accident

jonathon

My son was in a accident on Friday it was very minor.He pulled out of a side road turning right and the rear of his car was clipped by a car coming from his right.

I believe the other car had plenty of time to slow down and avoid my sons car.




this is my sons car just a very minor rub on the very bottom of the fear bumper.



this is the other car damage to the wing bonnet and broken headlight (there was no glass broken at the scene )
I think the damage to the other car far exceeds any damage my sons car could have caused and was pre existing the other person has told my son thy will be claiming for all the damage to the front of there car.

so is my son 100% to blame and will his insurance believe him if he tells them he thinks the other peoples claim is fraudulent

prowla

Well, from the photos and description, I would say that (a) yes, it is your son's fault, (b) the damage on the other car does not tally.

The other car's owner is trying it on.

Tell your insurance company.

Quentin

It looks to be your son is to blame.

The photo of the red car appears to show collision damage higher up by the fuel flap (or is it a reflection). That looks to be a nearer match to the height of the damage on the third party car.

Your son disputes the third party damage. Why is there no photo of the damage your son did do?

lesalanos

so you're son pulled out when there was not time to safely get across the traffic coming along the road?

jonathon

Quentin wrote: »

It looks to be your son is to blame.

The photo of the red car appears to show collision damage higher up by the fuel flap (or is it a reflection). That looks to be a nearer match to the height of the damage on the third party car.

Your son disputes the third party damage. Why is there no photo of the damage your son did do?

there is no other damage to my sons car just the graze on the bumper

that is the only damage on the other car and the 3rd party is saying that's what my son did.

jonathon

lesalanos wrote: »

so you're son pulled out when there was not time to safely get across the traffic coming along the road?

yes I agree,
I think he thought had time to clear the road
I think because he was crossing a box junction and the lights further down were on red the car would be slowing down.

[Deleted User]

Quentin wrote: »

It looks to be your son is to blame.

There's no looks about it.

If you emerge from a side road, without sufficient time/distance to get out, then you are to blame.

[Deleted User]

prowla wrote: »

(b) the damage on the other car does not tally.

It would if the other car was being heavily braked, at the moment of impact.

Stooby2

It's not possible to say who's at fault without knowing far more about the collision and without the other driver's version of events. It could be wholly your son's fault if he pulled out without seeing the other car. It could be the other driver's fault if he was on the phone, changing his CD and eating a burger and didn't see your son pull out. It could be a combination of both.

However, with regards to the damage, take extensive and clear photos of the damage to your son's car, and measure the height of the damage from the road - it's lowest and highest extent. That way you may be able to discount the damage to the other car around the headlamp if it is clearly too high to match the damage on your son's car.

maninthestreet

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

It would if the other car was being heavily braked, at the moment of impact.

There is no way that amount of damage was caused to the wing of the green car with so little damage to the red car - it just has a scrape on the bumper.

colino

Your son can huff and puff about it for as long as he likes, but pulling out of a side road in front of moving traffic he is to blame. There isn't an insurance company in the land that will bother putting Columbo on to this and they will fix his up, write off the Punto and extract his excess from him and move on.