Should I Split Liability For A Non Fault collision?

rborob

Hi all, I hope this is in the correct place, but here's my predicament.

Last year I was involved in a collision where a van and trailer pulled across the front of my car due to his lane being coned off. His trailer crushed my wing mirror and crumpled my wing. He drove off, so instead of stopping to take pictures and get witnesses etc I had to follow him and tell him to stop.

He wasn't aware of the collision (he says) but pulled over, saw the damage and we exchanged details. He told me that it was unsafe for him to stop (with the heavy machinery on the trailer) so he had to try and get in the gap.

Our insurers finally got a response from them but they said there was no damage to our car. We sent the pictures we took of the damage and referred them to the garage who repaired our car. They have no replied again stating that because there was no independent witness that they are willing to accept a 50/50 split liability.

Now I've never been in an accident and was quite shocked at the time. I could have been more vigilant in taking pictures (his trailer had no registration plate/lights on it) but i was generally in shock as was my wife.

What should I do? The accident wasn't my fault, the driver didn't stop, he lied about the damage to our car and now he's trying to share the blame with us. I don't want to accept split liability as there was nothing I could have done. He also claimed there was enough room when he undertook me, but I sped up to stop him getting in.

Any help would be great as I'm getting really stressed out over this.

Thanks in advance!

Quentin

See what your insurer says, restate your case and tell them you don't accept the offer - though conflicting stories with no witnesses does often mean it has to be 50/50, as who can decide on who is telling the truth, and it may be you have to accept this in the end.

rborob

Doesn't this allow people to get away with anything when there's noone around? Does the damage to our car not prove he drove into the side of us?

Forgive me if my questions seem silly but I've never dealt with this kind of thing before

warez22

Do you have legal expenses insurance? Sometimes the mere mention of this will get the truth out of people.

Could you not check whether there were any CCTV cameras in the area or contact the Highways Agency to see if it was filmed on their surveillance cameras?

If not, and the lack of witnesses, I am afraid it will probably have to be 50/50.

Hope that helps.

rborob

Yes we have legal cover and as a matter of principle i guess I'll be disputing it as far as I can.

I didn't contact the Highways Agency no. Would they still have footage 14 months later?

Quentin

rborob wrote: »

Yes we have legal cover and as a matter of principle i guess I'll be disputing it as far as I can.......

Presumably you paid your excess when your car was repaired?

If so, why haven't you used your "legal cover" to recover it as well as any other uninsured losses?

If they are successful, then it follows that the third party have accepted liability.

rborob

Quentin wrote: »

Presumably you paid your excess when your car was repaired?

If so, why haven't you used your "legal cover" to recover it as well as any other uninsured losses?

If they are successful, then it follows that the third party have accepted liability.

I don't know. We filled out all the paperwork, sent them copies of our receipts from the garage (for the excess). I figured the insurance company would handle the rest?

InsideInsurance

You need to go back to your insurers as the story doesnt make sense.

If they are disputing liability then they need to give their clients version of events and you can then assess them against the damage and make a decision on what to do but as others have said with no witnesses 50/50 is a frequent outcome.

However you say it is the damage that is disputed (ie quantum) in which case they should be admitting liability but only offering 50% contribution to the repairs (which is different to a 50/50 settlement)

vax2002

can you just clarify whos insurance you are claiming on
YOURS
OR
The Other Driver

mikey72

It'll be settled 50/50. If he was mostly in front of you, and clipped your wing with the back of the trailer, approaching roadworks to filter the second lane back into the first, he was obeying the roadsigns at the time, and they'll argue you should have forseen him moving, and braked slightly to let him in.

vax2002

mikey72 wrote: »

It'll be settled 50/50. If he was mostly in front of you, and clipped your wing with the back of the trailer, approaching roadworks to filter the second lane back into the first, he was obeying the roadsigns at the time, and they'll argue you should have forseen him moving, and braked slightly to let him in.

Twaddle, the other driver should not switch lanes when a vehicle is alongside or expect the other vehicle to brake, both cause pile ups.