Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:20 AM
    • 29Posts
    • 0Thanks
    billyghom
    Hit by stolen car, found at fault, please help
    • #1
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:20 AM
    Hit by stolen car, found at fault, please help 11th Jan 18 at 11:20 AM
    Hi everyone,

    I was in a car accident with a stolen BMW which I have been found to be at fault by my insurance company. I would like advice on how to overturn the decision. I have tried my best to present the information of the incident as succinctly and clearly as possible.

    - I came out from a minor road into a major road (indicating right, alone in my car), because the BMW (on my right, nearest lane) was far away enough for me to do so.
    - I came out halfway and stopped and observed my left and waited for it clear so that I could go
    - Just as the last car on my left passed, I was hit by the BMW, while I was still stationary
    - the five occupants of the BMW came out of their vehicle and discarded onto the ground a large quantity of used nitrous oxide cannisters (also known as Cream Chargers, Hippy Crack, and Laughing Gas). The BMW interior was also littered with these used cannisters. These are used to get high (illegally)
    - I was physically attacked by the driver of the BMW (once we were both out of our vehicles after the collision), the attack was stopped by passing members of the public
    - I called the police, but they refused to attend as it was a car accident with no serious injuries and needed to be dealt with between the two parties involved, this was despite me telling them about the used cannister and attack (I did not know the car was stolen at this point)
    - The five occupants of the BMW fled the scene, abandoning their vehicle
    - I called the police a second time, and insisted they attend, as one or two of the BMW occupants kept returning and I did not feel safe (one of them returned to recover something from the boot of their vehicle before fleeing again)
    - The police arrived around 30 minutes after the collision and took statements, there was one witness but I am not confident how reliable he is as he was a homeless man, I told the police about the used nitrous oxide cannisters and physical attack (the cannisters were there for the police to see anyway)

    So my insurance company is finding me at fault on the basis that I came out from a minor road into a major road and the BMW had right of way. This is despite me being stationary when I was hit (my insurance company says I cannot prove this), the BMW being stolen with joyriders inside, and the used nitrous oxide cannisters (an illegal high) inside the BMW. A couple of things to note: 1.) my maneuver was not illegal and it is routinely done everyday on the roads and it was absolutely safe for me to begin the maneuver as the BMW was so far away on my right
    2.) the BMW does have insurance, but clearly the owner wasn't at the wheel on the night of the collision as it was reported stolen. It did not have MOT however (I learned this later after an online check). I cannot see my version of events being disputed by the other side as clearly they are in hiding from the police and are untraceable. The only people disputing my version of events is my insurance company.

    I have tried my best to present all the relevant information, but I may have missed something.

    Please help with any advice, I will be very grateful. I only have Third Party Fire and Theft cover, and will not get anything from my insurance company unless I can overturn the decision for fault.

    This seems really unfair that I get hit by joyriders getting high in a stolen car, and yet I am found to be at fault and receive nothing. The BMW driver most likely didn't even have a driving license. I struggle for money and suffer from depression, and my car meant a lot to me. It was one of the only things I had that bought me joy (it's been written off).

    The other party has not made a claim against my insurers.

    Thank you.
Page 1
    • paddyandstumpy
    • By paddyandstumpy 11th Jan 18, 11:27 AM
    • 944 Posts
    • 425 Thanks
    paddyandstumpy
    • #2
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:27 AM
    • #2
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:27 AM
    So to clarify, you were pulling out of a minor road onto a major road, seeing there were cars in the distance, and you stopped in their path expecting them to stop?

    Sorry if I’ve misinterpreted what you’ve said if that’s not right!
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:31 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    • #3
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:31 AM
    • #3
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:31 AM
    Yes, but please remember the BMW was very far away, I mean very far away, and that this manoeuvre is not illegal and is routinely done on the roads everyday and in driving lessons.

    Thank you.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    • #4
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    • #4
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    Also there were no other cars coming (behind the BMW), this was late at night.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    • 34,077 Posts
    • 18,033 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #5
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    • #5
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:34 AM
    These points you feel are material are irrelevant to establishing you are not to blame: joyriders/canisters/driving licence/no mot/stolen/physical attack/


    Your main problem is seemingly no witness. (And why are you arguing with your insurer if you don't have any cover for damage to your own car? Ask them how long they will keep the claim open for the other side to make any claim before restoring your NCD if it is unprotected)


    But do see if the police have got anywhere in identifying the driver who attacked you - (though it's irrelevant to your claim you were not to blame).
    Last edited by Quentin; 11-01-2018 at 11:38 AM.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    • #6
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    • #6
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    Thank you.

    Yes, that is what my insurance company told me. But I think individually, yes, they are irrelevant, but adding them all up, because there is so many, they become impossible to ignore. Although I appreciate convincing the insurance company of that is a different matter.

    Thanks.
    • BoGoF
    • By BoGoF 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    • 2,838 Posts
    • 2,082 Thanks
    BoGoF
    • #7
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    • #7
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:39 AM
    Yes, but please remember the BMW was very far away, I mean very far away, and that this manoeuvre is not illegal and is routinely done on the roads everyday and in driving lessons.

    Thank you.
    Originally posted by billyghom
    Really......driving instructors teach learners to sit in the middle of the road when turning right if nothing coming from the right?
    • marlot
    • By marlot 11th Jan 18, 11:43 AM
    • 3,204 Posts
    • 2,334 Thanks
    marlot
    • #8
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:43 AM
    • #8
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:43 AM
    It would annoy me too, but I think you are at at least partly to blame. I may well have done the same as you, but the highway code is clear...

    Rule 172

    The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road.
    Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10(1),16(1) & 25

    The driver of the BMW may have had no licence, and may have been unfit to drive, but ultimately he had right of way.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:44 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    • #9
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:44 AM
    • #9
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:44 AM
    Yes, if it is safe to come out halfway into the middle of the road and wait for the other side clear, it can be done. Otherwise at junctions where there is no traffic lights you would be waiting a very long time to come out or never come out at all. It's done all the time on the roads, safely of course.

    Thanks.
    • PasturesNew
    • By PasturesNew 11th Jan 18, 11:45 AM
    • 61,289 Posts
    • 358,845 Thanks
    PasturesNew
    We all do it - look right, look left, then judge whether we think the car from the left will pass before the one on the right + a dose of trusting the car to the right seeing us and doing the right thing and letting us pull out.

    It's all luck and judgement. This time you weren't lucky as the car to the right had no interest in giving way to you. Indeed, a joyrider probably saw your car as "points" when they hit it.

    Not everybody is driving correctly and seeing what's happening in the distance and letting people out. For some, seeing you there will have "angered them".

    This time, you lost the gamble.

    It sucks, but that's how it is.

    Yes we all do it - and 99.99% of the time we're all lucky ... but it's that luck. I did it the other day and as the car from the right was getting closer I'm sure the one from the left had slowed down and I was annoyed at myself for having thought I could make it ....but I did make it as there was room in the end and the car to my right wasn't being driven by joyriders.
    • BoGoF
    • By BoGoF 11th Jan 18, 11:48 AM
    • 2,838 Posts
    • 2,082 Thanks
    BoGoF
    I'm not saying it cant be done but I imagine if you did it on a driving test you would fail.

    Sometimes you just have to be patient and wait for the gap.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 11th Jan 18, 11:49 AM
    • 1,788 Posts
    • 1,612 Thanks
    Comms69
    Yes, if it is safe to come out halfway into the middle of the road and wait for the other side clear, it can be done. Otherwise at junctions where there is no traffic lights you would be waiting a very long time to come out or never come out at all. It's done all the time on the roads, safely of course.

    Thanks.
    Originally posted by billyghom
    It can be done, it should not be done.


    It's actually really anti social. And clearly not safe this time.
    • marlot
    • By marlot 11th Jan 18, 11:49 AM
    • 3,204 Posts
    • 2,334 Thanks
    marlot
    The picture here on rule 173 is similar (though it refers to dual carriageways).

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203

    You did a manoevre that many people do every day. Mostly it works because the oncoming traffic is keen to avoid a crash, and so stop to let you out.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:55 AM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    It would annoy me too, but I think you are at at least partly to blame. I may well have done the same as you, but the highway code is clear...

    Rule 172

    The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road.

    [/B]The driver of the BMW may have had no licence, and may have been unfit to drive, but ultimately he had right of way.
    Originally posted by marlot
    Yes, I understand that. But what may change things in my favour is that I was stationary when I was hit. As I understand it, it is a generally accepted standard in the insurance industry that if a stationary vehicle is hit, the vehicle that hit the stationary car is at fault. Except my insurance company keep telling me I can't prove I was stationary. I remind them that there is no one on the other side to dispute if I was stationary, but that doesn't seem to matter to them (I realise the other insurance company could dispute it, but they weren't there on the night).

    Thank you.

    (sorry, I had to delete your links in the quote, as I'm not allowed to post links as a new member)
    • vacheron
    • By vacheron 11th Jan 18, 11:57 AM
    • 755 Posts
    • 666 Thanks
    vacheron
    Yes, but please remember the BMW was very far away, I mean very far away, and that this manoeuvre is not illegal and is routinely done on the roads everyday and in driving lessons.

    Thank you.
    Originally posted by billyghom
    While I empathise with your situation, I believe the stance the insurance company will take is that even though you admitted that they were "very" far away when you moved into their lane, you still did not leave yourself enough time to safely complete your maneuver and clear their right of way before they hit you.

    I suppose your defense is that had the driver not been under the influence of some substance, then they may have been able to stop, however you have no evidence that they were.

    Ironically, had you turned left instead of right and driven on for 100m or so past the junction before they slammed into you from behind, this would probably have been considered as entirely their fault, intoxicated or otherwise.
    • The rich buy assets.
    • The poor only have expenses.
    • The middle class buy liabilities they think are assets.
    Robert T. Kiyosaki
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 11th Jan 18, 11:58 AM
    • 34,077 Posts
    • 18,033 Thanks
    Quentin
    .....my insurance company keep telling me I can't prove I was stationary. I remind them that there is no one on the other side to dispute if I was stationary, but that doesn't seem to matter to them .....
    Originally posted by billyghom

    You are wasting your time arguing with your insurer! They are not going to pursue your claim for you as you had no cover for damage to your own car!
    • BoGoF
    • By BoGoF 11th Jan 18, 11:59 AM
    • 2,838 Posts
    • 2,082 Thanks
    BoGoF
    Do you accept your car shouldn't have been where it was?
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 11th Jan 18, 11:59 AM
    • 2,903 Posts
    • 2,405 Thanks
    Aretnap
    Please help with any advice, I will be very grateful. I only have Third Party Fire and Theft cover, and will not get anything from my insurance company unless I can overturn the decision for fault.
    Originally posted by billyghom
    If you only have third party, fire and theft then you won't get anything from your insurers full stop. Accidental damage to your car is not covered by your policy, regardless of whether it's your fault, someone else's fault or nobody's fault in particular.

    All you can do is pursue the other party's insurers for your costs - or the MIB if the driver of the other car cannot be identified. This will depend on proving that the other party was to blame for the accident - which means focussing on the specific acts of driving that caused the collision, not the fact that the car was stoled/uninsured/MOTless/full of laughing gas cannisters. If your insurance comes with legal expenses cover/Motor Legal Protection then your insurer will appoint a solicitor to help with the process IF they conclude that you have a reasonable chance of success. If it doesn't then you're on your own. You could try to find a claims management company to take on the case, but again they'll only be inetersted if they think there's a good chance of proving fault against the other party.

    It's easy to be wise after the event, but insuring TPFT is something that you should really only do if losing your car is a risk that you can afford to take.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 12:00 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    It can be done, it should not be done.


    It's actually really anti social. And clearly not safe this time.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    Please remember, the BMW was really far away. They were clearly speeding, but I could not tell they were speeding at the time, because they were so far away. It's harder to judge the speed of something when it is far away.

    Thank you.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 11th Jan 18, 12:02 PM
    • 34,077 Posts
    • 18,033 Thanks
    Quentin
    They were clearly speeding, but I could not tell they were speeding at the time, ..........
    Originally posted by billyghom
    Not helping your cause!!
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,052Posts Today

8,715Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Today's Twitter poll: Following yesterday's poll about being an organ donor when you die - would you consider being? https://t.co/tCTWjJBin8

  • RT @clq: @MartinSLewis You hit that one right out of the park. It might be the Tweet of the Century. I don't think anyone can do any Batter?

  • You've run-out of puns. That's a bit of a googly, maybe I can help break your duck, though it is s sticky wicket, t? https://t.co/nJT51NpXfO

  • Follow Martin