So my car had an unforeseen brake down. A hidden brake pipe bursted. By pure luck i was standind in a hill  at red light. When it happened I put the foot to the flor and grabbed the hand brake. But it slowly rolled in to the car 🚗 in front of me. First Trygg Hansa said ok that is a
Machine failure. But until we see the pictures from the work shop we need to put u as the causing part. No problem so far. But when I now looked they did not change it. I called them and had a long discussion with them ending with the “girl” being very frustrated as she had no reasons to why I was the causing part. And I had a battery of prof I was not. But at the end she just said she agreed I was not the causing factor but they will blame me anyway. And if I was not happy with that she recommended me to change insurance company. Guess if I will. #TryggHansa never again.

why where you not the causing part ? it was your car who rammed the other car

Om man läser villkoren:
https://www.trygghansa.se/sitecollectio … p00297.pdf
sidan 25
så får man inte ersättning för:
• frysning, väta eller korrosion

I think that they are correct in their assement of you being at fault. According to your description it was your car and not the other car that caused the collision. Regardless of error, either mechanical- or driver related error, you were the one causing the accident this time.

I think all insurance companys would have made the same assement and you would have the same outcome.

Someone has to be the one causing the accident, and if the other car is standing still at a red light they can't be at blame for this.

Hence why they put you as the part causing the accident.

It seems quite clear that you are the one at fault. Your car rolled into another car. No matter the cause, you will be the one causing the accident.

I mean, in what universe could it be blamed on the other guy? What did he ever do wrong by just standing there?

Vad för bil?
Hur gammal?
Inte 2-krets bromssystem?
Havererade BÅDA kretsarna samtidigt?
Har jag bara råkat ut för på SAAB!
Flera fall!

torsen skrev:

Vad för bil?
Hur gammal?
Inte 2-krets bromssystem?
Havererade BÅDA kretsarna samtidigt?
Har jag bara råkat ut för på SAAB!
Flera fall!

har kört bortfall ett par gånger i mitt liv.   och bromsarna blir endå istort sätt obefintliga..  även med 2krets system.
det är istort sätt bromspedal rätt ner i golvet. med väldigt liten bromsverkan när man har pedalen nerpressad i botten. 

har råkat ut för det på en Iveco buss 2gånger.. olika fel samma buss..  ena gången ett bromsrör som det gick hål i eftersom den låg i mot karossen från fabrik.  sen skjutit ut en kolv.   båda gångerna nada bromsverkan på pedalen där kände man inte ens att det bromsade.

en fiat uno 60s 86:A med 5k mil    pedal rätt ner i golvet kanske 10% bromsverkan. gick att bromsa om man körde försiktigt som fan  då var det ett bromsrör bak som gick sönder pga mitt hemmabyggda avgasystem

Peugote 306 199   bromsrör bak dagen efter bes    väldigt liten bromsverkan efteråt.  istort sätt noll känns det som men visst det bromsade om man var försiktig,

så man har oftast väldigt liten bromsverkan även om man har 2krets system som istort sätt alla bilar har från 80talet och uppåt istort sätt.
hade en saab 9000turbo som det bara var broms på höger framhjul men minns inte om var ett trasigt rör eller om det bara inte tog..    bromsade iaf dåligt i 240blås  märkte jag

I can not see how the other part could be responsible for beeing rearended by our car.
How do you explain that?

A split between the blame is not fare eigher.  The rearended part is 100% innocent as it was standing still when it should in the right place, and so on..

Sure, perhaps it could have happend to anyone driving your car, but it does not matter.
Also, as a driver you are responsible for that your car is safe on the road.
It obviously was not.  Sure, it is not easy if even the yearly carinspection misses the bad brakeline, but that is the way it is.

it could have been a much, MUCH worse crach due to lack of brakes on your car, than a gentle bump on the car in front.

But of course it's not OP's fault, how could it? I mean, the other guy should obviously have had the common sense to stay home that day.
And even if not, he clearly should've known OP's car was a piece of junk that had neither working footbrakes or a working e-brake. After all, we live in a country where nothing is annually inspected or maintained, right?

So clearly, the other guy is at fault for having the audacity to expect OP's car to work properly.


This message has been brought to you by pure sarcasm

o vart tog dirty jester vägen??????????????????????????