Accident involving Breakdown Recovery Vehicle

zippychurch

Hello all,

Have read the forums and been subscribed to the great emails from Martin for some time now - invaluable and dead useful.

Not sure if anyone has ever experienced a similar "problem" so thought I would see.

On Friday evening on the way home from work I was driving up a steep hill and one of the major Breakdown recovery companies was driving down the hill (need to be careful so not naming)

It is a narrow hill and was my right of way (he had 2 or 3 parked cars on his side and there were none on mine) but he still drove through - now there is just enough room for 2 cars normally but the car he was towing suddenly swung out around him and into me. I couldn't even see the car until about 1/2 second prior to the collision as it was obscured by his van.

Every panel and both doors are trashed but the major problem is that the major impact has possibly damaged the pillar and the repair guy has warned me it will probably be a write off.

This is the last thing I want as it is a reliable car that is worth a lot to me that probably isn't reflected in the amount their insurers will try and put my way. I don't think he should have been towing on the hill, the towee admitted to me she was scared being towed down there and I also have a witness too.

I didn't know if anyone had ever had a similar problem with one of the established companies and had any success taking them or trying to get a permanent replacement vehicle as opposed to a minimal cash offer. I bought the car for £4k but looking on price guides, they may offer me half this which as I am the innocent party does seem grossly unfair.

I will know more over the next few days so thought. fearing the worse I could arm myself with some extra ammo(info) in readiness

best regards

zc

Bossyboots

You need to make sure you have evidence gathered of what the car is worth so that you can push them to the limit. They are not going to offer you more than market value. It makes no difference that you were the innocent party, they only have to pay you the current value of the vehicle. Otherwise they would be putting you in a better position than you were before the accident, instead of the obligatory actual position. If you believe there is something special about your car that makes it worth more than the book price, you need to say so. We did this when my car got written off as it had been an ex demo with special markings which meant it was worth more than the standard model.

The fact that he shouldn't have been towing on the hill is neither here nor there. They still only have to offer you market value. You can claim against them for any consequential losses, but they are not going to pay you more than the car is worth at the date of the accident.

gyzmo

I would also be certain about saying you have right of way. If the third party had already proceeded to pass the parked vehicles before you had, then he had right of way and that might affect how a claim is dealt with (but I wouldn't worry about it, I'm just nitpicking!).

Bossyboots is quite correct about vehicle valuations. You car may be a godsend to you, but that does not change it's market value. Don't fall into the trap of expecting a "showroom" price of a similar car, as these inlude things such as profit for the seller, extras, such as "free" insurance etc. What price a car is bought sold for and what it is worth are entirely different things. if you really disagree, ask the insurance company to show what it has based its price on and take it from there.

marksward

Don't know if its urban legend, but if theres an obstruction both sides the vehicle going up-hill has right of way?

gyzmo

I believe that the test is the car had started to pass the obstruction first is the one that has the right of way. Any authoritative correction is welcome!

Astaroth

The problem is that there is no "rule" as it is all about negligence which is doing something that a reasonable person wouldnt or failing to do something that a reasonable person would. It effectively comes down to a judges decision (or the insurance companies in pre-litigation) on what a reasonable person would have done given the situation.

It is generally considered that if a vehicle has already started passing the obstruction that a reasonable person would allow them to complete the passing - where else are they going to go if you dont?

A consideration of cause is that it may be considered reasonable to allow a vehicle that is towing another and going downhill to proceed irrespective of if they have started the passing manover or not due to the general issues of towing. As I no longer work in claims I dont have access to my case law site to see if there is any relevant case.