Rear-Ended; New Bumper?

Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:Lld5m.105564$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

and running the risk of being caught at fraud.

I got some damage in a 10 or 15mph rear-ending at a yield sign. The insurance company called a Honda dealership for a price for a "replacement bumper" and paid me the $600 they quoted. When I went to pick it up it was just the skin, unpainted, without the collapsible supports. I ended up buying the supports and just repainting the scratches on the original "bumper." We need to get some redefinitions of what constitutes a "bumper."

Why's that?

Not to mention, the sudden onset of impotence and insomnia !

An even thing to do is to stay back so that you are able to see the bottom of the tires of the vehicle in front of yours. This allows you enough room to cut your wheels and to drive around that vehicle should the need arise, whether due to another vehicle approaching yours from the rear faster than it can stop or if the vehicle in front stalls and doesn't move when the light changes. This works for any size of vehicle by the way from a Smart Car or a tractor trailer truck.

It's the American way. You must recognize their battle cry, SUE, SUE, SUE! :^)

I recognize the battle cry, just never understood the selfish reasoning. People never fail to prove to me that my expectations are too high. And they're not very high at all...

That all sounds great, totally reasonable & in fact, driver's ed in 1965 taught the bumper rule. If you try it around here (Dallas), one of several things will happen every time: another car will try to pull into the gap between you and the car in front if that gap appears big enough; the cars behind you will start honking because you are blocking access to the turn lane by being stopped so far back; the driver behind you will stop, get out of the car and come up and start yelling (like they do in D.C.). I have found the half-car-length rule to be more practical & just as safe.

"E. Meyer" wrote in news:C67B4D70.C908% snipped-for-privacy@msn.com:

some folks just can't judge distance. The "bottom of the tires" guideline works good enough,and is not too far back,and doesn't leave a gap sufficient for anyone to sneak into.

(and if they appear to be trying,THEN you edge up a tad,block them.you should be paying attention anyways.)

I don't understand the mentality of it either, Joe. The world is driven by greed and greedy people seem to be driven to the extreme rather than by reason.

The space between vehicles is not great enough for any idiot to think about squeezing into, there just isn't room.

As far as blowing horns and people walking up to "chat" that's fine and easy to ignore.

Depends what you are driving - If its anything with a long hood (& I'll concede that leaves out most Hondas) and/or the thing in front has a long trunk (like an LTD), bottom of the tires is about one car length & I have seen it happen enough times to know its true.

Usually its the guy who just missed the once-every-5-minutes turn light because some jerk wouldn't pull up 5 feet to let him into it. Easy to ignore, but still...

Maybe the idiots where you are are more stupid than where I live. I have driven a lot of miles and there haven't been a large number of people that will try to squeeze in between my vehicles and the one in front. But that's truly not relevant to the practice I mentioned.

That is not my concern. I am not going to make room for someone behind me and then have the fellow behind him bump me in to the vehicle in front of me. It's only time and it's more affordable than repairs, especially unnecessary repairs.

The discussion isn't about people. The discussion is about corporations, specifically insurance companies, and their way--"deny, deny, deny". Where do you think the "back pain" came from?

What can I say. Dallas was just rated the number two place for road-rage in the US (just behind New York). You have to go with the hand you're dealt.

You're incorrect. The original discussion was about the damage to Elle's vehicle. This off shoot of the topic came about when this was posted the following;

Grumpy AuContraire wrote in news:Lld5m.105564$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

That is where the people came into the discussion. When it was made obvious that there are people with extremely low ethics and standards out there, that only think about what they can get out of others (whether businesses or other people) for nothing.

Well, I have to say that is too bad. I guess they'll just have to try harder for the next time period until they are number one. :^)

You're probably right... Sleazy lawyers get away with murder but poor ol' me gets life in the slammer for trying to squeeze a few bux for my "pain 'n suffering!"

Oh well...

JT

Oh, the pain and depression...

$$$$$$$

JT