Minor bump this morning - insurance question

Hintza

Now for your spanking OP....:)

Why didn't you stop when/if it was obvious that the road was too narrow? Then you would have a perfectly legitimate claim against the other party if they hit you. (Of course lack of witmesses would make this tricky)

I'm not trying to make a big issue out of it as these things happen but worth bearing in mind if you use the road frequently.

bestpud

Hintza wrote: »

Now for your spanking OP....:)

Why didn't you stop when/if it was obvious that the road was too narrow? Then you would have a perfectly legitimate claim against the other party if they hit you. (Of course lack of witmesses would make this tricky)

I'm not trying to make a big issue out of it as these things happen but worth bearing in mind if you use the road frequently.

It's a B road and I'd have caused an accident if I'd stopped - we were both travelling at about 50 mile an hour!

There is absolutely no need to stop as it is wide enough but cars do tend to go on the other side because it is a bend in a dip, hence there is signs warning drivers of this. Neither of us were but we were both obviously a bit close to the white line.

My point was there isn't oodles of room so it would have been obvious if one of us was on the wrong side iyswim?

I'd absolutely have stopped had I thought for one minute I had any chance of clipping the car coming the other way.

I've passed so many cars on that stretch of road, at speed, and with no issue and can see how this was just unfortunate.

It has made me think more about how I navigate that corner though, so some good has come out of it. Tbh, most of the time I just drive on the other side and cut out the corner as there is usually nothing coming and you can easily see whether there is or not.

I'd post a googlemap image of the bend if I knew how!

Quentin

bestpud wrote: »

The other person hasn't contacted me but I think it unlikely they will claim because their excess won't make it viable.

If the third party wants to pursue you for their repair costs, then their excess doesn't come into it.

You only have to pay your excess when you make a claim off your own insurance company for damage to your own car.

bestpud

Quentin wrote: »

If the third party wants to pursue you for their repair costs, then their excess doesn't come into it.

You only have to pay your excess when you make a claim off your own insurance company for damage to your own car.

Yes, but in that case, she'd have to try and prove I was at fault and that would be very difficult to do.

If blame cannot be proved, they will put it down as a 50:50 and she would pay her costs and me mine. Well, I've not got any as my car is fine.

Worst outcome for me in that case is an accident with partial blame on my insurance record.

That's what my insurer says anyway...

Quentin

bestpud wrote: »

If blame cannot be proved, they will put it down as a 50:50 and she would pay her costs and me mine. Well, I've not got any as my car is fine.

No.

50/50 doesn't work like that. If you are held 50% to blame, then you (or your insurer) would pay half the third party's costs, and the third party half yours. As yours are nil, the third party seems to have nothing to lose by making a claim directly against you.

In any case, should the third party pursue you directly, there is no question of them having to pay any excess to their insurer as previously explained.

bestpud

Quentin wrote: »

No.

50/50 doesn't work like that. If you are held 50% to blame, then you (or your insurer) would pay half the third party's costs, and the third party half yours. As yours are nil, the third party seems to have nothing to lose by making a claim directly against you.

In any case, should the third party pursue you directly, there is no question of them having to pay any excess to their insurer as previously explained.

Ok, I'm probably being thick, but would explain how she would pursue me directly, please?

I have no excess on my policy so I wouldn't pay anything even if she did claim from my insurance but I don't really understand what you mean.

TIA

Quentin

bestpud wrote: »

Ok, I'm probably being thick, but would explain how she would pursue me directly, please?

I have no excess on my policy so I wouldn't pay anything even if she did claim from my insurance but I don't really understand what you mean.

Anyone involved in an incident who thinks a third party has some liability in an incident can pursue the "guilty party" themselves for their costs to be reimbursed.

In practice, as long as the "guilty party" has insurance, then any direct claim from a third party can be passed on to the insurer to deal with.

Regarding excess, should you be held liable (or part liable), then your insurer will pay out, and as they are only dealing with the third party claim, then there is nil excess for you to pay.

However, if you are held in any part responsible (eg the 50/50 scenario), although all third party costs would be settled by your insurer with no charge to you, you would have an at fault claim on your record, with loss of NCB (unless protected), and a premium loading at renewal.

bestpud

Quentin wrote: »

Anyone involved in an incident who thinks a third party has some liability in an incident can pursue the "guilty party" themselves for their costs to be reimbursed.

In practice, as long as the "guilty party" has insurance, then any direct claim from a third party can be passed on to the insurer to deal with.

Regarding excess, should you be held liable (or part liable), then your insurer will pay out, and as they are only dealing with the third party claim, then there is nil excess for you to pay.

However, if you are held in any part responsible (eg the 50/50 scenario), although all third party costs would be settled by your insurer with no charge to you, you would have an at fault claim on your record, with loss of NCB (unless protected), and a premium loading at renewal.

Ah, ok, thanks for explaining.

I know there is a risk to my no claims and premium but was getting worried there may be more to it than that.

She may well not claim.

Could I check one more thing out:

Am I right in thinking she would not have to pay any excess if she did?

Quentin

If she claims directly from you, (or your insurer), then she would have no excess to pay.

(If it should be that she does claim off you, and your insurer agrees any liability, then it may be worth you reimbursing your insurer (if it is just for a mirror) to prevent your loss of 2 years NCD as well as not getting any NCB added for this year either)

kevin0410

jesus christ!! all that happened to the OP was that they clipped mirrors. It was unlucky that the other driver's mirror was broken, but there was just as much chance of the OP having the mirror smashed too.

i can't believe all this guff about getting insurance involved, do you people like giving companies the chance to get more money out of you?

the driver who suffered a broken mirror should put it down to experience and buy a new bit of glass. it doesn't cost that much, !!!!!!.