Flying tyre on expressway?? What to do??

[thatJDMahboy]

To me, this is a pretty unusual and weird occurrence to experience a flying tyre on expressways in Singapore. As I have no prior knowledge and experience of this type of incident, I am curious to know what would be the possible actions that the camcar could take? And would insurance coverage be applicable in such a situation? At the speed that the tyre was flying towards the cam car, I reckon that the cost for repairs and replacements of parts would be a hefty sum. 

At the moment, I am still puzzled about the facts of the incident:

1. Is this the fault of the van driver? As he is responsible for:

• Spare tyre not being secured properly; and
• For playing the role of the "catalyst" in this incident, since the tyre was merely a stationary road hazard moments before the incident happened.

2. As the Subaru Forester driver caused the tyre to fly towards the cam car, is it his fault in this incident?

3. Are both the van driver and Subaru Forester at fault? 

4. Or is the cam car just so damn unlucky, that he's unable to get any form of compensation for damages to his car?

Hope you guys can enlighten me on these type of unusual incidents, and shed some light on the relevant procedures required. 🙂 

 

 

[ER-3682]

Cam Car claim own Insurance.

[Didu]

Need something like that for protection against flying tires....

 

[Brass]

2 hours ago, ER-3682 said:

Cam Car claim own Insurance.

Just admit that you are out of luck and move on to repair the car yourself either via claiming your own insurance or out of your pocket.

If the tyre directly flew out of a moving lorry or vehicle and it didn't land on the road before it hit you, with appropriate footage you can claim.

My car was hit by a plank of wood at Bukit Panjang flyover about 3 years ago and I claimed the lorry driver's insurance. That took a month or two iirc and the process was smooth without any rejection of claims or hassle etc.

[thatJDMahboy]

1 hour ago, Brass said:

Just admit that you are out of luck and move on to repair the car yourself either via claiming your own insurance or out of your pocket.

If the tyre directly flew out of a moving lorry or vehicle and it didn't land on the road before it hit you, with appropriate footage you can claim.

My car was hit by a plank of wood at Bukit Panjang flyover about 3 years ago and I claimed the lorry driver's insurance. That took a month or two iirc and the process was smooth without any rejection of claims or hassle etc.

Thanks for enlightening me on this matter, especially from someone who has been in a similar situation before. Wah, really damn suay if need to claim own insurance or pay out of own pocket. 😪 I am glad that you managed to claim the lorry driver's insurance. Just wondering, how bad was the damage to your car?

On a side note, dash cams are so crucial during times like this, and yet there are some drivers that are willing to forgo it...

[thatJDMahboy]

2 hours ago, Didu said:

Need something like that for protection against flying tires....

 

That's gonna be an expensive add-on😂

[Comage]

I find our car insurance system very flawed. 

If someone damages your vehicle and his vehicle is in motion - you can claim for damages assuming the video evidence is present. 

However, if the other vehicle is not in motion (stationary car at a car park for instance), you can't claim for damages? Like for instance when someone opens the car door really hard and causes a palm-sized dent on your car?

Wtf? Why should there be any difference whether the car is in motion or not? There's 101 ways I can damage another vehicle using my vehicle that will end up with the other guy sucking his thumb, not being able to claim a single cent even with video footage. 

[inlinesix]

7 hours ago, Comage said:

I find our car insurance system very flawed. 

If someone damages your vehicle and his vehicle is in motion - you can claim for damages assuming the video evidence is present. 

However, if the other vehicle is not in motion (stationary car at a car park for instance), you can't claim for damages? Like for instance when someone opens the car door really hard and causes a palm-sized dent on your car?

Wtf? Why should there be any difference whether the car is in motion or not? There's 101 ways I can damage another vehicle using my vehicle that will end up with the other guy sucking his thumb, not being able to claim a single cent even with video footage. 

We don’t have consumer protection.
What do you expect?

[ER-3682]

7 hours ago, Comage said:

I find our car insurance system very flawed. 

If someone damages your vehicle and his vehicle is in motion - you can claim for damages assuming the video evidence is present. 

However, if the other vehicle is not in motion (stationary car at a car park for instance), you can't claim for damages? Like for instance when someone opens the car door really hard and causes a palm-sized dent on your car?

Wtf? Why should there be any difference whether the car is in motion or not? There's 101 ways I can damage another vehicle using my vehicle that will end up with the other guy sucking his thumb, not being able to claim a single cent even with video footage. 

If Insurance Companies allowed Open Door that caused Damage claims,i think 1 day exceed a few hundreds cases,then prepare for alot of ''Inflated'' Claims & hike in Insurance Premiums.

[Ody_2004]

7 hours ago, Comage said:

I find our car insurance system very flawed. 

 

Insurance just like condom.. you just hope it works 😂

Guess our system is pretty much same as other countries..

Spoken to someone who in the insurance biz donkey years ago.. he said best for them is selling Fire Insurance.. but govt need them to sell any other before they can be selling insurance in our sunny island.. so this include motor insurance.. in the past (or even current) many workshop, owners, all trying to "gain" so the premium just get bigger n bigger.. every year i paying more despite my cars got older and cheaper..

[Mustank]

Drive coe 老 pigkarp 😁

[Tohto]

51 minutes ago, Mustank said:

Drive coe 老 pigkarp 😁

I believe if I see your pickup on the road, I will take photo and post on rare car thread. Have not see it for a long time. 

[thatJDMahboy]

1 hour ago, Ody_2004 said:

Insurance just like condom.. you just hope it works 😂

Guess our system is pretty much same as other countries..

Spoken to someone who in the insurance biz donkey years ago.. he said best for them is selling Fire Insurance.. but govt need them to sell any other before they can be selling insurance in our sunny island.. so this include motor insurance.. in the past (or even current) many workshop, owners, all trying to "gain" so the premium just get bigger n bigger.. every year i paying more despite my cars got older and cheaper..

Hahahaha what an unsual but apt comparison 🤣

[thatJDMahboy]

9 hours ago, Comage said:

I find our car insurance system very flawed. 

If someone damages your vehicle and his vehicle is in motion - you can claim for damages assuming the video evidence is present. 

However, if the other vehicle is not in motion (stationary car at a car park for instance), you can't claim for damages? Like for instance when someone opens the car door really hard and causes a palm-sized dent on your car?

Wtf? Why should there be any difference whether the car is in motion or not? There's 101 ways I can damage another vehicle using my vehicle that will end up with the other guy sucking his thumb, not being able to claim a single cent even with video footage. 

 

2 hours ago, ER-3682 said:

If Insurance Companies allowed Open Door that caused Damage claims,i think 1 day exceed a few hundreds cases,then prepare for alot of ''Inflated'' Claims & hike in Insurance Premiums.

What @ER-3682 mentioned is very true. And also, the claim process will definitely not be as smooth for these "petty" cases. 

[DOBIEMKZ]

10 hours ago, thatJDMahboy said:

Thanks for enlightening me on this matter, especially from someone who has been in a similar situation before. Wah, really damn suay if need to claim own insurance or pay out of own pocket. 😪 I am glad that you managed to claim the lorry driver's insurance. Just wondering, how bad was the damage to your car?

On a side note, dash cams are so crucial during times like this, and yet there are some drivers that are willing to forgo it...

Dashcams are a necessity now.

[thatJDMahboy]

Just now, DOBIEMKZ said:

Dashcams are a necessity now.

Yup, it is. However, every other day you will see people posting on Motoring Groups on Facebook asking for dashcam footage of their accident, as they do not have dashcams installed in their car. 

[DOBIEMKZ]

1 hour ago, Mustank said:

Drive coe 老 pigkarp 😁

I have fond memories of my uncle's pick-up when I was a primary school kid and sometimes he would gave my cousins and I a ripe home from school.

That was in the 80s and the vehicle was a blue Datsun pick-up with flat cargo bed type. Had quite a hard time climbing up onto the bed when we are so little. 

[DOBIEMKZ]

16 hours ago, thatJDMahboy said:

To me, this is a pretty unusual and weird occurrence to experience a flying tyre on expressways in Singapore. As I have no prior knowledge and experience of this type of incident, I am curious to know what would be the possible actions that the camcar could take? And would insurance coverage be applicable in such a situation? At the speed that the tyre was flying towards the cam car, I reckon that the cost for repairs and replacements of parts would be a hefty sum. 

At the moment, I am still puzzled about the facts of the incident:

1. Is this the fault of the van driver? As he is responsible for:

• Spare tyre not being secured properly; and
• For playing the role of the "catalyst" in this incident, since the tyre was merely a stationary road hazard moments before the incident happened.

2. As the Subaru Forester driver caused the tyre to fly towards the cam car, is it his fault in this incident?

3. Are both the van driver and Subaru Forester at fault? 

4. Or is the cam car just so damn unlucky, that he's unable to get any form of compensation for damages to his car?

Hope you guys can enlighten me on these type of unusual incidents, and shed some light on the relevant procedures required. 🙂 

 

 

Actually from the video I was not expecting that the dislodged wheel and tyre (supposedly lying flat on the road) to be kicked up so high when it was ran over by the white car.