Advice on car crash & insurance liability.

iamana1ias

MrsE wrote: »

Thats how we feel:cool:

My DH had an accident a few years ago & was in a similar situation, the insurers wanted him to agree ti go 50:50 but he wouldn't, took 2 years but the other insurers agreed liability in the end.

A lorry driver after perceiving my DH had deliberately cut him up, chased him down the road (DH didn't even realised the guy was p1ssed off & following him) until he veered into the side of his car with the lorry.

DH took the keys out of his lorry & called the police as he thought he guy must be drunk or drugged up to drive like that, the guy denied it was deliberate, but said to the policewoman it was an accident (so he admitted it was his fault). He then changed his story & it took 2 years to sort out. The insurance wouldn't pursue the policewoman for her statement & wanted him to admit 50:50, but he wouldn't. He's a cabbie & his premiums increased hugely in the time.
He got proactive & tracked the WPC down & only then when she sent them her version of events would the insurance go to the other insurers with the evidence & they admitted liability.

But without a police statement he would have been ****ed & even with that it still took nearly 2 years:rolleyes:

If you've been through something similar before why do you need advice now?

MrsE_2

SueSueSue wrote: »

They havent said that but what exactly do you think they can do if no evidence exists about liability and both parties say different. Spend thousands on a court case so a judge can turn round and say no evidence so 50/50. If the OP has witnesses or a compelling case it will be pursued but in the event its their word against the other party it isnt reasonable to expect the insurer to go to court with no case.

And they wouldnt. Any ombudsman would simply agree that in the absence of evidence to decide the claim and different version of events that 50/50 was fair.

Its a sad part of life and insurance.

Actually their side is saying nothing. The lady didn't contact them for a few weeks & now my DDs insurers can get no response from the ladies insurers.

I would have thought the CCTV would make a compelling case.

dacouch

If (And it is a big if) the Police agree to release the CCTV footage it can take between 30 and 120 days for them to release it.

With regards to the Legal Expense Cover they only take on cases where they is a good chance of recovery, if it looks like 50 50 they will not take it on

goldspanners

i remember your original thread about this and you took a fair battering for some reason on it, undeservedly i thought.

but 50/50? how could they come to this conclusion if your daughters car was on the correct side of the road and the vehicle she hit was crossing her path? did she take any pictures of the vehicles positions after the crash,im guessing they asked for a drawing from both parties pointing out thier intentions and positions on the road. how can the other driver claim they werent at fault.

sarahg1969

From what you've said, OP, the other driver's insurers haven't dispute liability at all? They've just failed to deal with any correspondence.

If your daughter has legal cover, it might be useful to use that, and instruct some solicitors to deal with your daughter's claim, to put some pressure on the other driver's insurers. They are probably just slacking, rather than dithering about liability.

Inactive

None of us, including the OP was at the scene of the accident, so how can any of us possibly make judgement on fault attribution?

An experienced good driver would probably have anticipated the actions of the other driver and avoided a collision.

The OP's Daughter was a newly qualified driver with little experience, so does that in some way attribute a small part of the blame to her?

I don't know the answer to that one, like the rest of us, I wasn't there.;)

goldspanners

Inactive wrote: »

None of us, including the OP was at the scene of the accident, so how can any of us possibly make judgement on fault attribution?

An experienced good driver would probably have anticipated the actions of the other driver and avoided a collision.

The OP's Daughter was a newly qualified driver with little experience, so does that in some way attribute a small part of the blame to her?

I don't know the answer to that one, like the rest of us, I wasn't there.;)

most will be going on what mrse is telling us,like most threads on here, we can only go on what is posted by the op.

lawrie28

Legally, you are entitled to copies of any CCTV that you are on. You have to send a letter wiht a £10 (i beleive) fee to cover costs. Mark Thomas Comedy Product did a feature about making a film from being on cctv. You give them dates and times etc.

Also, ask the insurance company to visit the scene, or go and take some photos yourself to show the layout of the road. You can also ring up her insurance co yourself and ask them, you could have chosen to sort this yourself, so you are entitled to.

Also if you have the ladies contact number, ring/write to her and ask her to confirm what has happened. Most people will help to sort things, but if her insurers are crap, they may not have asked her for the claim form yet....

Inactive

goldspanners wrote: »

most will be going on what mrse is telling us,like most threads on here, we can only go on what is posted by the op.

I understand that, but I was just giving my opinion on the matter, it just seems futile to attempt to make a judgement on fault attribution when we have such sketchy information to go on.

That is not intended as a critisism of any individual, that is simply how I see things.

lawrie28

Inactive wrote: »

None of us, including the OP was at the scene of the accident, so how can any of us possibly make judgement on fault attribution?

An experienced good driver would probably have anticipated the actions of the other driver and avoided a collision.

The OP's Daughter was a newly qualified driver with little experience, so does that in some way attribute a small part of the blame to her?

I don't know the answer to that one, like the rest of us, I wasn't there.;)

Well generally if someone pulls into your path, they are in the wrong. It is kinda common sense. The " I indicated and thought you would let me go" argument doesn't wash. Something called rules of the road..... And no, inexperience does not attribute blame, just a larger insurance premium.

Although you are right, we weren't there so don;t know for sure, we have to go on what the OP said.