraud. It would be much harder to prove this in isolation, like the OP's BIL. The moral of the story here is 'don't tailgate'.

AppleSetsSail · 23/02/2016 07:30

I have been paid out when my car was vandelised and i was 1 week out MOT so it doesnt mean he will not get paid out and you already said he had 1 month MOT.

I'm fairly certain there's a one-month grace period on MOTs.

tiggytape · 23/02/2016 08:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LurkingHusband · 23/02/2016 09:26

Of course, the other danger of trying to engineer a tailgating accident, is you are gambling that the person hitting you from behind is

a) insured (oh the delicious irony if they weren't Grin)
b) not related to one of the late Kray twins, and rather than whiplash, make the claim more about missing teeth and baseball bat inflicted injuries.

SovietKitsch · 23/02/2016 09:30

People like this are the reason that soon no one will be able to make a claim for whiplash, genuinely injured or not...sledgehammer to crack a nut, but there we are

Swipe left for the next trending thread