Wednesday 14th of November 2018 05:02:25 PM
On attempting to enter a freeway on an acceleration ramp, a wrecker exiting in front of me began crossing the median between his through-lane and my acceleration ramp. As I passed him on his right side, he looked directly at me, stepped hard on his accelerator and turned his steering wheel toward me, forcing me partially onto the shoulder to avoid his obviously intentional attempt to ram me. As I accelerated more to prevent the obvious pending collision, to get out of his way, and to gain my position in front of him, he accelerated harder and turned his wheel more into me. My acceleration put me ahead of him (verified by his own dash cam video, I am told). After clearing the front of the wrecker, I started to move across in front of him to enter the freeway. However, since the wrecker was in the median between the lanes, my view of oncoming traffic was blocked. Plus, at that point, I would need to cross the median (illegally) to actually enter the freeway. I then considered just sliding on over in front of the wrecker. However, under his extreme acceleration (with his foot on the accelerator instead of the brake where it belonged), I knew he would squash me between him and the slowing car in front of me. Therefore, in order to give the wrecker alternative evasive options, I did not swerve in front of him. Bad choice. The wrecker took absolutely NO evasive action. Instead, being intent on colliding with me, he kept on accelerating. The right front of his front bumper hit the left rear of my rear bumper. I felt the nudge but kept moving forward to give him the opportunity to slow down or swerve to the left a bit to minimize the damage. At that point the damage (merely a small dent in my rear bumper) would not have been enough to warrant my filing a claim for damages. However, the driver of the wrecker took it upon himself to continue accelerating, whereupon his right front bumper then got into my left rear fender. At that point, realizing the damage was obviously more severe, I stopped, assuming he would also stop. Again, bad decision. He continued on an additional distance equal to more than the full length of my car, tearing up the full left side of my car from bumper to bumper. It was as if he was going to flee the scene, but he finally stopped. The most severe damage was actually done by his three-inch long spiked wheel nut covers. They not only tore up the whole left side of my car, but they also tore up both tires and both wheels, neither of which would have been damaged were the spikes not there. The spikes clearly performed as intended. It is clear that the wrecker driver made no attempt to avoid the collision or to minimize damage to my vehicle. Rather, he was intent on inflicting as much damage as possible, especially with those sharp wheel nut covers.However, the Nationwide Insurance adjuster judged that I ran into the wrecker on his deceleration ramp. She has yet to explain to me how this was possible, given the pictures, the video and the police report. She totally disregarded all of my explanations and pictures. Even BEFORE she received the police report, she finalized her ruling based solely on HER interpretation of the wrecker dash cam, to which she has repeatedly refused my access. The next day, after receiving the police report, she simply THREW OUT the police report because It clearly indicates that the wrecker crossed the median between the freeway through lanes and the acceleration ramp, which is simply not consistent with her prior ruling. Now, who does she think she is to be doing this. She was not even there, as the police were, to see that both vehicles, AFTER the collision, were on the acceleration ramp way before the end of the separation median, clear proof that the wrecker crossed the median prior to the collision, as so indicated in the police report.I did all I could to avoid this collision and minimize damage, while the wrecker driver did all he could to create the collision and maximize damage. Yet, Nationwide claims I am at fault, which cost me $500 deductible. Plus, since it is my insurance company making the payoff, I don't get my fair compensation for reduced value caused by the collision, which is at least $2,000.All I need to refute Nationwide's conclusions is for Nationwide to allow me to view the dash cam video (the only evidence they are using to justify their wild conclusions) so I can first handedly explain what is happening at every frame. The video probably is of very low resolution and fairly slow frame rate, but all that is required to substantiate my claims is a fairly detailed observation of frame-to-frame distance estimates and timing. Such detail would show that the wrecker, which was supposed to be decelerating to get off of the freeway and to avoid the accident was actually accelerating. It should also show fairly clearly that the wrecker crossed the median prior to the collision.In conclusion, I justly want my $500 deductible reimbursed to me as well as at least $2,000 to somewhat recover the reduced value of my vehicle resulting from the collision. Plus, I want my name cleared from the state records as being responsible for this collision. Lesson Learned: If the other guy is at fault, do not count on Nationwide to represent you against the other guy's insurance carrier. In order to have a fighting chance of keeping your name clear, you must tackle that yourself.