▲ 524 ▼ Sure buddy just take as many spots as you need (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by superduperenigma@lemmy.world to c/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world 139 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago (2 children) I am the guy that parks right beside him. In my designated spot. Takes a photo of his car and plate. Walks away. That drama is his drama. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (3 children) What would a photo do? Prove to your insurance you put your vehicle in a situation that it could be damaged? Your insurance has clauses to prevent paying out in those situations. You’re asking for trouble and a fight and potentially a bill that you created for yourself actually. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) If I'm in my space, and that person can't manoeuvre out of their space. That's their fault. Not mine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) So you’re intentially putting your car in a situation where it can be damaged, and you’ll admit that to your insurance so they can not pay out to you? They would ask why you parked there and not somewhere else. Taking the picture proofs your intent even…. Insurance isn’t stupid they know these games and people do this stuff intentionally all the time, you’re not going to have an easy slam dunk victory. There’s plenty of precedent from people thinking it’s a smart idea before. Give your insurance clauses a read, there’s clauses about you not putting your vehicle in situations, doing everting you can to avoid a collision… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hstde@feddit.de 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) Sometimes you don't have a choice. Either park there or nowhere. Examples include, but are not limited to: designated parking spaces, or full parking lots. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Insurance isn't gonna pay out either way. In this situation they'd say they don't have enough information to determine who is at fault and close the claim. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) insurance has clauses to prevent paying out Oh man what a sick gotcha it’s not like that’s the entire purpose of a for profit insurance system. Alternatively, the lovely thing about driving an old beater is that you have nothing to lose in situations like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Goes both ways, the clauses also prevent people from abusing the system and intentionally damaging their vehicles to get repaired. If you have a legitimate claim, there is nothing you should worry about. I’m glad my premiums don’t go up because someone intentionally hit a car marginally in their lane “because I had the right of way”, instead of just moving slightly over to avoid the collision. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Amen. I hate bitter people and I hate it even more when they start playing games with my stuff to prove their point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Jamie@jamie.moe -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) The last vehicle to move is the one at fault, even if someone else parks right up on them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* Nope that is not even true in the slightest actually, your insurance has clauses that you have to do what you can to prevent accidents and claims. You can be hit by a vehicle and still be found 100% at fault in plenty of situations. Play stupid games and find out. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gnugit@aussie.zone -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) So will I, unless it's a heap of crap that looks like the driver doesn't care about their paint.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago Agree. You can usually tell an insured vehicle. Not always, but usually. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (3 children) What would a photo do? Prove to your insurance you put your vehicle in a situation that it could be damaged? Your insurance has clauses to prevent paying out in those situations. You’re asking for trouble and a fight and potentially a bill that you created for yourself actually. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) If I'm in my space, and that person can't manoeuvre out of their space. That's their fault. Not mine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) So you’re intentially putting your car in a situation where it can be damaged, and you’ll admit that to your insurance so they can not pay out to you? They would ask why you parked there and not somewhere else. Taking the picture proofs your intent even…. Insurance isn’t stupid they know these games and people do this stuff intentionally all the time, you’re not going to have an easy slam dunk victory. There’s plenty of precedent from people thinking it’s a smart idea before. Give your insurance clauses a read, there’s clauses about you not putting your vehicle in situations, doing everting you can to avoid a collision… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hstde@feddit.de 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) Sometimes you don't have a choice. Either park there or nowhere. Examples include, but are not limited to: designated parking spaces, or full parking lots. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Insurance isn't gonna pay out either way. In this situation they'd say they don't have enough information to determine who is at fault and close the claim. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) insurance has clauses to prevent paying out Oh man what a sick gotcha it’s not like that’s the entire purpose of a for profit insurance system. Alternatively, the lovely thing about driving an old beater is that you have nothing to lose in situations like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Goes both ways, the clauses also prevent people from abusing the system and intentionally damaging their vehicles to get repaired. If you have a legitimate claim, there is nothing you should worry about. I’m glad my premiums don’t go up because someone intentionally hit a car marginally in their lane “because I had the right of way”, instead of just moving slightly over to avoid the collision. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Amen. I hate bitter people and I hate it even more when they start playing games with my stuff to prove their point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Jamie@jamie.moe -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) The last vehicle to move is the one at fault, even if someone else parks right up on them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* Nope that is not even true in the slightest actually, your insurance has clauses that you have to do what you can to prevent accidents and claims. You can be hit by a vehicle and still be found 100% at fault in plenty of situations. Play stupid games and find out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) If I'm in my space, and that person can't manoeuvre out of their space. That's their fault. Not mine. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) So you’re intentially putting your car in a situation where it can be damaged, and you’ll admit that to your insurance so they can not pay out to you? They would ask why you parked there and not somewhere else. Taking the picture proofs your intent even…. Insurance isn’t stupid they know these games and people do this stuff intentionally all the time, you’re not going to have an easy slam dunk victory. There’s plenty of precedent from people thinking it’s a smart idea before. Give your insurance clauses a read, there’s clauses about you not putting your vehicle in situations, doing everting you can to avoid a collision… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hstde@feddit.de 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) Sometimes you don't have a choice. Either park there or nowhere. Examples include, but are not limited to: designated parking spaces, or full parking lots. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Insurance isn't gonna pay out either way. In this situation they'd say they don't have enough information to determine who is at fault and close the claim. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children) So you’re intentially putting your car in a situation where it can be damaged, and you’ll admit that to your insurance so they can not pay out to you? They would ask why you parked there and not somewhere else. Taking the picture proofs your intent even…. Insurance isn’t stupid they know these games and people do this stuff intentionally all the time, you’re not going to have an easy slam dunk victory. There’s plenty of precedent from people thinking it’s a smart idea before. Give your insurance clauses a read, there’s clauses about you not putting your vehicle in situations, doing everting you can to avoid a collision… permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] hstde@feddit.de 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) Sometimes you don't have a choice. Either park there or nowhere. Examples include, but are not limited to: designated parking spaces, or full parking lots. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Insurance isn't gonna pay out either way. In this situation they'd say they don't have enough information to determine who is at fault and close the claim. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hstde@feddit.de 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) Sometimes you don't have a choice. Either park there or nowhere. Examples include, but are not limited to: designated parking spaces, or full parking lots. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago Sometimes you don’t have a choice Once I see a picture of that scenario, I’ll believe it. As it stands now it’s coming across as the sort of thing a person makes up on the fly. In this picture, this truck is obviously parked in a place with an overabundance of parking. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world -2 points 2 years ago Plenty of empty stalls in this picture though, and you better have images to prove that point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago Insurance isn't gonna pay out either way. In this situation they'd say they don't have enough information to determine who is at fault and close the claim. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) insurance has clauses to prevent paying out Oh man what a sick gotcha it’s not like that’s the entire purpose of a for profit insurance system. Alternatively, the lovely thing about driving an old beater is that you have nothing to lose in situations like this. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Goes both ways, the clauses also prevent people from abusing the system and intentionally damaging their vehicles to get repaired. If you have a legitimate claim, there is nothing you should worry about. I’m glad my premiums don’t go up because someone intentionally hit a car marginally in their lane “because I had the right of way”, instead of just moving slightly over to avoid the collision. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Amen. I hate bitter people and I hate it even more when they start playing games with my stuff to prove their point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Goes both ways, the clauses also prevent people from abusing the system and intentionally damaging their vehicles to get repaired. If you have a legitimate claim, there is nothing you should worry about. I’m glad my premiums don’t go up because someone intentionally hit a car marginally in their lane “because I had the right of way”, instead of just moving slightly over to avoid the collision. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Amen. I hate bitter people and I hate it even more when they start playing games with my stuff to prove their point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago Amen. I hate bitter people and I hate it even more when they start playing games with my stuff to prove their point. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Jamie@jamie.moe -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) The last vehicle to move is the one at fault, even if someone else parks right up on them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* Nope that is not even true in the slightest actually, your insurance has clauses that you have to do what you can to prevent accidents and claims. You can be hit by a vehicle and still be found 100% at fault in plenty of situations. Play stupid games and find out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schmidtster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* Nope that is not even true in the slightest actually, your insurance has clauses that you have to do what you can to prevent accidents and claims. You can be hit by a vehicle and still be found 100% at fault in plenty of situations. Play stupid games and find out. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Gnugit@aussie.zone -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) So will I, unless it's a heap of crap that looks like the driver doesn't care about their paint.. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago Agree. You can usually tell an insured vehicle. Not always, but usually. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago Agree. You can usually tell an insured vehicle. Not always, but usually. permalink fedilink source parent