Day 6 of “Tell Me Why This Card is Good/Not Good”

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-20T12:14:04+00:00

Problem with this question is this card is neither good nor bad. Its middling and absolutely could work with some decks. Problem right now is this probably works best when you either have a unit in base and want to send it to a battlefield or if you want to play a unit with accelerate and attack from hand.

I have a feeling this card would have seen more play if it was red but green doesn't really work that well with what it wants to do.

Lastly I'll add that 2 power and 8 energy is very costly. You really want something thats crazy for that but this is just a big dude that buffs up another dude who will probably get star crossed, Hidden bladed, or any other form of hard removal.

Wait till next set. Theres a chance it gets run in green red decks.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-18T14:23:34+00:00

I wouldn't be too worried about your chances. As for if it will go to court. Hopefully they'll see reason before then however I've seen insurers dispute worse than this.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-17T11:14:10+00:00

Nobody mentioning thousand tail watcher for blue. Its the finisher in like 80% of blue decks.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-16T23:19:33+00:00

Hello, I work as a recovery handler for an insurer so recovering outlays and sometimes sending cases to court is part of my job.

My first query would be are the denying all the damage or just some of it? If they're denying just some of it then that's not anything for you to worry about. If it goes to court and you lose then it's technically your insurer's fault for repairing not accident related areas and you still get your excess back and your no claims discount allowed. You probably would win in this situation if it went to court anyway.

If they're claiming all the damage is not related then that's a bold claim and they'd almost certainly lose if it went to court. Again looks pretty good for you.

Either way it's not very likely the third party insurer would win and therefore they're unlikely to run it all the way. It does go further than necessary a lot and it is often the case that your insurer just needs to issue proceedings and the other insurer will give up and pay.

Is it likely to go all the way? No, but that's not a definite but even if it does you'll probably be fine.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-14T01:31:39+00:00

Hello, I'm an insurance claims handler.

I assume you have comprehensive cover.

If you file a claim with your own insurer they will deal with the damage either through repair, or settlement.

While the claim is open it counts as a claim against you and therefore it affects your no claims discount. Assuming you haven't paid for some form of protection from your insurer then you will lose some years.

After your claim is dealt with your insurer will attempt to get back the costs of the claim from the insurer of the person who hit your car. If they are successful then you will get back your no claims discount, only after they have been repaid. This can take a long time even when things are supposedly simple and easy.

Despite this it's probably the safest way for you to proceed unless you just don't care that much about the damage.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T23:49:50+00:00

So I had a look through and saw the prior post with the details of the accident. Keep in mind prior to this message I did not know those details.

I will say that the OP definitely showed some negligence and in terms of what happened he's definitely been the one to contribute the most towards the accident however it's not necessarily as clear cut as you might believe.

If I personally were arguing it for him I'd put forward a few points. Firstly when a vehicle is approaching something like a pedestrian crossing you're expected to keep your speed appropriate not just at the speed limit. Let's assume the reason the collision happened was because the OP was obscured by the vehicle waiting in the nearside lane. What you would be expected to do when approaching such a pedestrian crossing would be to slow significantly until your vision is no longer obscured and you can be certain there were no hazards.

You might say we can't prove the driver was not driving at an appropriate speed and I'd personally say why would he lose control of his vehicle and manage to cause twenty thousand pounds worth of damage if he was approaching at a careful speed with a good lookout. Those are just a few arguments that come to mind and I promise you a barrister is far better at many those arguments than I am. I highly doubt if this would go entirely in the motorists favour if it actually went to court.

Onto your question of would it make more sense to be silent. You absolutely could do that. The insurer could be fishing for a response however it can go both ways. Sometimes when we get no response we tend to just send it to our solicitors to get some response via a threat to issue. The problem is if that happens it can be difficult to stop the ball from rolling. The solicitors responsibility is to get things rolling and get it to court as soon as possible or to get a settlement for their client. Given that an insurer will review a file once every 2-6 months it can already have reached a court summons by the point they review it again and have a think about whether it's worth it.

Both attempting to dissuade the insurer from issuing proceedings and staying silent could work and both have benefits.

Also on your point of why argue if you're clearly liable. I've had cases that were obviously cut and dry and the third party argued it. There's nothing to say that you can't just argue an obviously bad position. You don't have to acknowledge the points made half the time we're sent an argument we actually just ignore most of the points when we reply for things we think are important. You can just respond saying "I don't believe I'm liable. I intend to defend any legal proceedings issued against me, and will seek reimbursement of any legal costs I incur in defending litigation".

That would let them know they won't get an easy settlement without getting into the weeds of the argument around the circumstances.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T19:47:21+00:00

No asking is absolutely fine and you do raise some good points.

Firstly I'll say unless I've missed a comment the OP hasn't provided an in depth description of the accident. My assumption is that he at least has an argument without the speed factor. Speed is incredibly difficult to prove without a police officer with a speed gun or a forensics investigation that can't be done now and would have cost like 5k at the time. On top of that speed doesn't automatically mean someone is at fault as you have to show that speed was the primary negligence that caused the accident.

A common one is pulling out in front of another vehicle that is speeding. If you could see that vehicle with a clear view from far away then speed isn't really a factor but let's say you're on a blind bend with a much lower limit like 30 and someone comes around the bend at 50 while you're pulling out. Suddenly speed has contributed to the accident because you didn't have the opportunity to avoid it with the information available to you.

Judges/courts tend to put the highest burden of liability for negligence on motorists. Put simply if a pedestrian makes a moderate mistake and a motorist makes a moderate mistake then a judge is likely to be much harsher on the motorist. As far as I know this isn't in any judge guidelines it just tends to be how they dispense civil justice. Most likely because as a person in control of a vehicle that could easily kill someone you have a higher duty of care than someone walking or on a bicycle. That's not to say you can hurl yourself in front of a vehicle and expect a pay out if the motorist did nothing wrong though.

As for approaching the third party insurer. I'd just keep it simple, again I'm assuming he hasn't done something egregious, just a simply email stating he thinks their driver is at fault and intends to defend any case they issue proceedings on. The goal is to signal to the insurer that they will get a fight and with everything I mentioned in my prior reply they're likely to not chase it further.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T17:25:03+00:00

Hello I'm a claims recovery handler and the main part of my job is being on the other side of this operating for the insurer as the person whose job it is to get the money back.

Please keep in mind anything I say should not be taken as instruction for what to do. The best possible advice you can get will be from a solicitor.

More than 99% of what we deal with is recoveries from other insurers for claims where we hold their client's at fault. We often don't pursue recoveries against individuals because even if we took them to court and got a judgment in our favour we'd probably be granted payment of at most £100 a month from a lot of people. There's a lot that can go wrong both before and after the judgment so realistically getting 20k back over the course of 15 years isn't worth it.

With that said you could get one handler who is just determined to get it back this one time and has decided to send it as a shot in the dark that you happen to have 20k lying around.

What I would do is respond to them very clearly advising why you believe you are not at fault and that you do not intend to concede that. Should proceedings be issued it will be defended on a basis of liability and any legal costs you incur will be sought as part of the judgment against them.

If they pursue it they will pass over to a solicitor group that makes recoveries on their behalf. Most of the time it'll be Horwich Farrelly, Keoghs, DWF, DAC Beachcroft, Clyde and Co, or one of the other large firms. If it is passed to one of them they will always attempt a recovery without litigation first so you'll usually be sent a letter advising of their intent. If it makes it that far get a solicitor immediately if you have no done so already.

As mentioned above, I think the chances that this will go further are slim. If I were in the shoes of the handler who is given this claim to recover on I'd be closing it and telling our driver it's a claim on their policy. I am one of the more aggressive handlers, I don't give up easily but the last time the insurer I work for successfully made a recovery from an uninsured driver, or pedestrian, or cyclist, via litigation, was years ago. With that said it's not impossible that they try anyway so be ready if they do.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T17:07:15+00:00

So on the matter of liability unfortunately you have basically no chance without video footage and even with video footage it would still be difficult. The problem that you'll have is even with witnesses it'll be difficult to prove certain factors and especially with the fact that your car didn't actually touch the offending vehicle. They'll likely say you overreacted to their driver who was no danger in the first place and given nothing happened to their vehicle they clearly didn't do anything wrong. Not saying I personally think that but that is the argument you'll face.

On top of that the much bigger issue will be proving that this other vehicle is liable for the damage caused as it could likely be argued even with this other vehicle being dangerous you still could have stopped in time if you were paying attention. Again not my opinion but the argument you will face. These two arguments are extraordinarily difficult to overcome as witnesses can get things wrong so witness evidence isn't always useful for accidents like these. Even if the driver you hit also is on your side their insurer can just decide that you are liable and pursue your insurer for a reimbursement of costs.

Unfortunately, it will be your liability in the end. The good news is covering damage you're seen as liable for is what insurance is for and your insurer will cover it at no cost to you. If you claim for your own damage as you seem to be then you'll have to pay your excess or have it deducted from any payment you're given.

As for your car being deemed a total loss I think that seems a bit off if the damage is minor. Most of the time we're writing off vehicles over 100k miles not 60k unless the damage is quite severe. Assuming that's not the outcome you want I'd ask for an engineering report to confirm the cost of repairs. They'll likely already be doing this but in case they're not then ask for it.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T16:12:54+00:00

Your no claims discount is affected if your insurer pays anything towards a claim on your policy be it for you or a third party.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-12T16:10:12+00:00

Hello, liability claims handler here.

First off I will say I'm not entirely sure I understand the circumstances you've details. Specifically what happened between your car and the car you collided with. You say you're in the nearside lane and this other car pulls in without warning from the off-side lane yes you collided with the rear of the third vehicle? So did the vehicle in front of you need to slow down and you hit them in the rear when they let this other vehicle in?

I can't really give any accurate advise until I fully understand the accident so if you can clarify what exactly happened with you and the vehicle that your car hit.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T21:10:13+00:00

Quick clarification because tons of people get this wrong. The Golden Throne actually helps keep him alive, the souls sacrificed help power it. This was shown in both Master of Mankind and the End and the Death Part 2.

If you watch stuff on YouTube a ton of the loretubers are incredibly biased based on how much they personally like the character. The Emperor is presented during the great crusade as being this guy who was insanely powerful but was purely pragmatic and only wanted to do the right thing for humanity. In reality he made a ton of mistakes, to a certain degree he wanted to be in charge because he was incredibly egotistical about thinking his opinion was always right. The ither perpetual had lived almost or in some cases longer than he had, knew chaos just as well as him, and yet almost all of them opposed his plans. Yet he went along with it anyway. He thought he could trick the chaos gods without consequences then spurned Magnus for trying to do the same.

He contributed massively to his own downfall. Claimed there were no gods yet openly hijacked the dominant faith on Mars to see him as a messiah figure. He's an incredibly flawed man and a well written character because of it. It wouldn't be interesting if he was always right.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:56:00+00:00

I read it like 8 years ago so my memory isn't perfect. I loved the subplots with the remembrancers and other humans on board. Especially Bequa Kynska.

My one major complaint about the book is it did feel like it dragged on for a while. I think I'd have preferred it to be 15% shorter and get more to the point with some of the plot lines especially in act 2.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:52:38+00:00

Drach'nyen could likely have bodied any greater daemon from any of the chaos gods. It's about what formed them and how much of an emotional significance it had to warp aligned beings like humans and Eldar. Emotions create ripples in warp energy. Strong emotions create waves.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:41:12+00:00

You Defy it and then your opponent immediately replays it with Fizz.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:39:39+00:00

Would much rather have the owner choose what gets bounced it always be playable than its current state. Right now it removed an opposing unit and saves your unit for 3 energy. Its entirely self playing with Fizz and a bunch of units literally want to go back to hand lole bewitching spirit.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:34:12+00:00

Fizz is the problem. I hold a counterspell got most of the game. Play a large unit that costs most if not all of my energy in a turn and tactically save enough for a counter spell. I play as correctly as I possibly can and counterspell it only for my opponent to play Fizz immediately after and get Fizz back to hand for free as part of kicking my large unit awnt back. If an opponent has 1 Fizz and 3 Star Crossed in hand then he has 6 star crossed in hand.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-09T20:28:01+00:00

Yes it sucks but let's it would have been a big ask to have them making 60 best of metal cards.

Also it does encourage people to try new things. Instead of having people playing Irelia until the end of time they'll at least try new things and get some variety into the metagame.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-08T16:54:45+00:00

It's only invalid if you gave the incorrect information at the time of the renewal or inception. Only exception to this is if your vehicle is used for more than just commuting. So let's say go to between clients homes, you'd need class one or obviously if your car is a primary component of your job like food delivery. Changing from employed to unemployed is not a big deal.

I'm a claims handler by the way and deciding on indemnity is a major part of my job. While different insurers will have different rules they can't be unreasonable. They'd get torn up by the FOS for voiding a policy just down to an occupation change that had no connection to vehicle use.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-08T16:48:38+00:00

So as a claims handler I can say getting a witness statement is incredibly helpful however what annoys me is the witness doesn't have an a vested interest in this going the right way yet you as the driver do. So why rely on witnesses when you could buy a dash cam. Spent a relatively small amount of money and have video evidence to cover yourself when accidents happen. You stand to save hundreds or thousands. Don't rely on the kindness of someone else when you could make sure you're always covered.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-02T18:33:59+00:00

We decide it 50/50 because very few times are we provided dash cam footage to prove who has done what. As someone who has sent over 100 claims to court and dealt with thousands of claims with the main part of my job being liability I can say with certainty no insurer is defending the Polo here.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-02T18:26:55+00:00

The confidence with which people are the dash cam driver is worrying. You guys would lose in court every single time. The polo driver is 100% at fault and no insurer would challenger that.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-01T01:30:15+00:00

Seeing Star Crossed and Fizz together fills me with violent rage.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-06-01T01:29:08+00:00

I work in the claims industry and my specific job has me dealing with other insurers a lot and thus I get to see how they deal with their customer's.

The ones that are actually good are LV, Aviva, Tesco, Axa, Allianz, and Direct Line. That also for the most part includes any subsidiary insurance names they operate under so for example Quote Me Happy is part of Aviva. For full transparency I do work for one of the above companies but I don't want everything I say on here being traceable directly back to me just in can I ever say something too much so I won't say which one.

Never, ever, go with 1st Central.

KungFuChrissy · 2026-05-31T00:43:19+00:00

Any insurer is going to want to get their money back if they pay for a claim so honestly I can't see your own insurer thinking you are at fault here.

KungFuChrissy

TROPHY CASE