[Closed] Possible crash for cash scam

Do not understand the people on here saying the guy that stopped was somehow at fault as I thought we had established that it is nearly 100% the guy that crashes into the backs fault,

Edit
It goes back to the "Died on the moral high ground" tombstone, you can be in the right and still end up dead or seriously injured. Sometimes being right isn't that important.

but he could have done more than moan and swear at the car in front

Not really a car went up the inside of him at the same time he was rear ended that was the only place he could go(hit the car then he is at fault), plus by the height of him I suspect he was in a truck which ain't as manoeverable as a car.

He was too close initially, there were 2 long gaps at the point that he was swearing away at the car in front. If he had been further away, paying attention behind and inside and thinking a bit more there was something he could have done. It doesn't excuse blame.

agreed he was too close initially but he did manage to stop, if he was further away this could still have happened because it is only with hindsight that we knew he was coming to a complete stop and lets face it if someone is stopping for no good reason on a fast road it would probably surprise you how many people would not use the other lane, as I said before there was 4 seconds between the last car passing and the next one coming(the same 4 seconds that he is wondering why this guy is slowing down) then he is going too slow to pull into the inside lane safely as the car is motoring up it.

I'm not knowingly trolling.

It's a bit like bullying then. It isn't how you perceive it. It's how others perceive it.
Your trolling always seemed a bit more subtle, but I'm not working so hard to spot it these days.

I had a woman try this on with me at a large roundabout and am firmly in the camp that anyone could be sucked in.

The woman was in front of me, plenty room between my car and hers. Nothing coming and she pulls off at a decent lick. It's a difficult junction so I follow at the same speed. Suddenly she's completely stationary and I skid to a halt. A little further round and she does exactly the same thing again. Had it been wet or had I not been completely switched on, it's entirely possible I could have tapped her bumper.

Car was a shitty old banger and so was the driver from what I could see.

I'm with Cougar on this one. Leave enough room and keep your eyes open and you won't have any problems. However I seem to be in a minority nowadays when I keep to the speed limit and leave proper stopping room. I find it amusing that people get so irate when you do this though, tailgating, weaving around looking to overtake in increasingly dangerous places as their rage increases. I do a lot of miles and I bet one of those people have been one of the STW driving gods. 😉

Cougar's right, you should leave a good gap and not crash into someone pulling an emergency stop. That's why there is presumed liability.

Only issue is that, on a motorway, that gap is big enough for a car to pull into. This happens to me often and I'm no longer leaving enough space between me and the (new) car in front.

If they then pulled an emergency stop soon after pulling in I'd go into the back of them.

This is happening more and more. I have a family member who works in insurance fraud and she was saying that reports of this have risen 600% in the last 2 years.

I had it happen to me in March of last year. I was driving along the A34 towards Oxford, very early in the morning and a small van pulled out of a layby just up ahead of me the road was dead quiet and I indicated and moved into the outside lane (dual carriageway) to overtake. Just as i got within a few car lengths i would say i was doing 70-75mph and he was doing about 55-60mph he suddenly swerved into the outside lane and did an emergency stop. Having only just previously looked in my rear view mirror when overtaking anyway i knew there was nothing behind so was able to swerve into the inside lane to avoid him. There was nothing to do with speed or stopping distance or gap to the car in front that the haters can through at this, he was clearly trying to get in an accident. I reported it to the police with his numberplate but never heard anything back.

If you give yourself an adequate gap between you and the car in front then no matter what they do you will not hit them

Nonsense. M8, M90, M9 - leave the right amount of space at peak times and someone will pull into it whether you're in inside or outside lane. Back off to create space, same thing happens again. It isn't just what you do - it is what other people do.

Rubbish - it is what you do. There is no excuse for not leaving an adequate gap. Being surrounded by ****s doent mean you should become a **** yourself. Peer pressure at its finest....

(...)surely you'd disconnect your brake lights!
It would be better to fit blown bulbs.

Not saying every accident gets investigated, but this trick is easily spotted if it does get even a cursory investigation.

Bulbs that are working at the time of the accident leave traces on the inside of the plastic lens when it breaks as they are hot. Bulbs that aren't working don't.

That relies on a decent impact obviously.

I had a woman try this on with me at a large roundabout and am firmly in the camp that anyone could be sucked in.

. . . if you're not paying attention.

Seriously, it's very unlikely (not saying impossible), but very unlikely that anyone could get taken in by this if they're paying attention and leaving sufficient room to the vehicle infront. I pay just as much attention to the rear view mirrors when I'm driving as whats infront or to the side of me. That way if something like this happens I'll know exactly where other vehicles are around me and can take appropriate avoiding action, whether that's braking, swerving, or accelerating sharply as second nature and without even thinking about it - the plan has been thought about already. If you're not confident you could avoid this sort of situation, then I'm sorry but you should really consider taking some more training.

Not saying every accident gets investigated, but this trick is easily spotted if it does get even a cursory investigation.

Bulbs that are working at the time of the accident leave traces on the inside of the plastic lens when it breaks as they are hot. Bulbs that aren't working don't.

That relies on a decent impact obviously.

Well that can't be too hard to simulate either, but I'm not going to do their homework for them!

A couple of months ago, there were 2 cars doing this at the roundabout off the M54 junction by RAF Cosford. I am overly cautious with my braking distance as it is.

wanmankylung - Member

Rubbish - it is what you do. There is no excuse for not leaving an adequate gap.

Could be wrong but I think the point was that you can only create a gap, you can't stop other people taking it- all you can do then is create another which someone else may take. Sometimes it feels downright sketchy with people swarming to get into your 2-car-lengths.

I've heard of the roundabout one where the scammer pulls away, driver behind moves forward now looking to their right, scammer then slams on, bump whiplash etc. Yes that's victim driver not paying attention.*

Surely car overtakes pulls in front 3m away and brakes, you aint stopping. Its a forced crash

Either way, intending to cause a crash is complete ****tery and the scammers should be in a lot of trouble.

*my mate suffered from this, dunno if it was a scam or just one of those things, either way since then in traffic I make a point of not even bothering to look for a gap to my right until I'm at the front of the queue.

Could be wrong but I think the point was that you can only create a gap, you can't stop other people taking it- all you can do then is create another which someone else may take. Sometimes it feels downright sketchy with people swarming to get into your 2-car-lengths

I don't see how Bruneep's second vid is cash for crash. A driver didn't know which way to go and slowed before the exit. The following driver slowed too and was hit by the third who wasn't paying attention.

I'm sure it's easy to get someone to hit you from behind, even someone as careful as Cougar, but the risk is they have a dashcam - and in the case of Bruneep's first vid a lifetime driving ban for the driver of the blue car that caused the crash by stopping in the outside lane for no reason seems appropriate.

the exit swerve was an engineered incident. both cars were iirc operating as a pair.

with a bit if luck the scammers will try some more 40 ton truck rear shunts, and instead of the N x £2000 that insurers dish out no questions asked, will find that a week in ICU with several broken bones is quite painful.

have has a few on the autobahn. overtake, cut in with seriously less than one car length, then oddly slow right down to 90kph from ca. 120. scam? dunno. but there's a point where the gap between me and the car in front is way less than a highway code 270ft, and it's 100% not my fault.

fast lane for me with 270ft gap between me and all cars in all lanes in future 🙄 then I can be sure I have stopping distance to everyone 🙄

edit: PS and a road angel. Most of the seriously insane driving is scooters.

the exit swerve was an engineered incident. both cars were iirc operating as a pair.

BTW - No surprise that many on here are blaming the victims - fairly typical of any STW 'accident' threads.

BTW - No surprise that many on here are blaming the victims

Depends on the definition of "victim"

If I'm driving along, and the car in front stops suddenly, and I run into it, it's my fault.

I may still be the "victim" of a crash for cash scam, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still my fault

That's the whole point of it surely.

If it wasn't my fault, I'd be claiming off them, and it would be a totally shit scam.

They engineer a situation, but it would rely on poor driving by the "victim" for it to play out the way they want.

I'm sure it's easy to get someone to hit you from behind, even someone as careful as Cougar

I think I may have misrepresented myself here, I'm not claiming to be perfect. We all make mistakes; I have at times driven too close to the car in front, though I do make a conscious effort to try not to. But I recognise that as my failing when I do.

I've been caught out by exactly the roundabout situation D0NK describes (I don't think it was a scammer, just an old duffer who'd started pulling out onto an empty roundabout and then stopped dead a couple of yards ahead for no discernible reason), you live and learn. It'd be easy to argue that it was their fault for driving erratically, but the blame rests wholly for me for being too close, looking round the roundabout rather than in the direction of travel, and foolishly assuming that the other driver wasn't Bellender Carlisle.

Point is, you have to assume that anyone else on the road could be about to do something randomly batshit mental. They might well be scammers deliberately trying to cause an accident, but if you plough into the back of someone else then you have to accept a degree of responsibility for that. You were going too fast, or were too close, or not paying attention, or quite probably a combination of those factors. If you weren't, the scam wouldn't work. I've done it myself many years ago, drove into the back of them at a fairly low speed. Why? I wasn't paying attention; I was trying to work out something that was going on behind me, took my eyes off the road for a fraction too long and the traffic in front of me stopped abruptly and I didn't quite get to the brake fast enough. It's so easily done, this is why braking distances are so important (and presumably why the scammers are so fond of it), if I'd have given myself more room that day then I'd almost certainly have avoided an accident.

The argument that you can't leave sufficient braking distance because of $reason is pretty thin (and not wholly relevant anyway if you're comparing motorways with regular roads). If anything that sounds more like a lane discipline issue to me; if you're in the correct lane and someone pulls out in front of you, I'm inclined to think "so?" Someone's in front of you, big whoop.

The 'overtake' challenge someone described earlier sounds particularly terrifying though. Someone swerves in front of you and jams on when you're in the middle of an overtake, you'd really need your wits about you.

Starting to wonder which STWer was the bellend that stuffed their Audi into the back of my poor little Micra the other day.

You know 80% of people are above average at driving, I'm guessing it's closer to 95% for STW people... http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001457586900047
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority

You know 80% of people are above average at driving, I'm guessing it's closer to 95% for STW people...

I wonder how many are above average at reading?

but the blame rests wholly for me for being too close

it's the lane changers that concern me. I can leave as much space as i like for the car in front, but every single car in another lane, at some point leaves me as little as zero stopping distance. think my record low is sub 1 metre, and i think that was genuinely a dippy bint that had no feel for how large her Polo was.

(re averages) Honestly I do think I'm above average, because the average seems to be really low, it doesn't imply I'm a Driving God. I don't think you can pat yourself on the back just for being above average here.

half of that scam is based on you successfully stopping. then someone else hitting you in to them.
you only have to tickle their bumper, and hey presto 4 lots of £2000 whiplash. also evidenced by several that have posted on this very forum that got whiplash in a car park ding when not even in the car!

In which case, that's not your fault, and you can join in with a whiplash claim of your own. Everyone's a winner!

Actually, what do they gain by having you in the middle in this scenario? From a blame / claim perspective, isn't that the same as having their mates just run in it them directly?

(re averages) Honestly I do think I'm above average, because the average seems to be really low, it doesn't imply I'm a Driving God. I don't think you can pat yourself on the back just for being above average here.

+1.

I said exactly that on a Speed Awareness Course, got told that this means I'm over-confident. Completely missing the point that I genuinely believe I'm an above average driver because the 'average' standard of driving is frighteningly poor. If I thought my standard of driving was comparable to the average I'd start taking the bus.

[i]You know 80% of people are above average at driving[/i]

What the hell does that mean? 20% are shit drivers? How is it measured? Safety? Courtesy? Appropriate speed? Patience? or a Clarkson measurement of Good Driving?
Jeez.

What the hell does that mean?

it means you missed the joke...

.....on a Speed Awareness Course

....I genuinely believe I'm an above average driver

A chap I used to work with got caught out in an accident. Not entirely crash for cash but he did rear end someone that had abruptly stopped in front of him. Whilst he admitted blame, he was quite surprised to be hit by a whiplash claim for 5 people, when there were only 2 in the car at the time of the accident.

I've also been involved in a 5 car shunt where I couldn't stop in time of a line of queuing traffic. Hold my hands up, my fault* and I now drive far more carefully. However, if someone is hell bent on intentionally causing a crash (or for you to take avoiding action which would otherwise be unnecessary) with a view to claiming off you, I reckon you could be the most careful driver in the world but still get caught out.

*the police had a interesting take on that. The 2 options they gave were for the first 4 drivers to be charged with driving without due care and attention, or for us all to let the insurance co's sort it out. Needless to say everyone wanted to take the second option.

.....on a Speed Awareness Course
....I genuinely believe I'm an above average driver

Yes yes, well done, have a biscuit.

I said not a couple of edits ago that I wasn't perfect and didn't claim to be. I got speedgunned on the border of where a 50mph limit drops to a 30. I was braking but hadn't quite got down to 30mph by time I'd reached the sign, if they'd have taken the reading a second later I'd have been in the clear. Still, no excuse; do the crime, do the time I suppose.

Yes yes, well done, have a biscuit.

better than a ticket 😛

[i]it means you missed the joke...[/i]

Not the first time 🙂

Someone swerves in front of you and jams on when you're in the middle of an overtake, you'd really need your wits about you.

I was fortunate enough that there was no other traffic around so didn't have to think twice about swerving, however I was driving a friends S-Class Merc at the time and for such a big car I was surprised at how well it responded to jamming on the brakes and swerving at the same time. I am sure the electronics had a lot to do with it.

The police don't do speed checks on the line of a limit, starting their measurement well within the limit in order to comply with the following guideline (which has been updated but remains much the same)

A speed limit starts or ends at the exact point on a road indicated by the relevant signs. There is no legal bar to the enforcement of a speed limit from that exact point. There are however operational constraints dependent on the device used. ACPO will not specify a minimum distance from the start or end of a speed limit from which enforcement can place. Enforcement may only take place where the operator is absolutely positive, and a court may subsequently be certain, the whole of the measurement of the speed took place within the speed limit. If there is any chance, whatsoever, that any of the measurement took place, or could have taken place, outside of the speed limit then that measurement will be disregarded.

Honestly I do think I'm above average, because the average seems to be really low

(looking at it more closely and I guess you see the flaws, juries don't like to convict people like them, stuff I've seen is just anecdotal, confirmation bias etc etc, still easy to get that impression tho)

The police don't do speed checks on the line of a limit, starting their measurement well within the limit in order to comply with the following guideline (which has been updated but remains much the same)

"Don't" and "shouldn't" are not the same thing.

Sounds like I should've challenged it. Ho hum, bit late now.

The standard of driving is much worse than anybody can ever imagine; most drivers haven't got a scoobies how to operate their vehicles properly or how to drive safely and efficiently. In the USA it's even worse.

I must be one of the lousy drivers. I find the way the vast majority of my fellow road users behave is just fine. Meeting a motoring yob is a once a month or once every few months event.

Don't be so obtuse...in the first clip, the driver leaves enough space to come to a complete standstill on the outside lane of a dual carridgeway. He's then hit from behind by another car, forcing him into the car in front.

But so close that he has to brake at the same rate as the car in front, forcing the exact same situation on the car behind.

The whole point of leaving plenty of space is not to give yourself JUST enough time to stop. But time to think, make an educated decision, and circumvent any dangers with as little risk as possible.

I do agree that anyone could be caught out by it. But I bet instances of crash for cash scams would decrease by about 99% if people just drove properly. Driving like that is just making it easy for them.