Bike crash with carbon frame - next steps?

svetty

Meanwhile we all get to pay ever higher insurance premiums as a result :evil: :evil:

Following this logic every time your carbon bike falls over it should be replaced! I'm damned sure that the people who advise folk to claim a new frame/bike when there is no evidence of structural damage don't do this....

barry_badrinath

To clarify, I am not doing this just to swing a new bike. I've been advised by various friends, folk who know more than me and now the manufacturer that due to the collision, it can't be guaranteed to be 100% safe without expensive testing carried out. Having even a tiny element of doubt won't be good for my confidence when getting back on the bike, especially when descending - and could even cause me to make a mistake I may not have made.

Trust me, I'd much rather have my four front teeth back and not have a huge gash down my face than have a new frameset or bike.

svetty

Barry Badrinath wrote:

To clarify, I am not doing this just to swing a new bike. I've been advised by various friends, folk who know more than me and now the manufacturer that due to the collision, it can't be guaranteed to be 100% safe without expensive testing carried out. Having even a tiny element of doubt won't be good for my confidence when getting back on the bike, especially when descending - and could even cause me to make a mistake I may not have made.

Trust me, I'd much rather have my four front teeth back and not have a huge gash down my face than have a new frameset or bike.

No, it's clear from your postings that you are 100% genuine in your concern and I have every respect and sympathy for you. It's the so-called experts who are all to ready to leap to the conclusion that a new frame is mandated that I take issue with: nothing can be guaranteed to be 100% safe and 's**t happens'. I suspect that there is an element of 'punish the guilty driver' sentiment, sub-conscious or otherwise, that promotes the 'get a new frame', 'you can't be too careful' line of thinking. The manufacturer's representative, not having seen the frame nor tested it, is not in a position to say it's safe and so will always cover themselves.

Of course, where the frame is clearly damaged you should get a new one

photonic69

Hence why I commented "use a large hammer to be sure". Then you'd be in no doubt that the frame was a write off. Your crash does sound horrific and I do wish you all the best in your recovery too. I was off the bike for 8 months after my accident. Took ages to get any confidence back. I literally went out for slow rides with my (then) 8 year old daughter just to get used to riding again. Even on the first few rides I felt sketchy. Heal first. Ride later. Hope you mend well.

mugensi

Sorry to hear about your accident and I hope your recovery goes well.

I realise that your injuries were quite serious, however, what was the nature of the actual collision?
Did you slow down any before impact?
Did you fly off the bike hitting your face and causing the injuries?
Did the bike hit the car head on, ie the wheel hitting first and if so is the wheel broken/bent?

If the collision wasn't head on and you went into the side of the car at an angle then it wouldn't have been high impact for the bike and as you have said only the bar tape suffered a little. I wouldn't be writing the frame off if the collision wasn't head on but merely 'glancing' despite your subsequent injuries.

barry_badrinath

I was coming down a hill fairly fast. Ahead of me there were two left hand junctions, with the second one being the one I'd be turning up for my road. 3 cars on other side of road were queuing to turn up the first one in the filter lane - first two with plenty space, but the third definitely not. It then turned at the last second, I tried to brake and (I think) went over the handle bars and hit the side /corner of the car with my head and face.

I was apparently kinda disentangled from the bike and the handle bars on the impact side were all bent out of shape, with a gash into the metal and through the shifter hood, so although I took the brunt of it, the bike did take a fair whack.

apreading

Its not about punishing the driver or trying to take advantage - its about restoring you to the position you were in before the collision. Before the collision you had a carbon bike that you had confidence in the integrity of the frame to descent at probably up or over 40mph on. Now you have a bike which looks OK but may suddenly and catastrophically fail with no warning and do you severe harm. Even if you personally have the confidence to ride as you did before, I doubt whether you would have that confidence on this bike any more, without costly x-rays etc. You could choose to try and build that confidence, gradually increasing your speed and covering many miles before putting yourself in significantly risky positions but why should you go to that hassle or take that risk (even if you can reduce it by taking a long time testing it at low speed first).

New bike puts you back where you were before. Whether the insurance company lets you keep the old one (they usually do) and whether you decide to take the risk of riding it anyway are separate issues and down to your acceptable level of risk.

thebikeboy16

This is useful. Is there any way to save the thread to read at a later date?

milemuncher1

apreading wrote:

Its not about punishing the driver or trying to take advantage - its about restoring you to the position you were in before the collision. Before the collision you had a carbon bike that you had confidence in the integrity of the frame to descent at probably up or over 40mph on. Now you have a bike which looks OK but may suddenly and catastrophically fail with no warning and do you severe harm. Even if you personally have the confidence to ride as you did before, I doubt whether you would have that confidence on this bike any more, without costly x-rays etc. You could choose to try and build that confidence, gradually increasing your speed and covering many miles before putting yourself in significantly risky positions but why should you go to that hassle or take that risk (even if you can reduce it by taking a long time testing it at low speed first).

New bike puts you back where you were before. Whether the insurance company lets you keep the old one (they usually do) and whether you decide to take the risk of riding it anyway are separate issues and down to your acceptable level of risk.

Blimey, another Internet post I 100% agree with. This is getting silly.

andyh01

Hope of speedy recovery and quick resolution for OP. Being a bit of an insurance geek, there is a difference between legal obligation of Indemnity (being put back in the same position you enjoyed, immediately prior to the accident) and personal choice of whether you feel comfortable riding the bike, once you have been indemnified for your loss.

In car v car, the indemnity value is calculated on the repair costs V resale value less salvage value. If indemnifying ie cash settlement figure instead of repair as uneconomical, the vehicle would then become the property of the other insurer, who will then be able to sell to their preferred salvage company, who will either break and sell as parts/scrap or repair on cheap and sell on. Due to volume/ecumenical scale insurer will get a good deal.

Personally I'd be pushing for the cost of full replacement value of bike, on basis x-ray costs be more expensive then to replace frame (assuming not a £20k bike in which case, cost of xray 1st) and expect to negotiate down, taking into account wear and tear ie say bike was £2k 3 years ago I'd expect a payment of circa £1500/£1200 depending on condition, at which point if/when agreed and accepted, in theory at least, the bike ownership CCOULD transfer to the insurance company, however, practically, as insurer won't have a way to depose/sell it on to TP, they probably won't ask for the bike or they'd expect you to depose of bike ie scrap as the insurer won't want any liability attaching back to them (*eg you sold it, the bike then fails causing serious injury the insurer MAY become liable)

Likewise as the LBS report concludes the bike could still fail and therefore again I'd be stressing this point to insurer to ensure if I wanted to I could replace frame at a later date if I felt the need arose, once the claim settled you'd find it more difficult to go back to insurer to replace the frame 6 or 12 months further down the line

ben@31

cougie wrote:

Bones will heal after a break.

Not necessarily.
2 years after a badly fractured leg, I still not back to what I could do before.
Whilst I was having physiotherapy to get the muscles working again after not walking for 2 months, I came across another guy with a fractured pelvis, he's had so many complications he'll never be the same again.

ben@31

Svetty wrote:

Meanwhile we all get to pay ever higher insurance premiums as a result :evil: :evil:

Following this logic every time your carbon bike falls over it should be replaced! I'm damned sure that the people who advise folk to claim a new frame/bike when there is no evidence of structural damage don't do this....

You should drive safely with more care and attention. Then you'll have nothing to worry about.

andyh01

Plus other factors will increase cost of insurance premiums claim inflation, uninsured drivers, new legislation, fraud, the list is endless.
As previously said insurer be in their rights to take ownership of bike or make a deduction if other party agrees and they could make reduction for wear and tear/betterment ie a new bike is more than the 3year old previous bike so small gain so they could (again in theory negotiate down) so it's not the full replacement cost...

barry_badrinath

Thanks all for your kind words and helpful advice, it's really much appreciated. Current situation is I'm waiting for my lawyer to put the overall claim together, and think that might move quite slowly.

My face is healing up well, although much of the scarring is being masked by my unkempt beard. Still no feeling in my chin. I had the partial dentures fitted last week, and although they are making me lisp and eating is a challenge, I no longer look like Sloth from the Goonies. I have also lost 2kg so every cloud eh!

shimanobottombracket

Barry Badrinath wrote:

Cheers guys, all good advice. Off to see a dental specialist just now about my teeth, and will be dropping bike in after. Also speaking with a lawyer later about my injuries so will see what guidance they have there. Thanks again!

Odd reason to go to a dentist .

Anyway I would also aim to have the entire bike replaced even if just for piece of mind. I would not feel comfortable riding a bike thats been involved in a crash. This alone makes me "worse off" than I was before and should be compensated for. Hope your lawyer takes the driver to the effin cleaners.

dennisn

apreading wrote:

Just ask the guy in the shop if he is prepared to certify that it is safe to ride, on the basis that if it snaps on a fast downhill he will then be liable for any further injury. Cant see a shop writing up anything other than a recommendation not to ride it unless checked by x-ray first and to assume it is unsafe without that. Promise to buy the replacement from the shop of they need any added incentive...!

I can't see a bike shop giving you something IN WRITING, saying anything, about a damaged bike, under any circumstances.
Why would they? Dream on.

bigjim

I can recall reading some interview somewhere with a TDF bike mechanic. Evidently if a team rider has a crash, that frame is scrapped the next day. Nobody will take chances with an expensive pro riders life. Or I suppose the manufacturers reputation. The liability/insurance issues are not worth it. Whether those pro carbon frames are the same as the ones retailed in the high street I don't know. Plus I suppose they don't pay for them.
When I hire a bike in Mallorca I do wonder how it has been abused, or not, the week before.

dag_on_a_bike

Barry, I'm not going to be at all critical of the well-intentioned but varied advice given here, and I'm not going to add my own advice (though I could) apart from to say that you have commented that you have discussed your injuries with your lawyers. I trust you have discussed all of your losses with them, including the bike, dental costs (and future dental costs), clothing (?) etc.

It is a harsh reality but don't expect the insurer to be generous. If they can get away with paying you less, they will.

It is also a harsh reality that your lawyer will not get paid his costs on anything but a fixed basis (unless the value of your claim exceeds £25,000). There is no financial incentive for him to do more work than necessary, and should therefore try to get your claim settled expediently and efficiently. That said, the lawyer still has to do his job properly or risk being sued for professional negligence.

Any claim can essentially be broken down into general damages (compensation for your injuries) and special damages (financial losses that can be quantified). Your future financial losses should not be overlooked - dental injuries invariably include future losses.

Listen to your lawyer. He should be advising you on what you need to do. If he has any understanding of cycling accidents (not all do) then he should be advising you on what to do about the bike damage. If not, then perhaps you need to consider changing your lawyer.