18 Yr old in not fault crash....no chance!!

ste2012

I was involved in a car crash a few days back now where a man cut across out of a lane and partially into mine around a island. He then immediately had to stop because of lights on the island. By the time i hhad braked it was too late. The damage was the the front right hand corner of my car( including the wing mirror) and the back left hand side of his. The damage points out to supporting my story. He was soon quick enough to get out the car and ask for my details but when he an ambulance was called he soon sat down claiming pains and had to be taken to hospital, fishy.
Im 18 and have been driving for just underneath a month, i can see insurance companies in particular using this against me and making my case weaker. Because i hit him from behind the police seem to have assumed it was my fault when i was left in a hoepless situation.
I wonder if my age will effect my claim

pcombo

Well firstly i would think that would come under age discrimination.

Was there any witnesses? If not its your word against his, But they cannot use your age against you.

DCFC79

Definitely can not and shouldn't use your age against you. I would imagine the police will inform the insurers of what any witnesses said and what if any tyre skid marks say.

dalesrider

ste2012 wrote: »

He was soon quick enough to get out the car and ask for my details but when he an ambulance was called he soon sat down claiming pains and had to be taken to hospital, fishy.

Who called the ambulance?

forgotmyname

So he stopped and you hit his now stationary car.

Age is not an issue the fact it appears from that description it was your fault will
go against you.

I dread to think what your premium was this year and next year is likely to be worse.

SteveFromAccounts

Lane changing collisions like this usually go '50:50' so I would not be too concerned. They cannot use your age against you however I would remain conscious that this claim will affect your future premiums somewhat.

slh4283

Age shouldn't make a difference to the claim. I worked in insurance claims for quite some time and what will help will be a full description of the accident - plus diagrams. A copy of the estimates/engineers reports for the damage to both the vehicles should verify the events, however unfortunately with lane changes it's often hard to pinpoint who was where on the road without some witness evidence/photos etc - if this is the case they often go 50/50 unless you can get something to prove your version of events and hope you've got a good claims handler!

opinions4u

I was involved in a car crash a few days back now where a man cut across out of a lane and partially into mine around a island.

In the immediate time before he cut across did he overtake you? Was he travelling faster than you? Slower? Same speed?

He then immediately had to stop because of lights on the island.

Did those lights also mean you had to stop too?

By the time i hhad braked it was too late. The damage was the the front right hand corner of my car( including the wing mirror) and the back left hand side of his. The damage points out to supporting my story.

My instinctive reaction is that you are to blame.

You have hit a car in front of you. Your reactions were too slow or your brakes were faulty.

Now I have drawn this conclusion from the words posted. Your words. If you feel that my conclusion doesn't reflect what happened then I suggest you explain again using different words.

As it stands, an insurer is going to attribute blame to you for what happened.

What did the witnesses say in their statements?

InsideInsurance

Lane cutting cases are hard to prove but to predict anything is jumping the gun a little until there are detailed versions of events from both parties to cross compare to both each other and the areas of damage.

I have to say that I do not necessarily agree with others comments on age. If this is a lane switching accident - ie damage is sides rather than front/rear - and both sides claim the other one crossed into their lane then it does ultimately come down to who is the most believable.

Insurers will most commonly go for a 50:50 because there is too much randomness in who the judge will believe but things like age, vehicle, time etc are all considered when making that decision.

Ultimately if it went to court the judge will have 3 choices - driver 1 is lying and did change lanes so 100% to blame, driver 2 is lying and did change lanes and so is 100% to blame or both drivers are lying and both switched lanes and so 50:50.

You can call it sexist, ageist or anything else but on the balance of probabilities then a lot of judges (white middle class middle aged male) do seem to show a trend of thinking that the teenager in their hot hatch on a friday night with their drunk mates in the car is more likely to have been the one that switched lanes carelessly than the 45 year old woman in her electric prius with her 2 young kids asleep in the back

ste2012

how it happens was there are two right hand lanes that stop at lights and a left hand that is free flowing. Chevrons split the two. The lights were on red and traffic had built up to the chevrons. By moving over left the other person had cut across the laneand was then forced to break whilst being half way across the chevrons. Because it was unexpected i had to break whilst they broke because of movement in front of them

forgotmyname

Sorry still sounds like you just failed to see his actions and stop.

OK he maybe in the wrong swapping lanes but that doesnt make the fact you hit him right.

You will get this a lot as people rush around like loonies and cannot wait 20 seconds.