Going knock for knock?

welshmoneylover

Hi

I just want your opinion on a car accident insurance claim.

Background: Male driver driving along left hand side of road normally doing about 20-25ish.

Female driver parked on double yellow lines on the right hand side of road facing down, so she's on the right.

Female driver pulls out and hits the front wing and door of male driver's car. We think she was looking over her shoulder looking UP the street before pulling out without looking to see who was in front of her.

The insurance company want to go knock for knock but the male driver may lose his NCB. Obviously he doesn't want to do this as he feels she was entirely at fault.

The car has been fixed and the excess was £275 so he wants it back.

I'd like to know the best way to proceed with this one.

Ta v much

dogbot

There is no such thing as knock for knock now. Do you mean 50-50? If this is the case you are sharing the liability equaly.

She pulled from a parked position into the mans path. If I were the bloke, I wouldn't settle for less than 100% liability in his favour! It is a clear cut case, there is nothing in the womans favour.

lisyloo

I agree it sounds like her fault.

Are there independent witnesses?
Compelling photos?

The problem is that in many cases there is no objective evidence.
Where it is one persons word against another then there cannot be a good hope of winning so it is never worth going to court.

cirrusmp

<Please Delete>

geri1965_2

Knock for knock was an agreement between insurance companies not to pursue each other for their outlay on the basis that over time, it would even itself out - "swings and roundabouts". It has mostly been done away with, although some of the smaller insurers do still have a knock for knock agreement (at least up until a couple of years ago).

It had nothing to do with liability.

lisyloo

You certainly shouldn't loose your no claims if someone drives into you

Well you will if there is no proof and it's just one persons word against another.
I know that's not right.

As regards the police, they really won't be interested in a minor bump.

Sorry, but what we really need to establish here is
Were there independent witnesses (not passengrs, family or friends).
Was there any other compelling evidence that is recorded e.g. photos?

If none then I'm sorry, but it will be loss of ncb, excess and declaring the accident for 3 years on any policies you are on (this includes any polciies where you are named driverr and any motorcycle policies etc).

welshmoneylover

It is all such a minefield this insurance malarky. They are quick enough to take your money but not so quick to help when things go wrong.

Keep away from Hastings Direct!

rudekid48

welshmoneylover wrote: »

It is all such a minefield this insurance malarky. They are quick enough to take your money but not so quick to help when things go wrong.

Keep away from Hastings Direct!

Why? Because there is no evidence to back up what you say? How is that the fault of the Insurer? The other party could be saying anything, they may have said that you were doing something that you weren't, to get settlement in your favour your Insurer needs to prove that the other driver was at fault. Have you provided them with any proof?

It is too easy to blame the Insurer. Did you get any witness details at the time? Take any photographs (with a mobile)?

If there were no witnesses and you could not take pictures then you are relying solely on the honesty of the other person. If they are dishonest, how is that the fault of the Insurer?

lisyloo

but not so quick to help when things go wrong

I agree with rudekid.
You still haven't answered the questions.
What objective evidence do you have for them to go on?

If you have none then you won't find any insurer in the world that would pay to go to court.

I'm not knocking the male drivers driving, but he might find it cheaper overall to go on an advanced driving course, where they teach you to avoid accidents of this nature.
It doesn't sound like it was his fault at all, but it's about avoidance.
The cost is less than the excess and he would probably get an insurance discount.

welshmoneylover

The male driver didn't see the other party until about a second before impact.

There were no photographs taken, the only witnesses were in the car with him so won't be classed as independent. He couldn't get out of the car to take photographs as his door was buckled from the impact, the front passenger is disabled and relies upon male driver to get him out. So he had to move the car a bit to get out that is when he lost the opportunity to take photographs at the time.

I'm basing it on the fact that she pulled off from a parked position and drove into the side of a moving vehicle.

Any more thoughts people?

lisyloo

By all means press the insurer to argue with the other sides insurance rather than just go straight for 50/50. There is a (slim) chance she may be honest.
It's not clear whether they have just gone for the easy option or whether they have debated it already, so he should press his case.

However no insurer in the land will go to court with no evidence.
So if she or her insurer decide to be dis-honest (or have a different recollection of events) then he just has to live with it and look at it as a cost of motoring.

The only other thing he can do is sue her with his personal money, but with no objective evidence then this is probably not adviseable.

He must declare it on all future motoring policies for 3 years whether car, bike, named or main driver and it could affect future premiums as well as loss of NCD and excess.

I wouldn't dispute at all that she is in the wrong, but you have to consider it from a courts point of view if there are two people saying different things and no evidence whatsoever.

I sympathise, but I am very sure that no insurer would treat you differently, although you should ensure they have argued his case rather than just agreed straight off.
Nine times out of ten, the other side will have a completely different recollection in their favour/