Just had a car accident

JimmyTheWig

Don't think the male / female bit has got anything to do with it. Hadn't even considered what either of you were until you mentioned it.

Don't think the mobile phone bit is particularly relevant. There is no law against talking on a hands free kit whilst driving. Unless this was causing the other driver to drive without due care and attention then this doesn't really figure.

I think the suggestion that you were 100% to blame was due to you being the one who skidded.

That you were going less than the speed limit isn't particularly relevant. The speed limit is just that - a limit. It doesn't mean that it is safe to drive at that speed (especially, as it happens, on country roads).

I think the trouble you may have is that you are the one who lost control of their car. I understand that this happened because the other driver failed to stop, but it's still what happened.

If you are confident that you can live with the damage to your car (i.e. you are confident there is no internal damage) then the best you can hope for is to contact the other driver and offer to pay "knock for knock" - i.e. you sort out your car and they sort out theirs without the insurance companies.

If they don't agree to this then I think the best you can hope for is joint responsibility.

robnye

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Don't think the male / female bit has got anything to do with it. Hadn't even considered what either of you were until you mentioned it.

no worries, i wasnt using it as a reason to not take any blame

Don't think the mobile phone bit is particularly relevant. There is no law against talking on a hands free kit whilst driving. Unless this was causing the other driver to drive without due care and attention then this doesn't really figure.

without a witness hard to prove

I think the suggestion that you were 100% to blame was due to you being the one who skidded.

ok

That you were going less than the speed limit isn't particularly relevant. The speed limit is just that - a limit. It doesn't mean that it is safe to drive at that speed (especially, as it happens, on country roads).

true

I think the trouble you may have is that you are the one who lost control of their car. I understand that this happened because the other driver failed to stop, but it's still what happened.

again true, again no witnesses

If you are confident that you can live with the damage to your car (i.e. you are confident there is no internal damage) then the best you can hope for is to contact the other driver and offer to pay "knock for knock" - i.e. you sort out your car and they sort out theirs without the insurance companies.

i can, the damage was less on mine than the other car and neither cars driving is affected by the damage.
how do insurance companies react to this?
my paperwork states dont do any discussions without their knowledge

If they don't agree to this then I think the best you can hope for is joint responsibility.

which i suspect would be the end result.

if the claim goes 100% against me, how does that affect in the future?
i realise that any claim will increase my policy at renewal, but does it state on my insurance details whether a claim is fault/non fault ?

~Chameleon~

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Don't think the mobile phone bit is particularly relevant. There is no law against talking on a hands free kit whilst driving. Unless this was causing the other driver to drive without due care and attention then this doesn't really figure.

But wouldn't the fact that the other driver failed to see the oncoming car and use the passing point accordingly mean he/she was driving without due care and attention whilst talking on the phone?

Quentin

robnye wrote: »

if the claim goes 100% against me, how does that affect in the future?
i realise that any claim will increase my policy at renewal, but does it state on my insurance details whether a claim is fault/non fault ?

Whatever the degree it goes against you, then it will be marked as a fault claim.

If you are hoping to be regarded not at fault, but offer knock for knock to the third party, then you are admitting some fault!

robnye

Quentin wrote: »

If you are hoping to be regarded not at fault, but offer knock for knock to the third party, then you are admitting some fault!

thats what i thought.

ill report the accident to my insurance company and wait to see what comes in the post

Bagpuss741

~Chameleon~ wrote: »

But wouldn't the fact that the other driver failed to see the oncoming car and use the passing point accordingly mean he/she was driving without due care and attention whilst talking on the phone?

That's what I was thinking, surely they should have spotted two passing points and a car coming towards them.

robnye

Bagpuss741 wrote: »

That's what I was thinking, surely they should have spotted two passing points and a car coming towards them.

but how to prove with no witnesses, the googlemap/multimap pictures benefit my side of the story, but at the end of the day, it will still be my word against the other driver

lisyloo

but how to prove with no witnesses, the googlemap/multimap pictures benefit my side of the story, but at the end of the day, it will still be my word against the other driver

Yes that's right and lets be generous and say the others driver may recollect things differently from you (or lie through their teeth).

Whether it's 1% against you or 100% against you makes no difference.
It only makes a different if you are 100% innocent which I think is unlikely - mainly down to the lack of proof rather than anything else.