Car Ins - worth pursuing claim?

Shelle

I had an accident back in April of this year.

Approaching a junction, I noticed the car in front had stopped opposite another turning. It had stopped where the road continues as a narrowed road and as a car was already coming from the other direction. I stopped with a gap of over a length of a car as I realised he was about to reverse. I put my handbrake on as I waited. He started to reverse to let the other car through, but as he got closer I realised that he was not going to stop. I sounded my horn but it was too late and he went into the front of my car.

Both of us got out and examined both cars. The rear left light on his car was damaged, and on mine the bumper on the right was damaged, together with remnants of paint from his car. Neither of us had pen and paper with us, and other driver said he did not have his insurance details with him. My cousin drove past a few minutes after accident, so I asked him to get his dad to come down to the scene from Selby Close. Other driver phoned his step father who also lived close by to come down too.

Step father arrived, as did my uncle. Step father had the insurance details, MOT, driving licence etc with him. He took command of situation and gave me the details of drivers ins etc, and took my details. Confirmed no one was hurt and that we would both contact our insurance companies and explain what had happened. Tried to say I had gone into back of his car, but my Uncle stepped in and corrected him that the other driver had reversed into me. Step father asked is that right, to which the driver said yes.

Originally when I put the claim into my isurance company, they contacted the third party insurers to find out if it could be a no falut claim for me. It was agreed the same day of the accident. I also submitted a statement from my uncle, who did not witness the accident, but witnessed the admittance of liability.

Now, I have received a letter telling me the third party is disputing my "story" and that I drove into him! They will not accept the witness statement from my uncle as he did not witness the accident and he is not an independent witness. They are making an offer of 50/50 fault. I cannot understand how they can say that I went into the back of their car, how would I go into the back of a moving car if they hadnt stopped because of the obstruction caused by the car coming the other way?!?

Whilst I am furious and feel like refusing to accept the offer, I realise that I need to consider the facts and whether it will benefit me or not to pursue the claim. I do not, as the other driver does not have, have details of the other car that resulted in the third party having to reverse to let them through. If I were to lose and receive 100% blame do I simply just pay my policy excess? I need to know what I stand to lose by refusing the offer? I have protected no claims bonus, plus motor legal protection if that has any bearings on this.

I would really like to continue with the claim, but realise that it is my word against the third party, and my uncles word against his step father.

Any advice gratefully received!

Thanks

flang

I would fight it!!!
I had a accident last year when a car didnt stop and give way to be at the roundabout! she wouldnt admit liability eventhough it was blaintly her thought!!
I got peed off in the end and instructed my solicator to summonds her to the small claims court!
Guess who recieved a cheque a few weeks later
I suggest you do the same!

gyzmo

Without independant evidence, it is difficult to prove on persons side over the other. The same will be said if the case goes to court. If the insurers do not believe that they can get better than a split liability, then it is unlikely that your legal cover will provide assistance to fight the case.

Whether it is fair or not is a different story.

tomstickland

This is typical of the lying !!!!ers that abound. Sadly you're probably best off accepting a 50-50 rather than going to court and ending up with a 50-50.
Then again, dragging them through the small claims will give you a certain satisfaction.

thewelshman_2

If you go to court, you may end up with full liability, As your insurance company will attempt to prove that it was the other drivers fault. The burdon of proof is then on you. If you lose there is no 50-50 (at least there wasn't when it happened to me)

Astaroth

Civil law works on the balance of probability and so if there are 2 conflicting version of events the judge will decide which he believes - or in some cases he will decide that both parties arent telling the whole truth and therefore apportion liability on the basis of what he believes truly happened.

Insurance companies will often not like the odds of going to court on these types of incidents and therefore offer a 50/50 split decision based on the basis either side could be telling the truth.... unfortunately your uncles statement would have 2 major issues, one that an admission of liability at the scene of an accident basically doesnt count for anything as the other driver isnt considered an expert on the law of torts and secondly as a relative his evidence isnt considered independant - that isnt to say a judge wouldnt allow the evidence (though some insurers will say that they wont count it) but the judge again will decide if he is telling the whole truth or slanting it in your favour.

Ultimately the decision on if it is worth pursuing is simply down to you but it is worth considering things like your age, car, gender etc -v- the third parties... be it right or wrong a judge is more likely to believe a middle age woman with a small low power family car with her kids in the car over a teenage male driver with a hot hatch and 3 mates in the car.

Shelle

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts. It is grossly unfair and dishonest, but I guess there are a lot of those around!

Interesting point Astaroth re car/age/gender! I am in my early thirties, female with a small car, whilst the third party was early twenties, male and a porsche!!! Say no more! Perhaps his excess is significantly higher thus decides to contest in the hope of not paying anything, or at least reduce it??!!!

Still very undecided but suspect that realistically I have no choice but to accept 50/50. Anoying when it means the likes of those get away with all the time though!

Thanks again!

Astaroth

If it went 50/50 both parties can claim 50% of their losses from the other party (though obviously the insurance companies are the ones that actually pay out) so they would be able to get 50% of their excess, loss of use and any other uninsured losses they are claiming to have back from your insurers. If he was under 25 then he is likely to have a very high excess as both his age and the type of vehicle he has both carry an additional compulsary excess on top of what ever voluntary excess he has agreed to have.

Ultimately it is up to your insurers what they go for and dont as both the law and undoubtably your policy gives them the right to decide how to settle the claim.

You ultimately could fight it and if necessary fund your own court action if your insurers decide that your chances of success arent high enough (though I would be careful as even a small RTA can easily get pushed into a higher court than the small claims, esp if the TPs car is a porsche, and this increases the court fees and means you have to pay the TPs solicitors fees, though if you were to win then of cause the TP has to pay it all). If you do decide to do this then you would have to tell your insurers ASAP as if they accept the 50/50 on your behalf it is binding on you (esp if it is a small claims court level) and you would need to get them to act on a without prejudice basis whilst you are dealing with it as you see fit.

Ultimately as with any court action it would be a case of you pays your money and takes your chances.... and irrespective of the cost you have to ask yourself it is worth the personal hassel