The thorny traffic issue of right of way at round-abouts

Insurance Helpline with Cedric Stephens

Question: On November 4, 2009, there was a campus-wide power cut at the institution where I teach. This led to the early closure of many classes and a traffic pile-up. At about 7:30 p.m., I was in the roundabout north of the main gate when a Toyota Tundra approached the roundabout from my left. Realising that I had allowed in the vehicle ahead of his, the third party decided to force his way in ahead of me. This led to a collision. The right front bumper of the Toyota hit my left passenger door.

The traffic code governing the use of round-abouts and the damage to both vehicles leaves no doubt as to which driver was at fault. The damage to my vehicle was minor. I would gladly have overlooked it had not the third party continued his attempt to bully me. He demanded that we head immediately to the police station and said that I would have to repair his vehicle. Campus security visited the scene and took the particulars. In July and October of this year I was told that my premium would go up from $26,000 to $75,000 pending an investigation of the 'accident'. A premium of that magnitude is tantamount to a denial of my right to operate a vehicle. Can you please intervene?

- rudawal@gmail.com

HELPLINE: My daughter had a nasty experience with her bank this week. She made three attempts within minutes of each other and from two different ABMs to withdraw cash from her account. In each case, she received a note which read: "System error, try again or use a different ABM".

None of the machines dispensed any cash. When she checked her account online she learnt that in spite of the admitted "system error," her account was debited as though cash withdrawals had been made. To add insult to injury, her bank's call centre told her, incredibly, that three working days were required to credit the funds that were mistakenly withdrawn from her account! The credit was posted to the account the following day but an ABM decline fee plus GCT were deducted from the account, even though the error was the fault of the bank.

Your case and Alexis' share at least one thing in common: Corporate interests, in practice, take precedence over consumers' in some banks and insurance entities in spite of the many statements that these entities make to the contrary.

A senior official at your insurance company wrote to me in response to your complaint. Unlike his counterpart last week, he appears to be ignorant about the role that empathy and effective communication play in enhancing customer satisfaction with the claims process.He writes: "Thank you for sharing the information with us. We have reviewed our files and while there are some differences, generally the information provided tells his side of the story," he wrote.

"Unfortunately, as (an) insurer(s) we have a duty, once a claim is made, to establish both sides of the story before we can proceed. We make every effort to minimise the inconvenience to our client during this time and settle the claim quickly. In this case, we had to investigate the claim of the third party and the information was not forthcoming.

"We have since closed our claim file, reinstated (the) no-claims discount and written to ... and his broker."

The company - like the bank - has offered no explanation for the delay in resolving this matter. Its knee-jerk reaction was to increase your premium by over 200 per cent.

General rule

The argument about investigating "the claim of the third party" is rubbish! It implies that company employees are ignorant about the road code. For the benefit of my readers, here is what The Jamaican Road Users' Guide says about round-abouts:

"The general rule is give way to traffic coming from the right. Vehicles already in the roundabout have the right of way. However, there are some roundabouts which have 'Give way' signs erected on some of the approaches to the intersection. When approaching such a sign, slow down to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions, or stop if necessary, then yield the right of way (give way) to any vehicular traffic in the intersection, or any approaching from another roadway which may constitute an immediate hazard." (page 45).

Your insurers had information since last year that indicated that you did not cause the accident. Unfortunately, to give them the benefit of the doubt, those details were (mistakenly) used to boost the company's income and to get you to pay for it.

Two questions: What is the frequency of errors like these on an annual basis? How many of them are corrected?

Cedric E. Stephens provides independent information and free advice about the management of risks and insurance.aegis@cwjamaica.comSMS/text message to 812-7233