Do claims assessors visit the scene of an accident?

ferry

Just curious as wife is going through the claims process at the moment.
The road layout at the scene is slightly complicated and bit tricky to interpret onto paper and wonder if the assessor would actually visit the spot of the accident or assess based purely on witness and claimers statements and nature of the damage?

Need to ensure every angle is covered as although wife was clearly not at fault from our perspective didn't want to risk an incorrect decision

Thanks as usual
F

lindsaygalaxy

In my case no, they just used Google.

AdrianC

If you think it's that complicated, take plenty of driver's-eyeline photos.

pogofish

It depends on the nature of the accident, They might for more challenging/complex accidents but otherwise no. I remember one incident a where succession of different assessors turned-up at work after an accident on the road outside - one vehicle ended-up through the fence of our car park and at least one set were under the impression that the accident had actually happened in it!

So describe it well!

forgotmyname

If there is an obvious obstructions that the other parties would not be aware of then take photo's and supply them to the insurer.

If its just the road layout then they may just use the internet. Check google maps yourself. Any change in the road markings or layout?

One of the lorry drivers at work had an accident after a couple of months the other party's story changed slightly. He found out that the road markings had been changed since the accident. Pictures they supplied were freshly painted white lines.

londonTiger

I'd imagine only in big claims where there's any benefit to doing investigation like the big motorway pileup perhaps. But even then all they'll see is carnage.

A big cost for insurers is the admin and claims time. So insurers will often just accept liability for small claims and close the case[if the odds are not in favour of their claimant].

e.g. my bother was doing a paralell park, another vehicle took his chance and tried to sneak into the tiny gap that was there and got his door dented by my brothers wheels that were sticking out, my bros insurer just said we're doing to admit fault unless you want to protest it because it's not in your favour

The vehicle was rented and the insurance was for the fleet so the insurance company was keen to admit liability early and pay out to third party without arguement.

phill99

I'm not convinced claims assessors visit the scene of an accident. Their role is to confirm the valuation of work needed to repair a car or whether it's being written off.

I've never known one visit the scene of an accident. Its not their role to prove liability. You are thinking if an accident investigator.

matttye

No. Even when presented with proof of the road layout, they sometimes don't listen to sense.

A colleague of mine had an accident, whereby he turned left into a car park from a road that had only one lane. A moped hit the side of his car as he was turning because it was undertaking at the time.

An independent witness confirmed that the moped had sped up down the side of a couple of cars, overtaking them all on the left, before hitting my colleague's car.

This happened at a point where one lane splits into two, but only AFTER the turning where my colleague turned.

We went out and I took some pictures for him, and we also sent a link to it on Google Street View. You can clearly see there's only one lane.

The insurance company said it was his fault because although there's only one lane, the road there is commonly used as though there are two lanes (i.e. traffic sits side by side next to each other, sharing the lane). They're suggesting that his road position was such that he looked like he was in the right "lane", rather than left. Never mind that there was only a single lane.

This seems absolutely ludicrous because somebody with no local knowledge would have no idea that that is how the road is usually used in that area. They would use the road in the way that it's built, but that's apparently wrong?

InsideInsurance

londonTiger wrote: »

I'd imagine only in big claims where there's any benefit to doing investigation like the big motorway pileup perhaps. But even then all they'll see is carnage.

The OP sounds to be talking about getting a Locus Report done which is done after the accident to show road markings, signage, line of vision etc. Its done weeks/ months after the event not whilst everything is still in situ

They are certainly done on smaller accidents than just large motorway pileups but it very much depends on what the area of dispute is. If people agree on circumstances, eg a classic roundabout accident, but have a simple allegation of the other party was in the wrong lane for their intended exit then a simple report can confirm which parties were in the right lane and which were in the wrong. Likewise the "rolling down the hill" type ones.

These days some of this can be done using Google Maps and Street View but there is an element of age of the images and luck on if the road markings are visible or obscured.

Clearly for a claim for £100 its not going to be worth doing but the reports used to be under £100 in cost so worth doing on any case involving PI or even modest mark vehicles where repair costs are always going to be high.

There are more in depth reports available from accident scene reconstruction firms etc and those are reserved for larger PI cases