Minor Car accident -Either party not accepting liability

guysl80

Hi,

There was a minor accident happened when i turn into other side of the road and the car on the other side of the road reverse and hit my car, The other driver tried to blame me and i did not accept as i saw the car move little bit ahead first and then reversed. At that point i did sound my horn but he hit me.

But he only saw the scratch marks in my car and didnt complain any damage to his car. So we did not exchange any insurance details. Just parted away. (Later found out that he was one of the estate agents working for a company where I rent my flat)

After 3 hours he phone me and said that there is damage and i should pay. But i refused.

1)Since at the time of accident there was no argument about the accident and no insurance details were exchanged can he make me liable?
2) He said he can find witnesses but i didnt see anyone near that area apart the other car drivers.

Thanks

Sgt_Pepper_2

Sounds like 50/50.

Hintza

If/when he contacts his insurer he will tell them he didn't reverse and you drove in to the back of him.

He is at fault but you will most likely end up paying as you will get the blame.

InsideInsurance

So you are turning right into a side road and another car that was on the main road coming in the other direction had passed the side road and reversed backwards? Was he reversing back straight or reversing around the corner into the side road too?

Where is the damage on both vehicles? Presumably o/s/r corner on his but yours?

Assuming all parties told the truth about the accident then I would hold him liable for the accident on the basis he was reversing at the time. The reality however is that often in accidents people either dont recall things properly or out and out lie and so it may well be that he says he is static and you simply cut the corner and hit him.

Often cases where you have two conflicting versions of events will end on a 50/50 settlement unless one version of events is either inconsistent with damage, there are witnesses or one version is massively more plausible than the other.

guysl80

Hi,

Thanks for the response. I spoke to a claim company to get some advice and they said as the 3rd driver was reversing in the main road and its his fault as he should check whatever car behind him.

Also he said he can get a witness. But i didnt see any witness. Maybe he can tell one of the builders working in the house to act as witness. Is that possible?

*** The guy was reversing back on the side of the pavement.

Thanks

InsideInsurance wrote: »

So you are turning right into a side road and another car that was on the main road coming in the other direction had passed the side road and reversed backwards? Was he reversing back straight or reversing around the corner into the side road too?

Where is the damage on both vehicles? Presumably o/s/r corner on his but yours?

Assuming all parties told the truth about the accident then I would hold him liable for the accident on the basis he was reversing at the time. The reality however is that often in accidents people either dont recall things properly or out and out lie and so it may well be that he says he is static and you simply cut the corner and hit him.

Often cases where you have two conflicting versions of events will end on a 50/50 settlement unless one version of events is either inconsistent with damage, there are witnesses or one version is massively more plausible than the other.

guysl80

I will meet the 3rd party person(estate agent) as i have a 2nd viewing.

I will try to get the same thing he told me today(that he was reversing and i should have seen and stopped) because i feel he might changed these words.

Is it OK i secretly record the conversation for legal purpose

Thanks

InsideInsurance

it is ok to record it however if it were to get as far as court it would be the courts decision on if they allow it to be submitted as evidence or not.

Generally speaking the problem with anything along these sorts of lines is they either deny its them or more often, just say you were threatening them and so they said what they said under cohersion and thus inadmissible.

Strider590

I don't understand what's happened, im guessing that he was parked at the kerb and you were trying to park behind him? or he was about to reverse parallel park?

peter_the_piper

Did you report this to the poice, it sounds like it could get messy?

Sgt_Pepper_2

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Did you report this to the poice, it sounds like it could get messy?

Why?

The op said it was a minor accident, damage only and details exchanged. You'll get nfi from the police and they are not in the business of deciding who is liable for insurance claims.

neilmcl

Strider590 wrote: »

I don't understand what's happened, im guessing that he was parked at the kerb and you were trying to park behind him? or he was about to reverse parallel park?

I got the impression that the OP did a U-turn to come up behind the third-party whilst the third-party was reversing his car on the other side of the road. All looks very 50/50 to me.