Had a prang, who is responsible?

htrj

My mother has just had a low speed impact with another car. There is some ambiguity regarding who was to blame, mum says she had started reversing when the other car pulled in behind her - the other party claim she started reversing after they pulled in. There were no witnesses and I have no access to any CCTV images, although there is a camera nearby. The incident happened in a council car park. Mums car was not damaged.

In order to protect her and the other parties NCB and also because of the ambiguity of who is responsible, mum very kindly offered to pay for half of the repair of the other car. The other party refused this offer so mum, again thinking of the potentially increased insurance premiums, said she'd pay for the whole repair. Amazingly, this was also refused with the other party insisting that they went through the insurers.

What is the likely outcome in this situation? Does it make any difference that the incident did not happen on a public highway? Is it likely that they will claim off mums insurance? Im very fortunate to be able to say that I have never been involved in anything like this before and neither has my mum so this is all new territory to us.

Thanks for reading .

vax2002

The likely outcome is Mums insurance will pay out and the idiot that drove behind a reversing car will see their premiums quite rightly increased as a poor driver putting themselves at risk.

htrj

So will mum have to pay increased premiums too? Loss of NCB?

Rolandtheroadie

Put it through the insurers, deny liability/blame the other party.
Worse case scenario she'll be in the same position she is just now.

bengalknights

Just put it through the insurance but accept no liability, this will then end 50/50 which means your mother will have a rise in premiums but so will the other party, who should really have accepted the offer.

htrj

It had crossed my mind to deny liabilty but I didnt think we were allowed to discuss those sort of shannanagins here. Agreed, there is nothing to loose by doing it and potentially a lot to save. 40 years without a claim doesnt happen overnight.

What a plonker not taking that offer - most people in this situation would have bitten her arm off.

scheming_gypsy

htrj wrote: »

What a plonker not taking that offer - most people in this situation would have bitten her arm off.

they're probably sitting in A&E saying oooh and eeeee while thinking about their whiplash claim. If they'd settled up with your mum and not gone through the insurance they might not have been able to go for a personal injury claim.

Wig

Easily 100% your mother's fault, She should be looking where she is going, whether or not they pulled up before or after she started reversing she should have seen them and stopped reversing.

Ideally we need more information where were the cars?
What part of mums car hit what part of other car?

Other cars have right of way over cars that are reversing.

There is always room for some fault to be on the other side for example they used inappropriate speed and gave your mother no chance to see them arrive before impact, but this is unlikely.

Most likely the other party is just thinking it will be easier (guaranteed) to just let the insurers do it, whereas if they go along with your idea, there is always the chance that you could try to pull a fast one and/or refuse to pay for expensive repairs in the future thus complicating the whole situation.

Likely both parties will have increased premiums but only your mum will lose 2 years of her NCB, the other party won't lose any NCB. If she is with a company that gives more than 5 years this won't be so bad, she may drop to only 5 years which is still the max that she can use with other insurers so won't lose out that much.

Yes you can both settle it together, but legally you would still have had to tell your insurers, which would mean there would be no point for the other party to deal direct with you as it has no advantage for them. Only if you both decided to commit insurance fraud would there be a slight advantage to both parties.

pendulum

Car park accidents usually go 50/50. I'm surprised the other party insisted on going through insurance, they may regret that.

Enterprise_1701C

When I was working in an insurance brokers, the first thing we always told customers was NEVER admit fault even if it was definitely your fault, offering to pay was admitting fault and could unfortunately go against her.

Kilty_2

Jane_Blackford wrote: »

When I was working in an insurance brokers, the first thing we always told customers was NEVER admit fault even if it was definitely your fault, offering to pay was admitting fault and could unfortunately go against her.

But then of course she was in shock at the scene of the accident, wasn't thinking straight etc.

Although if the person she hit is filing a personal injury claim there's very little hope of the insurer wanting to fight enough to assign liability to them.