- Car crushing after a serious R.T.A question?
A friend was recently driving her car late at night on a stretch of 3 lane road where a vehicle in front of her was sadly involved in a tragic fatal R.T.A with a pedestrian. She has been informed that due to the severity of the incident her car must be destroyed. She wasn’t the cause of the accident and she wasn’t the first driver/car involved in the incident, additionally her car was undamaged.
I wouldn’t want to buy or see cars for sale that had been involved in a fatal incident but it looks like all six or seven cars involved are being destroyed. I am wondering is if the complete car is destroyed or whether engine parts are salvaged and the bodywork/cars identity destroyed? What, if anything would stop the car crushers helping themselves to the cars destined to be destroyed?Posted 6 years ago
Who is saying her car has to be crushed?
If it’s undamaged she will not have claimed on her insurance.
Sounds very odd.Posted 6 years ago
Who’s informed her?Posted 6 years ago
Feel sorry for your friend, would hate to be arrive to the above situation be it a by stander or being involved. Is she OK?
Her car is undamaged and the Police are going to destroy it? Is this tin hat time as that’s all types of odd. I’ll be hiding under my desk if anyone needs me.Posted 6 years ago
I have never heard of this before.
Why are “they” going to destroy her car if it’s undamaged?
What has her insurance company said?Posted 6 years ago
OP for clarity – Are you saying your friend, and others, also hit the pedestrian after the initial collison?Posted 6 years ago
someone has wires crossed surely
if it was my car they would be prizing it from my cold dead hands.Posted 6 years ago
She has been informed that due to the severity of the incident her car must be destroyed
By whom?Posted 6 years ago
The incident was understandably extremely distressing for all involved but she seems to be getting the help that she needs to cope. The local constabulary have been quite good and handled things well.
Her insurance company have informed her of the decision to destroy the car. They have also told her that at least one other insurance company have decided to destroy their clients car.Posted 6 years ago
ah ok they also hit the ped secondary, i assume its been impounded as evidence ? it might be that there is blood such like all over the underside of the car ? wouldnt bother me but i guess its a biohazard that needs to be removed fully to ensure safety of folks working on the car in future ? i assume to do this thoughrally would be quite expensivePosted 6 years ago
So what actually happened?
– car A hits pedestrian
– friend, driving car B, hits car A
– cars C-F hit car A/B
How is there no damage? Why is she claiming on insurance is there’s no damage? Why would they destroy a car with no damage?
This makes very little sense indeed.Posted 6 years ago
Is there some policy of crushing cars “involved” in road fatalities?
Even so, she had nothing to do with the accident(right?), and patently hasn’t hit anything or anyone (as the car is undamaged)?Posted 6 years ago
did her car hit the pedestrian or any of the other cars? if not why should it be destroyed?
does that mean that everyone that’s even just seen a serious or fatal collision have their cars crushed?Posted 6 years ago
Nope, something doesn’t add up at all – insurance companies aren’t in the habit of destroying “undamaged” cars out of squeamishness.
Either there’s something you’re not telling us, something your friend’s not telling you, or someone is trying to scam someone somewhere along the way.Posted 6 years ago
Never heard of this before, but my motor insurance days were a few years ago now.
Be very interested to know on what basis her insurers can take possession and decide the fate of an undamaged car. Seems to me that we are missing part of the full story here.Posted 6 years ago
This is wrong their is no reason or rationale to destroy an undamaged car. Where has it been stored. On occasions cars seized by the police for forensic examination appear to end up in certain garages who then refuse to hand them back unless the owners pay massive storage charges on threat of crushing the car .Posted 6 years ago
So what actually happened?
I think car A hit the pedestrian, cars B to F then also hit person in road, not other cars.Posted 6 years ago
Surely the insurance company must have given her the reason for destroying her car. If its not damaged in any way then why would they do ths, doesn’t make sense.
I wouldn’t want to buy or see cars for sale that had been involved in a fatal incident
I don’t suppose you would know though if the car wasn’t damaged. Can’t say it would bother me if I bought a car and the previous owner had been involved in a fatal rta using the car. As long as there was no damage to the car. Its just a machine, nothing else.
it might be that there is blood such like all over the underside of the car ? wouldnt bother me but i guess its a biohazard that needs to be removed fully to ensure safety of folks working on the car in future ? i assume to do this thoughrally would be quite expensive
That would make sense I guess if the car was of low value but would be classed as a ‘write off’ surely as cleaning the car would cost more than its worth?Posted 6 years ago
neilwheel – Yes, my friend run over the individual after the initial collision.
All the vehicles involved were kept on the carriageway until the morning after the incident and then transported to a police compound as I understand things. All of the occupants of the vehicles involved had to leave the highway on foot, escorted by police officers. The insurance companies then became involved about a week after the incident.Posted 6 years ago
Phia – Sorry, I have no experience of this kind of situation.
I’m not sure if the car would be broken for spares or some special control would be imposed for the complete entity to be recycled.Posted 6 years ago
Circs as I suspected then, but still not clear on who is saying the car must be crushed and why?Posted 6 years ago
I think car A hit the pedestrian, cars B to F then also hit person in road, not other cars.
I imagine the cars are impounded and held – because they can’t say how long for/coupled with the possible mess they decided to take ownership/keep the cars.
Grim and terrible though. I’m not surprised its affected her.
I wouldn’t want that car- imagine finding hair or teeth etc in the engine bay during a air filter change. No.
A Pigeon recently ‘took out’ one of my foglights. I had to remove some fluff etc. Thats not a problem- a human. They can keep the car. Too distressing.Posted 6 years ago
yep find out if its being crushed because the storage charges are more than the cars worth …. if thats the case then then i would be fighting it , in these circumstances you entered no contract with the storage company.
their contract is with the cop shop who gave them the car.
IANAL and my advice is not advice so worth exactly what you paid for it but my cars are low value and if disposed of due to storage charges i did not enter into i would be kicking up a shit storm.Posted 6 years ago
If the insurance company want to destroy the car then they have to pay for it. They will have to pay a value that is agreed with ‘your friend’ before they do as it is not their property.
If a value is mutually agreed then where’s the harm? If it is not then there is all kinds of problems in the offing.
And I have never heard such a thing. A work colleague was involved in a fatal RTA with a pedestrian a couple of years ago and he had his car returned to him complete with smashed windscreen and associated DNA evidence still intact. Nasty.Posted 6 years ago
M.C.T.D – I believe the insurance company informed her of the decision to crush the car.
I guess that there is a chance that the insurance company aren’t telling my friend what is going on underneath the car, although she has visited the car to collect her belongings.
EDIT: the vehicle is less than 6 months old.Posted 6 years ago
Circs as I suspected then, but still not clear on who is saying the car must be crushed and why?Posted 6 years ago
Her insurance company have informed her of the decision to destroy the car. They have also told her that at least one other insurance company have decided to destroy their clients car.
With no vehicle insurance to claim on, this will go against your friends NCB (this being writing off the car)and likely increase her premiums. If no damage to the vehicle I’d insist they tell her why they deem it necessary to write the vehicle off.Posted 6 years ago
A work colleague was involved in a fatal RTA with a pedestrian a couple of years ago and he had his car returned to him complete with smashed windscreen and associated DNA evidence still intact. Nasty.
That is quite grim and I find that a bit of a surprise if I’m honest! Not that I’m doubting you.Posted 6 years ago
A 6 month old car must be on new replacement value in that case. Quite a stretch for an insurance co.
I can’t see why she would argue on that basis; she’s getting new wheels.
Any deal less than that and she should kick off, big time.Posted 6 years ago
It’ll be the insurance company. From their point of view, why bother risking handing it back? Could be problems with it, could have ‘bits’ under the bonnet. Not worth their bother to pay storage, to have it cleaned and risk further grief. Pay out, get the risk off their books.
These are the same companies who hand out £5k whiplash claims just to save the bother of investigating.
I’ve seen plenty of cars in scrapyards with loads of evidence of what happened to the occupants in them, I don’t think it’s a police thing.Posted 6 years ago
piha – Member
That is quite grim and I find that a bit of a surprise if I’m honest! Not that I’m doubting you.
Even if someone was to be murdered on your property you might find that you have to clean up yourselfPosted 6 years ago
Without being grisly, I can see how someone might want rid of such a car, but the insurers can’t dispose of it until they have paid the market value or replaced it (depending on her policy)
I once spent an eventful few days piecing together the facts linking a standard Autoglass windscreen replacement claim and a claim for an injured pedestrian that came in 6 months later. Policyholder hadn’t thought to mention the cause of the broken windscreen to Autoglass when he called them out. 🙄Posted 6 years ago
[hora]Someone at the ins co want a cheap ‘salvage’ car?[/hora]
Or possibly it’s be ragged around the impound and is now royally ****? (this happened to my cousin)Posted 6 years ago
I can understand this. You will never find any vehicle that has been involved in an RTA that has caused serious injury or death in a scrap yard – they all go off to the crusher immediately after the police finish their investigations. I think this is mainly to contain the biohazard the vehicle poses. As the car is less than a year old it’ll be replaced with a brand new identical model.
A work colleague was involved in a fatal RTA with a pedestrian a couple of years ago and he had his car returned to him complete with smashed windscreen and associated DNA evidence still intact
That’s quite shocking. I suspect someone made a mistake there.
‘ve seen plenty of cars in scrapyards with loads of evidence of what happened to the occupants in them
Really? A long time ago perhaps, but not any more – none of ours have any. In fact the yard that has the contract with Northumbria police for disposing of the numerous A1 events has a special sealed compound for them.Posted 6 years ago
These are the same companies who
hand outpay £5k whiplash claims just to save the bother ofadditional costs associated with investigating.
FTFY, I assure you insurance companies would love to see whiplash claims finished. In fact there’s been talk in the press about a cap on associated costs this week.
I still don’t get it though, I can’t see an insurance company paying out on a (basically) brand new car.Posted 6 years ago
Can’t cost that much to steam clean, scrape bits off and disinfect a car surely.Posted 6 years ago
aye – then on theother side of that nick theydont bother their arse investigating when the sums dont add up – i am currently fighting their lax policys against me at the moment where they claim i managed to smash a wishbone / steering rack inwards to the centre of the car – every panel along the side of my car and the rear wheel – yet only scrape and dent along the front of a corsa by us driving into it APPARENTLY.
Last i checked cars dont strafe side ways as you drive along like duke nukem on the amiga did.
they made their declaration of position via email 20 minutes after the incident without seeing any pictures or even speaking to my mrs…..
its been 6 months of fighting – but we have CCTV footage now – waiting for review.Posted 6 years ago
i wouldnt want a car back thats been steam cleaned gary. not unless it was purely mechanical.
i dont buy cars with spotless engine bays for this reason either – the used car dealer world loves to **** cars up with their steam cleaner.Posted 6 years ago
I still don’t get it though, I can’t see an insurance company paying out on a (basically) brand new car.
A three lane road and the fact that half a dozen drivers managed to run over a pedestrian before they could stop suggests high speed.
A body hit by 6 cars at high speed is going to be pretty unpleasant.
The engine bay/wheel arches could be full of all kinds of ‘bits’. Putting the car back to the state where it’s no longer a potential biohazard could mean dismantling everything in the engine bay, removing all the wheels and arches, removing the entire suspension and exhuast systems to be cleaned, inspected, replaced if necessary and reassembled.
That’s not going to be cheap.Posted 6 years ago
the used car dealer world loves to **** cars up with their steam cleaner.
First car I bought was steam cleaned; broke down on it’s 1st proper drive due to water in the spark plugs.Posted 6 years ago
The topic ‘Car crushing after a serious R.T.A question?’ is closed to new replies.