Who is liable for this crash

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

I think one thing which is vital and has not been answered is what way was the other party turning, if he was turning left and hit a car on the wrong side of the road he is not to blame

If he was turning right he is as he didnt wait til the road was clear

Either way I really hope your daughter gets caught because yours and hers lack of responsibility here is disgusting

rose28454

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

I think one thing which is vital and has not been answered is what way was the other party turning, if he was turning left and hit a car on the wrong side of the road he is not to blame

If he was turning right he is as he didnt wait til the road was clear

Either way I really hope your daughter gets caught because yours and hers lack of responsibility here is disgusting

He was suppusedly turning right so is to blame. I have already said that she has told his insurers she was not insured and if the police get involved then so be it. No need to be nasty. Have you never done anything wrong?

cogito

Smi1er wrote: »

I have just read this thread in total disbelief:mad:

OP, you are trying to justify your daughters actions:o

If driver A is over the drink drive limit and is stationary, and Driver B comes along and drives straight into the back of Driver A then guess who is to blame. Yep, Driver A, because they are over the drink drive limit and basically shouldn't be there.

Your daughter drove on the public highway whilst uninsured. Period. There is no excuse, whatsoever.

Now I'm not disputing that the other driver drove into the side of your daughters car whilst your daughter was on a main road, but the fact is she wasn't insured to be on the actual road.

Your daughter can expect six points, a fine, to repair her own damage at her cost and a vastly increased premium because she has a claim against her and also six points for driving without insurance. Your insurance company will take care of the damage to the third party.

Clueless.

if he was turning left and hit a car on the wrong side of the road he is not to blame

Not necessarily. Are you saying that a driver turning left doesn't need to look left before proceeding? You can't proceed without making sure that it's safe to do so.

RabbitMad

Smi1er wrote: »

If driver A is over the drink drive limit and is stationary, and Driver B comes along and drives straight into the back of Driver A then guess who is to blame. Yep, Driver A, because they are over the drink drive limit and basically shouldn't be there.

I think you are wrong here. A drunk will be presumed to be at fault unless he can show that he wasn't - i.e. witnesses etc.

I know of a case where a drunk ran over a child who ran out and just got a standard Drink Drive fine and ban as it was deemed that even if he'd been sober he'd have still hit the child.

rose28454

We have just spoken to our insurers and explained about the accident. They noted it on the record and said it would not alter the premium and thanks for calling. Spoke to other persons insurers who say they are mnaking enquiries and to wait for a letter from them. We will however be writing to them in the meantime to claim for her damage.

rose28454

I have just spoken to a car dealer friend looking for a replacement door for her car and told him the story. He put in perspective for me and said as she was insured she should not have been on the road and if she had not been there the accident would not have happened. He said that we should let it go and hope she is not done for the no insurance aspect. Therefore we are going to wait to see if his insurance company contacts us and if not then we will just leave it. We know he has fully protected no claims so his policy will pay for his damage. He told us his insurance were dealing with it so if we dont here from them then that is that. DD will just have to repair car as cheaply as possible and I already have a price for a door @ £35.00 in nearly the same colour. Wing then just need beating out. Now hoping this all works outand I know she will be much more careful in future.

tinkerbell84

rose28454 wrote: »

We know he has fully protected no claims so his policy will pay for his damage.

Protected NCB doesn't determine what is paid.

It also won't stop his premiums rising in the next 3 years.

What about his excess? Who will pay that?

Quentin

rose28454 wrote: »

He put in perspective for me and said as she was insured she should not have been on the road and if she had not been there the accident would not have happened.

That is correct. But irrelevant to your case that the third party is liable for the damage!

Remember that if your daughter is deemed liable, then the third party's insurance company will still come after her to repay them for any expenses they have had, and as already mentioned, the third party (or his legal team) will come after her to reimburse his uninsured losses (excess, lost wages, expenses getting the car to and from repairers etc).

Horace

One does wonder why she didn't let the driver out who was sticking part way out from the give way instead of driving round him. I am also asking myself if the OP's daughter caused the accident herself - you do hear about it all the time about people causing accidents just to get compo:mad: Best not mention that because then she will illegally claim something else.

Uninsured drivers should be banned from the road and have their cars taken to be crushed - its a good job she wasnt driving in my neck of the woods because the police here are very good and all have number plate recognition in their cars, she would have been caught for sure.:D

Being uninsured is not a silly mistake its a deadly serious one - I really have no idea what answer the OP expected to get when she came on in the first place and then tells us that her daughter was uninsured and to say that her daughter made a silly mistake is laughable.

I hope his insurers claim for everything under the sun - personal injury, loss of salary, inconvenience, cost of repairs, loss of earnings, loss of enjoyment. Stop trying to wriggle out of it she was uninsured and shouldn't have even been on the road - end of!

Please let me know the name of your daughter's insurers so that I can be sure never to use them because they seem to just allow policies to be renewed after a period of driving around uninsured.

rose28454

Quentin wrote: »

That is correct. But irrelevant to your case that the third party is liable for the damage!

Remember that if your daughter is deemed liable, then the third party's insurance company will still come after her to repay them for any expenses they have had, and as already mentioned, the third party (or his legal team) will come after her to reimburse his uninsured losses (excess, lost wages, expenses getting the car to and from repairers etc).

And if she is deemed liable ( and who will decide this - his insurers?) then if they chase for the money she will have to pay wont she!