Completely agree, but it is likely those costs would not have been quite so high if you were paying them yourself. Repair shops and people in general tend to overcharge insurance companies in these situations.
I had a minor accident once where I ran into the car in front very slowly in stopped traffic: the bumper was dented and I was quoted several hundred thousand yen to replace it and the panels around it. In the end a mechanic I know banged out the dent and charged me 4,000 yen
[/quote]
DudeInJapan wrote: ↑Sun Jul 02, 2023 11:53 am
Isn't that also known as insurance fraud?
I've been involved in a number of accidents here, just seems to be how things are done. Shops will ask who's paying, then give you completely different possible courses of action (insurance paying = completely fixing the car by replacing any possibly affected parts with new ones; self pay = doing it as cheaply as possible to get the vehicle operational again).
There is a 整形外科 near us who recommend warm water baths for 'rehabilitation' for people involved in accidents. You go in every day, get a foot bath, and can bill the insurance for a hospital visit at a fixed rate. Do that every day for months on end and you end up with a decent payout.
I'm surprised the insurance companies put up with it, to be honest.
English teacher and writer. RetireJapan founder. Avid reader.
DudeInJapan wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 11:15 am
I hit a car on the road HARD. It was my fault at the end of the day and nothing was provided to me to fix my bike.
My understanding is that in an accident involving a bike and a car, legally it's always the car's fault, no matter who really caused it. Is that wrong?
Even if a bicycle runs into a stationary car? Doesn't seem to pass the sniff test.
DudeInJapan wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 11:15 am
I hit a car on the road HARD. It was my fault at the end of the day and nothing was provided to me to fix my bike.
My understanding is that in an accident involving a bike and a car, legally it's always the car's fault, no matter who really caused it. Is that wrong?
Even if a bicycle runs into a stationary car? Doesn't seem to pass the sniff test.
Although bicycles are normally apportioned less responsibility in collisions with cars -- the reasoning being in part that they and their passengers are more vulnerable so more deserving of protection, and that less skill and expertise is expected of bicyclists in the first place (no license required, no age limits imposed) -- they do get assigned a portion of the blame in many cases, especially when the cyclist has been reckless or broken laws regarding double riding, smartphone use, drinking, and the like. This site and this one list some examples showing how apportionment typically works, although the insurance companies themselves usually work out the details based on precedent.
My understanding is that in an accident involving a bike and a car, legally it's always the car's fault, no matter who really caused it. Is that wrong?
Even if a bicycle runs into a stationary car? Doesn't seem to pass the sniff test.
Although bicycles are normally apportioned less responsibility in collisions with cars -- the reasoning being in part that they and their passengers are more vulnerable so more deserving of protection, and that less skill and expertise is expected of bicyclists in the first place (no license required, no age limits imposed) -- they do get assigned a portion of the blame in many cases, especially when the cyclist has been reckless or broken laws regarding double riding, smartphone use, drinking, and the like. This site and this one list some examples showing how apportionment typically works, although the insurance companies themselves usually work out the details based on precedent.
Thanks, that is much more reasonable than it always being the car drivers fault!
