Motor Insurance Help on a Claim

carcom1

Some advice required please, my son was driving my car of which he isclassed as main driver with business use. He approached a T junction afterpassing a parked car. When he arrived at the junction he was preparing to turnleft, my son says he had his indicator on but has no proof of that. Whilstparked at the junction a car has tried to fit in a gap on my sons left, the gapwasn’t big enough so has mounted the pavement to fit in. According to videofootage he was there for over 5 seconds. My son has then pulled out to the left to join traffic but has collided with the other car.

We have gone through the insurance (we both have the sameprovider) who have called it a 50/50 saying my sons part was due to “duty ofcare” to check to his left before setting off. My thoughts are that the othercar should not have even been there if he had to mount the curb which is anillegal manoeuvre. I would welcome any thoughts on this before I decide to challenge this or not.
Thanks

forgotmyname

Just because the other car did an illegal manouvre or parked illegally doesnt prove your son was totally blameless.

Similar to someone hitting a car parked on a double yellow line saying it shouldnt have been there so not my fault.

He should have look to the left before pulling away.

Its all down to who said what. If your son said he failed to look to the left then it does appear to be 50/50.

Who has the video footage? Have you watched it yourself?

carcom1

Thanks for the reply, Nobody has said he is blameless but at what point does he stop checking each direction. He hadn't left enough room for a car to enter so its safe to say a car should not be there. Surely priority is to check oncoming traffic certainly at 7:30 in the morning when joining a major road. I am not allowed to view the footage as it was provided by the other party. Just to clarify both cars were moving not one parked on double yellow lines.

rs65

carcom1 wrote: »

He hadn't left enough room for a car to enter so its safe to say a car should not be there.

Presumably still enough room for a cyclist perhaps?

Has your son seen the footage?

carcom1

No cyclists, motorcyclists and scooter riders were injured during the filming of the cctv footage just damage to the car that had driven on the curb to squeeze into a gap that wasn't big enough. Its a good job he was looking left whilst riding onto the pavement or he could have taken out some poor kid walking to school, but that would have been a 50/50 with the kid. And no my son hasn't seen the cctv either.

forgotmyname

Nobody is condoning what the other driver did, But if my daughter had been in a similar incident i would be questioning them on how much attention they were paying to the conditions.

Failed to spot a car to the left, As mentioned above even if there wasnt enough room for a car there appears to have been room for a pedestrian or cycle which your son wouldnt have seen also.

He needs more experience. Maybe go out with him or another family member and see what he fails to spot that a more experienced driver doesnt.

Even watching some of the hazard perception tests online. See what he fails to spot.

dacouch

carcom1 wrote: »

No cyclists, motorcyclists and scooter riders were injured during the filming of the cctv footage just damage to the car that had driven on the curb to squeeze into a gap that wasn't big enough. Its a good job he was looking left whilst riding onto the pavement or he could have taken out some poor kid walking to school, but that would have been a 50/50 with the kid. And no my son hasn't seen the cctv either.

If you ever deal with motor claims especially if you have ever had dealings with both parties you will find that each party have a habit of giving a different version of events which almost always paints the other party to be at fault.

The claims staff dealing with the matter then have to try and work out whose to blame from the versions of events and any other evidence

InsideInsurance

According to the video footage? What video footage?

Have you heard the third party's version of events?

Until the above is answered then anything else is speculation. I'd guess they claim your son was positioned to turn right, they may say he was indicating right or not indicating at all. They probably will say there was room to come up the inside without mounting the kerb as you say etc

Assuming there is CCTV that fully confirms your sons version of events then you almost certainly would get better than a 50/50 especially if the TP simply cuts in, across the pavement and pulling out without stopping. Pass it to the police for driving without due care etc and the TP insurer probably wouldnt bother defending if the police prosecute. If it did go to court a small proportion may still be put against your son

OnanTheBarbarian

Where is the point of contact on your son's vehicle?

carcom1

Thanks Insideinsurance,
Thats the sought of reply I was after, non patronising. The other car did stop for about 5 seconds. The footage is from the pub on the junction of which I am told I cannot see and therefore pass on to the police. If my son is going to get partial blame due to evidence given thats fair enough I don't see the point in challenging. To the people talking about cyclists there quite a bit narrower than a car leaving and plenty of room to go round.
Dacouch all evidence is from cctv footage so doesn't matter what was said.

InsideInsurance

carcom1 wrote: »

Thanks Insideinsurance,
Thats the sought of reply I was after, non patronising. The other car did stop for about 5 seconds. The footage is from the pub on the junction of which I am told I cannot see and therefore pass on to the police. If my son is going to get partial blame due to evidence given thats fair enough I don't see the point in challenging. To the people talking about cyclists there quite a bit narrower than a car leaving and plenty of room to go round.
Dacouch all evidence is from cctv footage so doesn't matter what was said.

Why can you not see it?

To be a pub probably doesnt know the greatest amount about the law etc. In theory you could get your son to contact them and ask for a copy of the tape as a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act. Normally the maximum fee for doing this is £10 though there can be some grounds for the business to deny it because of the details of the other people captured in the video and the cost of bluring them out is disproportionate - unfortunately its a bit of a grey area. Of course you could take a punt and hope the reference of legal things like the DPA and SRA makes them do it.

Alternatively speak to the police about getting a copy. They may take a similar line or probably will say that your insurers can buy a copy of it from them as part of their police report (yes buy, police reports arent cheap)

As per the previous post, until the video is seen and the third party's version of events heard then its hard to predict the end position.