Insurance help - Who decides fault?

MikeyTen4

Hi everyone

I'm new here, this is my first time posting although I've referred to the site plenty of times in the past when I've needed some help. Now I need to ask a question of my own, I hope this is the right place (apologies if not, I know it's not specifically a financial query).

Yesterday I was involved in an accident with another person. This is the first accident I've been involved in in 5 years of driving, so the whole claims process is alien to me. Although I've avoided outright asking the woman concerned, it all appears that she's accepting liability - she opened her car door just as I was passing. The angle of it means it's cut a wedge into the front of my car, then scrapped down the wing and done damage I'm told will cost £2k to repair.

Now, a few hours after the accident she sent me a text apologising and letting me know she's started the claim process with her insurance company, AXA. She also told me they had told her they will provide me with a hire car.

My first question is, does this sound in the first instance liek she has accepted blame and advised AXA that ti was her fault? I'm assuming her insurer wouldn't offer me a hire car if she was blaming me?

A while after this I spoke to AXA and they took more details of the damage to my car, although I didn't tell them what I'd been quoted for repair. I told them what I had been told, that their policy holder had told me that AXA had told her I could have a hire car. AXA however seem to have been very vague with me. The girl on the phone stated that now they have more details their 'liability team' will need to 'assess' it before making any decisions regarding 'costs'. When I asked any questions (specifically what are they assessing - blame or the cost of repairs for my car?) she just kept repeating the same statement. When I asked "does this mean their policy holder is contesting who's fault it was" I was told 'No...' then the same statement was repeated. As for the hire car, as far as I can gather I'm not getting anything until after they've 'assessed' whatever they're now 'assessing', if at all - there was no confirmation.

A little later I spoke to the other party, and to be fair she's been very apologetic and helpful. She even said she will give them a push regarding the hire car.

So, my main question now is... if the other party IS accepting fault, as it seems, and as I'd expect given the circumstances... can AXA still go through some process of deciding who they think is at fault? Is there some chance they will refuse to pay out regardless of what their policy holder has admitted liability for? And will it have any bearing that my car is going to be beyond economical repair (it's worth about £700)?

Also, i haven't yet infomred my own insurer. I'm only covered TPF&T, but should I do this now anyway? i know my insurer won't provide a hire car, that was an optional extra I didn't take up, but should I let them know now regardless? will they get involved with AXA even though I'm only covered TPF&T?

Any guidance would be really really appreciated on this, since it's all new to me.

Cheers

Quentin

You do need to inform your insurer (and any others you approach for quotes in future as part of your history). They won't help out on your behalf, but if the other side make a claim against you (unlikely!) they will deal with it.

From what you say this is the other sides fault, and you need to be a little more patient if this only happened yesterday.

Assuming your car is still roadworthy, then don't you just need a hire car whilst yours is in for repair? (The repairer may provide a courtesy car for this). If the repairs are uneconomical, then expect a write off, so be on the lookout for a new car!

Whilst waiting to hear from the third party, decide where you want your car repaired, then insist on this when they agree to deal with your claim.

InsideInsurance

Assuming the case isnt litigated then the decision on liability is a negotation between the parties involved and/ or their representatives (normally the two insurance companies).

Obviously if it is litigated then its the judge who decides.

With no independent witnesses accidents are always difficult to judge if the two parties disagree on what happened. With car door opening accidents however if the damage starts a reasonable way down the vehicle it tends to be fairly clear cut that the door was opened into the moving vehicle rather than the door being open and a car then driving into it.

Within insurers there tends to be several tiers/ departments of claims handlers from those that deal with the basic claim registration all the way up to those that deal with multi-million pound injury claims. Often the claims registration guys get very basic liability training but a second level of handlers will be assigned to look at this in more detail and deal with the TP as appropriate. Ideally you need to get passed the claims registration staff into that "liabilities" team to speak to them about provision of repairs and alternative transport etc

System

Insurance companies seem to be able to decide anything they like.

Our company van had a collision, damaging the other vehicle, the other driver went to hospital for a check up. The police said it was his fault, we believed it was his fault, but our insurance company said it was our fault, so they paid out and we lost our NCD.

InsideInsurance

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

The police said it was his fault

The police have absolutely no training on liability as it is a purely civil matter. You may as well ask a guy down the pub on who's liable and they will have as much authority on the matter as a policeman has.

The fact that police informally comment on liability is one of the biggest pains for claims handlers, who are trained on liability and have access to case law, as people assume they know what they are talking about.

Quentin

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

The police said it was his fault, we believed it was his fault, but our insurance company said it was our fault, so they paid out and we lost our NCD.

If a policeman at the scene tells you it's the other sides fault, see if there is any crime he thinks has been committed, then ask if this will be reported, and if not why not!

Police opinion on liability is worthless (as was yours saying you "believed" the other party was liable), but if the other side is convicted of an offence related to the incident (although not conclusive) it helps your argument.

Your insurer wouldn't have paid out unless they thought your driver was 100% to blame - why would they?

MikeyTen4

Hi everyone

Thanks for all of the replies, I really appreciate it. But a few things said, and a few more developments have left me with a bad feeling about this.

I've now informed my insurer, Admiral. They were helpful and explained what is going on based on what AXA, the other party's insurer, told me yesterday. Although the other person involved has told me AXA will provide me with a hire car, this apparently doesn't mean she has accepted fault - that's just me being niave I guess. Also, based on my description of the accident and the damage done, it's now going to Admiral's 'liability team' - the same thing AXA told me (about the only thing they would tell me). I now understand that this means the 2 insurers believe fault isn't clear and they'll argue it out. I've been warned to expect it being ruled 'split' if the other person isn't accepting blame - meaning I'll get nothing as a TPF&T customer.

Another development is that the other person has texted me this morning saying AXA are going to call me about the hire car and to discuss the incident. She has asked me to make sure I mention some slight marks to her rear drivers side door which she says must have happened during the process of us reversing apart. Something I can't understand, and certainly something I wasn't aware of. I certainly didn't reverse into her after the bump, and we actually reversed apart together, so only widened the gap between us. Basically, without boring you with the drama of it... it's begining to sound like we have different ideas on what happened, or she's trying to get other existing damage covered in the claim. I've now responded asking her directly if she's taking responsibility like I had niavely assumed... and she's hasn't responded. Although she might yet of course.

Also, InsideInsurance's comment...

"With no independent witnesses accidents are always difficult to judge if the two parties disagree on what happened. With car door opening accidents however if the damage starts a reasonable way down the vehicle it tends to be fairly clear cut that the door was opened into the moving vehicle rather than the door being open and a car then driving into it."

Well, this just about seals it I think I hit her door, she pushed it open and I had no time to respond. The angle I hit it at speaks for itself - right on the edge as she's pushed it, cutting into my front left bodywork and bonnet like a razor, then pushing it forward and around so it sat past 90 degrees and scrapped along my left hand hand wing and passenger door as I came to a stop (I was doing about 10-15mph on impact). If it had been open already it wouldn't have been at the angle I hit it - it would have swung shut. But she could easily say otherwise. Since in the shock I got no witnesses, no photos (until after moving), and it's obviously not in her interests to claim fault, I can't see this turning out well.

Stupid thing is, up until 3 weeks ago I was insured fully comp. I went TPF&T because I'm strapped for cash. And now I guess I'll be car-less and lose the £650 I paid for my policy just weeks ago. Sods law.

But thanks again anyway everyone.

Quentin

If this ends up split liability, then you will be able to claim your percentage off the other side (your insurer will deal with paying out anything you are deemed liable for to the third party).

So if it ends up 50/50 and a write off you will be able to claim 50% of the write off value from the third party. Likewise if it is a repair, you will be able to claim (say) 50% of the repair cost.

Don't get involved telling the third party insurer anything the driver wants you to say.

Just tell them what you know, and is relevant!

(The third party driver telling you she was liable and her insurer would pay for your hire car etc cannot be relied on - it isn't up to a policyholder to make these agreements!)

MikeyTen4

Ok, cheers Quentin. I was sceptical about what she's said regarding the extra damage... I certainly don't believe I touched her drivers side passenger door during the process of manouvering apart (which she also took part in, reversing herself), but asked to stake my life on it I couldn't since I was in a stunned state. Thinking about the process of how we moved apart I can't see how she's suggesting such contact happened. But I've asked her outright now if she's claiming responsibility, and so far no response.

Again naively, I'd been under the impression that if she, the policy holder, had called her insurers on a recorded line and stated she was at fault, then that would be it... if she did do that, which I'm now thinking she might well not have. But I guess this is all a lesson for me. A prospectively very expensive lesson.

On the plus side, that's the first good news I've had regarding the 50/50 situation. Admiral seemed to say otherwise, but maybe I misunderstood. anything is better than nothing. It's only just sunk in that regardless I've lost £650 I paid for my policy just 3 weeks ago though.

Thanks again guys, this is all really helpful to hear. Even if it doesn't go in my favour, at least I know what the score is with these things.

Quentin

You won't have lost £650 if you intend getting another car, as long as it is acceptable to your insurer (check with them before you buy it), then you will be able to put it on the policy (there may be a premium adjustment up or down depending on the model, plus an admin charge).

IS your car roadworthy? If so you could consider putting up with the damage if it is just cosmetic and is more economic than a write off (esp. if you will only receive a proportion of its value)

InsideInsurance

MikeyTen4 wrote: »

Well, this just about seals it I think I hit her door, she pushed it open and I had no time to respond. The angle I hit it at speaks for itself - right on the edge as she's pushed it, cutting into my front left bodywork and bonnet like a razor, then pushing it forward and around so it sat past 90 degrees and scrapped along my left hand hand wing and passenger door as I came to a stop (I was doing about 10-15mph on impact). If it had been open already it wouldn't have been at the angle I hit it - it would have swung shut. But she could easily say otherwise. Since in the shock I got no witnesses, no photos (until after moving), and it's obviously not in her interests to claim fault, I can't see this turning out well.

Stupid thing is, up until 3 weeks ago I was insured fully comp. I went TPF&T because I'm strapped for cash. And now I guess I'll be car-less and lose the £650 I paid for my policy just weeks ago. Sods law.

But thanks again anyway everyone.

Don't get too despondent yet. Claims notification/ registration tends to be considered relatively low skill and certainly in my claims handling days there was only 5 options for the person to chose from for accident claims:

1) Insured hit in rear or hit by car coming from side road

2) Insured hit on roundabout or narrow lane

3) Other/ Complex

4) Insured hit third part in rear or when existing from side road

5) No Third Party involved


Option 1 went to Recoveries

Option 2 & 3 went to Liabilities or Personal Injury depending on if an injury to the TP was noted or not

Option 4 went to Damage or Personal Injury depending on if an injury to the TP was noted or not

Option 5 wasnt assigned to a handling team


Needless to say based on the options a mass of claims went into 3 and could very quickly be farmed out into Recoveries or Damage once those with with proper liability training/ knowledge had read the circumstances.

Also, whilst mid vehicle damage is clear that doesnt mean front end damage definitively says one thing or another. If the TP has been honest then it will quickly be resolved.

Certainly shop around next time, Comp tends to be cheaper than TPFT and so "downgrading" can often cost more.