Wish I were a truck with faulty air brakes

[Kklim]

Edited January 5, 2013 by Kklim

[I-LOVE-CARS]

 

here, enabled for u

 

[Ryosuke]

Lady gaga driver?

[Kengheng450]

Sent to TP for action, X-ing double white line

[ER-3682]

The car may be in the wrong,but if you hit it back,comfirmed your N.C.D. is gone.

[Nzy]

The car wrong. But dun understand your title. Why a truck with faulty air brakes? You wish to rear end that car?

[Hamburger]

The car wrong. But dun understand your title. Why a truck with faulty air brakes? You wish to rear end that car?

talk nia lah......

[Nullifi3d]

Most likely scenario -

 

Driver: Where ar?

Passenger: Up ahead on your left.

Driver: Faster let me know when to turn.

Passenger: Here! Here! Turn now!

Driver: Ok ok!!

[RadX]

Most likely scenario -

 

Driver: Where ar?

Passenger: Up ahead on your left.

Driver: Faster let me know when to turn.

Passenger: Here! Here! Turn now!

Driver: Ok ok!!

 

 

then from somewhere

 

hornnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!! [laugh]

[Adrianli]

then from somewhere

 

hornnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!! [laugh]

 

U also up so early on sunday morning!!!

[Heartbreakid]

I think insurance claim will also base on traffic rules before one is allowed to claim. Like in this case, this driver of the red car, stopped in the middle of the road, crosses the double white line and got hit. Rightfully, such act if got hit from the rear, the driver can claim nothing. Anyone, care to clarify?

[Nzy]

I think insurance claim will also base on traffic rules before one is allowed to claim. Like in this case, this driver of the red car, stopped in the middle of the road, crosses the double white line and got hit. Rightfully, such act if got hit from the rear, the driver can claim nothing. Anyone, care to clarify?

 

Nope. Cuz if the car behind keep safe distance then he wouldn't rear end already. Only certain rules like if you go against traffic then you get 100% liability rather than 50-50 if head on collision. This happened to my dad few years ago. We were driving on a lane that can go straight only suddenly got this car infront decided to turn right he just jam brake cuz the other side got on coming traffic, my dad rear ended him and he claimed 100% from my dad's insurance company although the pics clearly showed he was trying to turn from a lane that is straight only.

 

Insurance argued that if my dad kept a safe distance he wouldn't rear end already. But IIRC that guy got summon from TP for not forming up correctly after my dad reported to the TP. Showed the report to insurance company already also the same. Still 100% liability for my dad.

[PengYou]

Nope. Cuz if the car behind keep safe distance then he wouldn't rear end already. Only certain rules like if you go against traffic then you get 100% liability rather than 50-50 if head on collision. This happened to my dad few years ago. We were driving on a lane that can go straight only suddenly got this car infront decided to turn right he just jam brake cuz the other side got on coming traffic, my dad rear ended him and he claimed 100% from my dad's insurance company although the pics clearly showed he was trying to turn from a lane that is straight only.

 

Insurance argued that if my dad kept a safe distance he wouldn't rear end already. But IIRC that guy got summon from TP for not forming up correctly after my dad reported to the TP. Showed the report to insurance company already also the same. Still 100% liability for my dad.

 

Drivers in Sg are in Mercy of 2 things, COE and insurance company. My friend kenna x2 accident, both time he suay kenna bang, both time he claim 100% from opposite party, but when he wanna renew, no insurance co wan to insure him..