Don't have an accident!

[palmermd]

Well, it took 4 full weeks, but I got my car back today. The shop did a fantastic job with the repair. It's so nice to drive the Leaf again. Just like the original poster on this thread, I can say "Don't have an accident" because it will take a long time to get it repaired at this time. Most of the time was spent waiting for parts. Some of the key parts did not arrive until the end of last week which caused the delay. Thankfully I did not have a big repair, because if there were more parts on order I might have waited 6 weeks or more, like the original poster.

Safe travels everyone!

 

[sub3marathonman]

palmermd,

Remember: if there is any reason they have to bake the whole car (like to repaint) you may have to pull and protect the battery. I suspect a lot of people are going to forget that as more accidents occur.

I am wondering if any of the experts can comment on the apparent discrepancy between the Leaf Body Repair Manual and the Owner's Manual. I am going by the posting of jpwhitehome at http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com/2011/12/10/leafless-in-nashville/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; which states: "I got a copy of the LEAF Body Repair Manual. It states that the door sill temperature must be kept to below 140 degrees in the paint booth. If that is not possible the manual indicates removal of the battery pack. It is still concerning since the owners manual seemingly contradicts the Body Repair Manual, requiring not just the removal of the battery pack, but the vehicle charger and high voltage wire harness as well in all body repairs."

Fortunately I haven't run into that problem on my Leaf, but I was researching for a Prius with a Hymotion kit installed.

 

[malloryk]

add me to the accident list. Got into one on Saturday, a bicyclist ran his red light and hit me, flew off his bike and bounced off my hood. Taking my car in tomorrow and will be driving a rental in the meantime. I'll let you guys know how it goes!

 

[thankyouOB]

Thanks for the posts... Geico is footing the bill, and they're still investigating liability because the other driver has changed her story and claims she stopped at a stop sign even though she blew right past it. I find it frustrating that even when both drivers are under the same insurance company, Geico must assign two different claim reps who have to act like lawyers and "represent" their clients. How about just getting to the truth of the matter through an investigation of the facts?
It appears that there will be no problem with parts, even though both doors on one side of the car will be completely replaced (and of course air bags must be reset).
I hope other people are right about the car holding up mechanically, we will find out soon, and I'll keep the forum updated.

Best,
Josh

My wife was just hit in our Leaf (on Friday the 13th of all dates!) by a careless driver at a four-way stop. Fortunately nobody was hurt, but our poor little car was. The initial estimate is more than $11,000, and all that from a side impact going 15 mph.

Josh

the other person is footing the bill correct?

as far as electronic damage on a side impact. it could affect the smart entry maybe but other than that, i dont think there is much there to damage.

sorry to hear about the accident. i am guessing the cost of the repair is primarily due to the rarity of replacement parts right now.

NO Fault insurance would cure that, and for the companies, the cost would even out over tens of thousands of claims.
they would actually save money because of all the superfluous things they would not have to do.

By the way, I got into the rear-ended boat last Thursday.
I am going by the repair shop today.
Prolly get there ahead of the adjustor.
I am hoping it is fixable, but worried about frame damage and the loss of the factory paint job. No repair painting lasts as long.

More later.

 

[TomT]

I completely agree on No Fault! In California, I am primarily insuring the unlicensed, the illegal, and the uninsured, rather than myself, which is as it should be.

As far as repainting, considering the poor quality and thinness of the factory Leaf paint, a repaint may actually be an improvement...

NO Fault insurance would cure that, and for the companies, the cost would even out over tens of thousands of claims. they would actually save money because of all the superfluous things they would not have to do.

I am hoping it is fixable, but worried about frame damage and the loss of the factory paint job. No repair painting lasts as long.

 

[thankyouOB]

I completely agree on No Fault! In California, I am primarily insuring the unlicensed, the illegal, and the uninsured, rather than myself, which is as it should be.

As far as repainting, considering the poor quality of the factory Leaf paint, a repaint may actually be an improvement...

NO Fault insurance would cure that, and for the companies, the cost would even out over tens of thousands of claims. they would actually save money because of all the superfluous things they would not have to do.

I am hoping it is fixable, but worried about frame damage and the loss of the factory paint job. No repair painting lasts as long.

Yea, and I just ahd it clayed, and waxed and ....
oh, fooey.
prolly a month of driving my stinkpot, which I used to love. A volvo T5 with stick.

 

[MaxPower]

I completely agree on No Fault! In California, I am primarily insuring the unlicensed, the illegal, and the uninsured, rather than myself, which is as it should be.

No-fault is a scam. Those responsible for causing the collision get to shift the cost to the people they hit. And it only works when everyone is forced to buy insurance, thus enriching the insurance companies. When i got rear-ended (someone plowed into the guy behind me and pushed him into me) then I was charged $100/year more - the excuse used was that I was "unlucky." I can't see how I was at fault in any way. I'm a math major, so I understand statistics, and I know price gouging when I see it. I changed to a different insurance company at that point.

 

[Herm]

No-fault is a scam. Those responsible for causing the collision get to shift the cost to the people they hit.

The money was not going to come out of the pocket of the insurance companies.. How does it work in California?.. if you get hit by an uninsured motorist with no assets you get no money at all to fix your car?

 

[TomT]

If everyone actually carried insurance I MIGHT agree with you. But the fact of the matter is that the number of uninsured continues to rise and the chances of them being the one that hits you is growing every day. In California, it is now estimated that 40% of drivers are uninsured. I don't insure someone else's house so there is no good reason why I should insure their car (which is essentially what I am doing under the current scheme). The real losers in no-fault are the attorneys, and they don't like that idea!

I completely agree on No Fault! In California, I am primarily insuring the unlicensed, the illegal, and the uninsured, rather than myself, which is as it should be.

No-fault is a scam. Those responsible for causing the collision get to shift the cost to the people they hit.

 

[ztanos]

If everyone actually carried insurance I MIGHT agree with you. But the fact of the matter is that the number of uninsured continues to rise and the chances of them being the one that hits you is growing every day. In California, it is now estimated that 40% of drivers are uninsured. I don't insure someone else's house so there is no good reason why I should insure their car (which is essentially what I am doing under the current scheme). The real losers in no-fault are the attorneys, and they don't like that idea!

I completely agree on No Fault! In California, I am primarily insuring the unlicensed, the illegal, and the uninsured, rather than myself, which is as it should be.

No-fault is a scam. Those responsible for causing the collision get to shift the cost to the people they hit.

Here in Ga it is a requirement to get your car tag renewed. I know that won't stop everyone, but it helps.

 

[TomT]

In California, there are two problems...
1) Counterfeit tags are easy to come by and wide-spread.
2) There is no requirement that insurance be in affect and uncancellable for the year the registration is active (which is the case in many states) so many people get insurance on day1, register their car on day 2, and cancel the insurance on day 3 for a refund... The legislature (largely Democratic) refuses to fix this problem because it would "inconvenience the poor and disadvantaged..."

Here in Ga it is a requirement to get your car tag renewed. I know that won't stop everyone, but it helps.

 

[thankyouOB]

In California, there are two problems...
1) Counterfeit tags are easy to come by and wide-spread.
2) There is no requirement that insurance be in affect and uncancellable for the year the registration is active (which is the case in many states) so many people get insurance on day1, register their car on day 2, and cancel the insurance on day 3 for a refund... The legislature (largely Democratic) refuses to fix this problem because it would "inconvenience the poor and disadvantaged..."

Here in Ga it is a requirement to get your car tag renewed. I know that won't stop everyone, but it helps.

i dont see a cite or a bit of proof for any of this.

 

[thankyouOB]

No-fault is a scam. Those responsible for causing the collision get to shift the cost to the people they hit.

The money was not going to come out of the pocket of the insurance companies.. How does it work in California?.. if you get hit by an uninsured motorist with no assets you get no money at all to fix your car?

you are covered in CA if you have collision and/or uninsured motorist coverage.

if you just have the required personal liability coverage, then you are covered only for injuries.

 

[TomT]

Look it up then. I can go down to MacArthur park in L.A. and get fake tags, licenses, SSN cards and a plethora of other documentation any day of the week at very reasonable prices. Insurance requirements you can look up in the CA DMV regs. And I didn't even touch on how ludicrous the CA minimum insurance requirement (15/30/5) is in this day and age... $5,000 for property damage?! Try and repair your Leaf for that! That is why virtually everyone in CA who IS insured carries uninsured/under-insured coverage as well (and why it is often one of the most expensive options)...

Or you can choose to simply ignore it all... Regardless, it does not change the underlying fact: No-Fault is a far better solution.

In California, there are two problems...
1) Counterfeit tags are easy to come by and wide-spread.
2) There is no requirement that insurance be in affect and uncancellable for the year the registration is active (which is the case in many states) so many people get insurance on day1, register their car on day 2, and cancel the insurance on day 3 for a refund... The legislature (largely Democratic) refuses to fix this problem because it would "inconvenience the poor and disadvantaged..."

Here in Ga it is a requirement to get your car tag renewed. I know that won't stop everyone, but it helps.

i dont see a cite or a bit of proof for any of this.

 

[thankyouOB]

if it is in the regs, then it doesnt hinge on the legislature.

also, the only auto insurance reform we have in CA was done by lawyers at the Consumer Watchdog in Santa Monica.
Founded by a lawyer, it fostered the prop in 1988 that set rules for rates that were more reasonable.

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/success-story/protecting-california%E2%80%99s-ban-zip-code-based-auto-insurance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Separately, just telling us to "look it up" doesnt change the fact that what you say is just rhetoric and unsupported.

 

[TomT]

Sure it does. They pass the laws that determine the regs. The DMV cannot and does not do it in a vacuum.

Anyway, this is getting way off topic so we'll just agree to disagree.

if it is in the regs, then it doesnt hinge on the legislature.

 

[SanDust]

add me to the accident list. Got into one on Saturday, a bicyclist ran his red light and hit me, flew off his bike and bounced off my hood. Taking my car in tomorrow and will be driving a rental in the meantime. I'll let you guys know how it goes!

How much damage did he do? I'd think it would be cosmetic. Surprised to hear you can't drive the car.

Strange accident, though once I had a drunk driver run into and knock down a tree, which fell onto my car.

Agree that uninsured motorists in CA are a problem, it raises rates a lot, but I doubt that bicyclists need insurance for this type of accident.

 

[planet4ever]

add me to the accident list. Got into one on Saturday, a bicyclist ran his red light and hit me, flew off his bike and bounced off my hood. Taking my car in tomorrow and will be driving a rental in the meantime. I'll let you guys know how it goes!

How much damage did he do? I'd think it would be cosmetic. Surprised to hear you can't drive the car.
Strange accident, though once I had a drunk driver run into and knock down a tree, which fell onto my car.

I ran into a policeman once on my bicycle. Well, actually, just bumped into his bumper. He looked at me in his rear view mirror, shook his head, and drove off without getting out of his car. There were extenuating circumstances. This was in Chicago in the dead of winter. He was stopped in an underpass in a line of traffic. There was ice on the road, and it was snowing lightly. Oh, and I was wearing my army dress uniform.

Ray

 

[malloryk]

add me to the accident list. Got into one on Saturday, a bicyclist ran his red light and hit me, flew off his bike and bounced off my hood. Taking my car in tomorrow and will be driving a rental in the meantime. I'll let you guys know how it goes!

How much damage did he do? I'd think it would be cosmetic. Surprised to hear you can't drive the car.

Strange accident, though once I had a drunk driver run into and knock down a tree, which fell onto my car.

Agree that uninsured motorists in CA are a problem, it raises rates a lot, but I doubt that bicyclists need insurance for this type of accident.

oh, the damage is totally cosmetic. Small dent and scrapes on the hood. But I need to have it fixed, it's a lease and I didn't want to put off filing the claim in case this kid ends up suing me in the future. He's homeless and I doubt has insurance. The police told me he wanted everyone to leave him be. At least I have witnesses who were kind to stop and give me their info. I'm hoping I can recoup my deductible. I'm driving a gas-guzzling Chrysler rental in the meantime

 

[malloryk]

How much damage did he do? I'd think it would be cosmetic. Surprised to hear you can't drive the car.

Strange accident, though once I had a drunk driver run into and knock down a tree, which fell onto my car.

Agree that uninsured motorists in CA are a problem, it raises rates a lot, but I doubt that bicyclists need insurance for this type of accident.

oh, the damage is totally cosmetic. Small dent and scrapes on the hood. But I need to have it fixed, it's a lease and I didn't want to put off filing the claim in case this kid ends up suing me in the future. He's homeless and I doubt has insurance. The police told me he wanted everyone to leave him be. At least I have witnesses who were kind to stop and give me their info. I'm hoping I can recoup my deductible. I'm driving a gas-guzzling Chrysler rental in the meantime [/quote]

I spoke too soon. Just heard from the body shop and I need a new hood. Plus there were small dents in the bumper. $2275. Bad but not as bad as it could've been. I guess I just have to be grateful for that.