car accident 3rd party denying liability

Strider590

She probably hasn't changed her story at all, her insurer is more than likely just trying it on at this stage.
I've had dealings with LV and they WILL drag things out to try and get you to agree 50/50.

missile

force_ten wrote: »

I have a very low opinion of LV as an insurer

I have low opinion of ALL insurers. Very quick to take your premium - very slow to pay out.


A month after the accident 3rd parties insurer Aviva claimed no knowledge of the accident. I contacted other driver. He confirmed he contacted insurer day after the accident and gave me their claim reference number.


Armed with that info, I was able to recover all of my uninsured losses promptly.

arcon5

19lottie82 wrote: »

No no no and no again. Please don't do this, it's a terrible idea and could be seen as harassment. Keep out of it, let the insurance companies fight IT out. Chances are it was her insurance company that told her to deny liability this rage, they usually do.

Harassment? Oh get real!

arcon5

Although in your situation op I'd have been inclined to deal with her insurers directly and if they didn't play ball would be on her car to pay the money having got quotes. No doubt you perusing her would get her also to put pressure on them. If they still dragged their feet I'm betting they'd wake up when you issued court papers against her and if they didn't who cares as you will obtain judgement against her and can enforce that.

Insurers know they can try it on with insurers and they know they take ages to take real action. But remember they are only their to indemnify their client, so pursuing the client directly can be a way of putting pressure on both.

As for somebody suggesting contacting the guilty party is harassment, oh wake up.

OnanTheBarbarian

Get real guys, if she can tell porkies about what happened in the collision, there is no way the OP can't prove he didn't phone her up and make aggressive threats. So I would advise against calling her up directly incase she tries to be clever and make allegations. it is just not worth the grief.

If you must do it, do it from your mobile on speakerphone and have your vicar friend in earshot.

If the OP took some pics of his car in the resting position it was in when hit, it will show where any possible debris is on the road and may help to support he was pulled over and out of the way when the drift queen appeared out of control. All of these little trinkets go towards supporting your allegations against her.

Odds are she probably has an injury claim going on now for her and her kids.

Just make sure you write down a detailed account of the matter now, draw a diagram, revisit the scene and take pics showing the view both drivers had of the approach. Get your witnesses to write down their account of the incident.

This could drag on for many months and you need to get all of this written down now so you have a good reference to go back to in the event you have to repeat all of this many months down the line if the matter becomes litigated.

arcon5

OnanTheBarbarian wrote: »

Get real guys, if she can tell porkies about what happened in the collision, there is no way the OP can't prove he didn't phone her up and make aggressive threats. So I would advise against calling her up directly incase she tries to be clever and make allegations. it is just not worth the grief.

Who said anything about a) making threats and b) being aggressive.

You can confront somebody whom has wronged you causing financial loss' with threatening somebody you know! Exactly what DCAs do day in day out.

Unless your suggesting telling somebody if they don't pay for damage they caused you'll be pursuing civil action against them is illegal!

There is no law stopping op contacting this woman. All the insurers do is liaise with each other acting on each parties behalf and indemnifying them personally. So even now there is indirect contact taking place!

About time people in this country stopped rolling over when somebody is trying to defraud them. Which is effectively what's happening here if this woman has spun her story as to make financial gains through insurance premiums.

OnanTheBarbarian

I get your point and there is no law preventing him from contacting her at all. What I am saying is that if you are going to phone her up and essentially ask her what she is playing at, you need to be smart and either record the call or have someone in the room in earshot of the conversation.

If this stupid bint is going to lie and play the helpless woman with her kids in the car which was hit by the nasty man routine, she is quite capable of crying wolf when the OP calls her up to (politely) ask what she is up to.

Strider590

Why all the anger? As i've just said, she might not have changed her story at all. It's most likely the insurance companies initial response.
With my case it took LV 3 months just to get the actual accident report from the 3rd party.

19lottie82

arcon5 wrote: »

Harassment? Oh get real!

I am "getting real"!

The exact same thing happened to my colleague (woman from neighbouring office building bumped into her in a shared work car park admitted liability but that all changed when insurance companies got involved), so my friend went over to her work to ask her what was going on.

The next day her insurance company phoned her, as the woman had phoned her insurance company and told them what had happened and they told my colleague NOT to approach the other party under any circumstances as it could be construed as harassment. They should leave everything to the insurance companies and not get involved.

19lottie82

force_ten wrote: »

what makes you think it is the other party that is stitching you up

Insurance companies always say never admit liability at the scene of the accident as they will work with the other insurance company to determine liability

This .......

It's not up to the other party to admit liability or not once it enters the hands of their insurance company, it's the insurance company that decides and they will NOT admit it until they have conducted their own investigation.