So Apparently Horses Think The M1 Is A Paddock - Sorry for people with shit internet, large files.  

Page 2 of 3
Jump to page
GHOSTY
Post #36

Glad to hear you are being covered finacially for your loss. That would just suck if you got stuck with the bill too.

DAL32
Post #37

I thought the idea of bullbars were so you could hit that sort of thing and come off relatively unscathed.

Not surprised that idiots are coming out with the "how didn't you see it" comments. I got the same shit when I hit a dog on a suburban street.

the_random_hero
Post #38

QUOTE (DAL32 @ Feb 26 2011, 05:51 PM) *
I thought the idea of bullbars were so you could hit that sort of thing and come off relatively unscathed.

Not surprised that idiots are coming out with the "how didn't you see it" comments. I got the same shit when I hit a dog on a suburban street.


Not much is standing in the way of you hitting a 500kg object at 120km/hr, no matter how big the bullbar is.

devi8
Post #39

fuck dude! as you say, it could have been much worse...

timmy_o
Post #40

QUOTE (VN-COM @ Feb 26 2011, 04:14 PM) *
fark mate, your a lucky bugger. I heard the acco over the uhf, was doing a run to coffs, as I do nearly every night.

Were the horses from the area, only reason I ask is on my way down, i passed two floats pulled over side by side on the southbound side around worongary. It almost looked as if they were gonna swap them over or something.

It would be easy to hit something were it happened, I know because your mirror is still at the scene. Its is pretty dark there and there are roadworks so not 100% sure how a horse get get across anyway.

Hope you are good now mate, its certainly the last thing you are looking for on the highway at that time of the morning


Not sure if they were local or not. I have the ladies details in which I passed onto my insurance company but they were microchipped etc. That would be a stupid thing to do to change horses over in floats on a motorway. Coming from a farm when I was growing up they can be a SOB to get in sometimes, especially if it was to be spooked by coming traffic etc... Yeah the lady travelling behind me that stopped to help me said she did not see them either.


QUOTE (the_random_hero @ Feb 26 2011, 04:49 PM) *
Fucking hell dude, that's an impressive crash to survive! I think I may still have photo's from when a police Hilux hit a horse at 120 - twisted the steel bullbar up like a pretzel (forced it pretty much straight through the block), peeled the roof back like a tin of tuna.
Glad to hear you're ok.


Wow. When I hear that, even looking at my own photos and realising how lucky I am, it makes me feel even more lucky considering bullbar on a hilux compared to FTO

timmy_o
Post #41

And thanks for everyones wishes on a recovery to :jerkit:

nferno
Post #42

As for not seeing it. One night heading down the coast i almost collided with a pile of dirt. Just a pile of dirt sitting in the left hand land. Like a body truck had just tipped it off there. Missed it by meters. Didn't see it till i was up close. A night shit like that just blends in with the scenery.

Ralli
Post #43

QUOTE (boostd_civic @ Feb 26 2011, 01:26 PM) *
how can you not see a horse on the highway at early morning when no other cars are on the road?? were you on the drink all night?

either way it sucks mate, hope you have a speedy recovery.

Are you kidding, if the horse comes out of nowhere , you may see it, but not going to be able to stop quick enough to not hit it, and being a animal, you could swerve to miss it, but it could move into the direction of you swerving.
Have you ever had an animal run out in front of you ? its fucking scary ...

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Feb 26 2011, 08:08 PM) *
And thanks for everyones wishes on a recovery to :jerkit:

Least you will have the joys of boost to keep you company in your recovery ... :unsure:

trev084
Post #44

Years ago a mates workmate was driving towards Toowoomba on the Warrego at Walloon at dawn and a horse ran out, the impact of him hitting it turned the truck (light truck with toolbox rear) on it's side and killed the driver.

da_foles
Post #45

Mate you are one lucky Bloke. something was watching over you. Glad you are alright.

slow bus
Post #46

I hit a horse in my falcon back in the day, it took 3" off the roof height and wiped out the front end, luckly I was only going 60 at the time

When the police showed up they were trying to fine me for driving without undue care and attention

atec77
Post #47

[quote name='timmy_o' date='Feb 26 2011, 11:22 AM' post='1287078997']
So, I've just got home from hospital. Was driving home from dropping a mate off after being in Broadbeach on Tues night, was about 1.30am. I dropped him off at Merrimac (Exit 77) this is the last I remember. I then got back on the M1 to continue north to my house and hit a horse at around Exit 75. There was apparently two horses from what the lady that stopped behind me said. I can't remember anything from dropping him off to when I woke up in the Emergency Room. I wrote my car off, was in the FTO. Have two fractures in my skull and going by the pictures I honestly don't know how I am not dead or paralysed etc. Just thought I'd share the pictures with everyone. :]


Might be the right time to purchase a casket ticket and say a prayor or two ?

350stato
Post #48

Holy fuckin shit!!!! Scratches on car should buff out right?.....

_Ben
Post #49

Hectic shit

Good to see you're all good though :jerkit:

timmy_o
Post #50

Just spoke to the chick who was behind me a bit more. She said they both just ran out at last second from the side. So had no choice but to hit it. My old girl flew up from Tas to look after me. We were discussing how you can see wreckages like mine and others and how people survived and see things far less worse and people die.

Ralli
Post #51

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Feb 27 2011, 08:44 AM) *
Just spoke to the chick who was behind me a bit more. She said they both just ran out at last second from the side. So had no choice but to hit it. My old girl flew up from Tas to look after me. We were discussing how you can see wreckages like mine and others and how people survived and see things far less worse and people die.

It just wasn't your time ....

BWAAAT
Post #52

oooo very lucky, a bit over a year ago 1 of my relatives died hitting a horse.

WinKE55
Post #53

QUOTE (Ralli @ Feb 27 2011, 10:56 AM) *
It just wasn't your time ....



exactly.

My cousins crash, he survived with nothing done to him. Was a slippery road after they picked up some mcdonalds, lost control and rolled into some wall.

escape91
Post #54

glad your alright. pretty hectic

s11via
Post #55

QUOTE (VTR @ Feb 26 2011, 11:49 AM) *
Geez... car Vs. horse is a different one on a motorway.

Hope you recover quickly OP.


lol this

COPY&PASTE
Post #56

QUOTE (EATU4T @ Feb 26 2011, 12:06 PM) *
wow now that was just to much horse power for you i guess..












































sorry, someone had to say it.. good to hear your ok mate
Dry bro,very dry :drool:

timmy_o
Post #57

So apparently because the paddock the horse is meant to be in doesn't attach to the M1, I am at fault and have to pay excess? This doesn't seem right to me. The horse is owned by a person whom they are aware of the owner. Therefore it is the owners responsibilty to keep the horse within their own property not roaming around the M1? It's not my fault their fence is damaged. Off to the solicitor I go.

...91LTI...
Post #58

Damn dude that is a nasty acco, definitely must not have been your time...

Glad to hear you're ok (might have been a different story with your mate in the car too) :bowrofl:

As for the excess, wtf, that's just plain gay.

Where is the common sense in that?

timmy_o
Post #59

.

176OES
Post #60

couple of things...

1st, glad you're alright... I know what its like, we hit a horse in a Hyundai Excel... it took the roof off, so yeah... I know how lucky you are!

2nd, the excess applies where the insurer has no one from whom they can legally recover their losses. If it can be proven the owner of the horse is legally liable, then your insurer will be seeking to recover their claim losses from them. You may find that they could be asking an excess in the interim whilst liability is being ascertained... and if it does get determined through admission from the owner or through court proceedings between the insurer & the owner that the owner is liable, you may be refunded your excess as a result.

timmy_o
Post #61

The owner has admitted that the two horses are hers. And the fence was broken that's why the horse got out. Just had the council send me 57 pages of stuff, it says that the owner is responsible to have it refrained on her property. That she has failed to do so. Therefore it is her issue.

Ralli
Post #62

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 1 2011, 12:42 PM) *
So apparently because the paddock the horse is meant to be in doesn't attach to the M1, I am at fault and have to pay excess? This doesn't seem right to me. The horse is owned by a person whom they are aware of the owner. Therefore it is the owners responsibilty to keep the horse within their own property not roaming around the M1? It's not my fault their fence is damaged. Off to the solicitor I go.

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 1 2011, 03:18 PM) *
The owner has admitted that the two horses are hers. And the fence was broken that's why the horse got out. Just had the council send me 57 pages of stuff, it says that the owner is responsible to have it refrained on her property. That she has failed to do so. Therefore it is her issue.

I was going to say, how can it be your fault for hitting a horse that ran out in front of you and you had not time to stop etc ?

176OES
Post #63

Simple Ralli - if the owner of the horse is unknown, then it is impossible for the insurer to recover losses. As such an excess is applicable.

Unfortunately the terms 'At Fault' and 'Not at Fault' in the insurance world give the implication that a finger of blame is being waved at the driver and they are the naughty one if the insurer cannot recoup losses. If it were termed 'Recoverable' and 'Non-Recoverable' it would make things a lot easier for people to understand.

Say for example it were a kangaroo, which is wildlife, and has no owner - excess would apply because the insurer cannot sue the Kangaroo (or the estate of the kangaroo in the event of its death)... Now, as mentioned above... if the term At Fault gets used, it sounds harsh on the driver, not his fault the dickhead roo jumped in front... if it were called non-recoverable, makes a lot more sense in relation to the circumstances.

Just a pity we cant change the names on these things, but I hope that helps clear it up

timmy_o
Post #64

QUOTE (176OES @ Mar 1 2011, 06:27 PM) *
Simple Ralli - if the owner of the horse is unknown, then it is impossible for the insurer to recover losses. As such an excess is applicable.

Unfortunately the terms 'At Fault' and 'Not at Fault' in the insurance world give the implication that a finger of blame is being waved at the driver and they are the naughty one if the insurer cannot recoup losses. If it were termed 'Recoverable' and 'Non-Recoverable' it would make things a lot easier for people to understand.

Say for example it were a kangaroo, which is wildlife, and has no owner - excess would apply because the insurer cannot sue the Kangaroo (or the estate of the kangaroo in the event of its death)... Now, as mentioned above... if the term At Fault gets used, it sounds harsh on the driver, not his fault the dickhead roo jumped in front... if it were called non-recoverable, makes a lot more sense in relation to the circumstances.

Just a pity we cant change the names on these things, but I hope that helps clear it up


I understand it. However they have all the horse owners details as the horse was microchipped. They said to me if I hit it on the road that the paddock with the broken fence was on I'd be covered but because it was elsewhere I'm not. I fail to understand.

Ralli
Post #65

QUOTE (176OES @ Mar 1 2011, 06:27 PM) *
Simple Ralli - if the owner of the horse is unknown, then it is impossible for the insurer to recover losses. As such an excess is applicable.

Unfortunately the terms 'At Fault' and 'Not at Fault' in the insurance world give the implication that a finger of blame is being waved at the driver and they are the naughty one if the insurer cannot recoup losses. If it were termed 'Recoverable' and 'Non-Recoverable' it would make things a lot easier for people to understand.

Say for example it were a kangaroo, which is wildlife, and has no owner - excess would apply because the insurer cannot sue the Kangaroo (or the estate of the kangaroo in the event of its death)... Now, as mentioned above... if the term At Fault gets used, it sounds harsh on the driver, not his fault the dickhead roo jumped in front... if it were called non-recoverable, makes a lot more sense in relation to the circumstances.

Just a pity we cant change the names on these things, but I hope that helps clear it up

ahh okay , got it .. . :P

G-uni7
Post #66

my sis was the one that helped you n gave you the towel

i was there also
i went looking 4 the other horse
the horse you hit died on impact
hope your ok

176OES
Post #67

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 1 2011, 07:41 PM) *
I understand it. However they have all the horse owners details as the horse was microchipped. They said to me if I hit it on the road that the paddock with the broken fence was on I'd be covered but because it was elsewhere I'm not. I fail to understand.


I would be arguing the point with your insurer.

As you say, it is irrelevant. The fact remains, the horse belongs to John Smith, it is John Smiths responsibility to ensure the horse is kept within its area.

It makes no difference to the owners liability if the horse was on the road adjacent, or running down pit lane at bathurst... it was still outside of its enclosure.

If they say it is not covered, have your copy of your policy booklet (PDS) handy and ask them ton point out where it outlines that clause (pretty sure it wont, but re-read it first just in case). For them to exclude cover on something, it NEEDS to be outlined in that booklet... if you dont have a copy, download it from their website.

Also your PDS should outline the dispute resolution process... follow that and dont be afraid to escalate it if you're not happy with the answer.

8spokeracing
Post #68

Glad your okay, but this is a bit rich, you could have been killed and their asking for you to pay excess...lol what is this some kind of joke on your behalf, the lady should pay for the excess as to keep you happy so you don't sue for negligence or whatever bro...Don't let it slide man, lube these @#$!s up the ass for not being able to look after their animals, the same way the police lube us when you have a defective vehicle...Pardon the pun, but thats what i'd do...get well soon

timmy_o
Post #69

QUOTE (G-uni7 @ Mar 1 2011, 08:36 PM) *
my sis was the one that helped you n gave you the towel

i was there also
i went looking 4 the other horse
the horse you hit died on impact
hope your ok


Nicole? My wife and herself have been in contact reguarly. Once I'm mobile and driving again I'll definitely be going to see her. I am ever so thankful. There needs to be more people like this on the planet.

QUOTE (176OES @ Mar 1 2011, 09:57 PM) *
I would be arguing the point with your insurer.

As you say, it is irrelevant. The fact remains, the horse belongs to John Smith, it is John Smiths responsibility to ensure the horse is kept within its area.

It makes no difference to the owners liability if the horse was on the road adjacent, or running down pit lane at bathurst... it was still outside of its enclosure.

If they say it is not covered, have your copy of your policy booklet (PDS) handy and ask them ton point out where it outlines that clause (pretty sure it wont, but re-read it first just in case). For them to exclude cover on something, it NEEDS to be outlined in that booklet... if you dont have a copy, download it from their website.

Also your PDS should outline the dispute resolution process... follow that and dont be afraid to escalate it if you're not happy with the answer.



QUOTE (8spokeracing @ Mar 2 2011, 01:21 AM) *
Glad your okay, but this is a bit rich, you could have been killed and their asking for you to pay excess...lol what is this some kind of joke on your behalf, the lady should pay for the excess as to keep you happy so you don't sue for negligence or whatever bro...Don't let it slide man, lube these @#$!s up the ass for not being able to look after their animals, the same way the police lube us when you have a defective vehicle...Pardon the pun, but thats what i'd do...get well soon



To above two. I'll go through the PDS today see what I can scrub up. I've gone through the Council legislation which it clearly states in there she has committed an offence. Sent this through to the insurance company they said that it doesn't matter as I need to prove the horse owner was negligent? I still fail to understand this also, how being negligent or not overrides the law? And yes, I've escalated it to the supervisor who has so far been helpful. She said to give her a couple of days. As I said before I don't want to be an asshole, I just want to claim my insurance for my car and my health so I am not out of pocket and I will be satisified. But if I have to go through the drawn out process of the courts, I'll be claiming full, everything which I am entitled to now, but I don't see the need. I just want to continue as per normal.

Ralli
Post #70

QUOTE (G-uni7 @ Mar 1 2011, 08:36 PM) *
my sis was the one that helped you n gave you the towel

i was there also
i went looking 4 the other horse
the horse you hit died on impact
hope your ok

:ugh:

  • Member Login

    If you have a BoostCruising account enter your user name and password into the yellow box.

    Alternatively, you can quickly login with Facebook.

    If you don't have an account create one below.

    Create Account
  • Login with Facebook

    Login using your Facebook account!

Page 2 of 3
Jump to page
THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN ARCHIVED
18 User(s) are reading this topic (18 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
Loading...
x