Reversed into, other party not claiming liability

Daveyk1975

Just asking for peoples opinions

Was driving home from work a week and a half ago and got involved in an accident.

Was coming up an hill and turned a blind corner and was confronted by a stationary car. So I decided to wait about 8 feet behind to wait for the driver to pull away. Well next minute the driver started reversing and went straight into me. They was no damage on her new Astra but she had put a big crack across the radiator grille, knocked the indicator light out of its hole and moved the front bumper out of place on my nine year old Saxo.

She admitted that she was trying to parallel park and had not seen me.

There wasn't any independent witnesses. She was driving her father's car.

I took her insurance details and contacted my insurance company with the details.

A few days ago I got a call from my insurance company saying that she isn't admitting liability and that I had drove into her when she was staionary.

With my basic undersanding of physics and also I was reversed into last year overseas, if the damage is inflicted onto a vehicle and not the other then the first vehicle must have been stationary. (In my other accident I had all the damage and the other car didn't, the other driver contacted her insurance straight away and admitted liabilty)

It seems that some people don't have morals.

What do people think?

darich

Laws of physics don't translate into traffic accidents. By that i mean, the location and quantity of damage is no indication of who's to blame.

Given that there are no witnesses, it's simply your word against hers. All you can do is put forward your case as clearly and convincingly as possible and don't back down. Your determination may be enough for her to buckle because sometimes i think people try it on but when it comes to the crunch, they they can't follow it through.
If she sticks to her guns then i doubt there's much you can do since your insurance company have nothing else to go on.

Did you get photos of the positions of the cars after the impact? That might be additional evidence that would show her to be trying to manouevre.

If she's adamant she's not accepting the blame then it might become 50/50 or go to court. In which case she'll need to lie on the witness stand for her case to stand up.

Quentin

You say there were no "independent" witnesses.

Were there any witnesses at all, as it is a myth that witnesses must be independent?

Daveyk1975

She had her friend in the car with her.

tinkerbell84

How did she manage to reverse 8 feet without you blasting your horn to get her attention?

Daveyk1975

tinkerbell84 wrote: »

How did she manage to reverse 8 feet without you blasting your horn to get her attention?

I didn't expect her to reverse into me. I just she was reversing a bit and then to pull forward into the gap

Quentin

Daveyk1975 wrote: »

She had her friend in the car with her.

Shame - was hoping you had one with you who you were considering wasn't relevant.

Presumably the friend will back up the other side's story, and will be no use. But there will be nothing lost in you contacting her to see what her story is.

Daveyk1975

i didn't take the passengers details doh

tinkerbell84

Daveyk1975 wrote: »

I didn't expect her to reverse into me. I just she was reversing a bit and then to pull forward into the gap

And when she was 6 inches from your car?

Daveyk1975

I didn't think

tinkerbell84

Looks like it's gonna cost you