Was involved in a car accident earlier today, whos liable?

Retrogamer

Altarf wrote: »

But that doesn't make the OP liable.

Are you sure? When i googled "passenger opened door and hit another car" i found this.

Your motor insurer will claim its expenditure from the person responsible for the car accident
Your vehicle insurer should claim all its expenses from the person who has UK motor vehicle insurance, the passenger or both - either way it will be the other motor vehicle insurer who will ultimately pay for the damage to your vehicle.

Source

JustinR1979

Altarf wrote: »

The insurer only liable for amounts to 3rd parties that the OP would have to pay. Again to quote from my insurance policy -

"This policy covers you for all amounts which you legally have to pay as a result of an accident involving your vehicle"



Strangely they do. Again to quote from my insurance policy -

"Cover provided for other people
If you give your permission, we will provide the same cover to the following people:
...
any person travelling in or getting into or out of your vehicle"



I thought that you had left for the day?

Do you and OP have some insurance company, or just assuming they're all worded the same?

Altarf

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Nope your very very wrong , how many people must point it out before you get it into the gray matter ? the passenger caused the accident but given it was with an insured car then the car insurance must cover it . The owner is then free to seek damages from the passenger to recover the losses afterwards but either way its that car and therefore its insurance which will be accountable

I suggest that you go away and read your own insurance policy

izzzzythedog wrote: »

Oh and dont lie , if a chimney fell onto your car you would seek damages from the owner . You wouldnt call it an act of god and face the cost without seeking redress from the owner . You would be on the phone to the owners insurance in miliseconds . From this you loose all credibility in what you have posted .

And when the owner demonstrated that they were not negligent, I would have no claim against them or their insurance company.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3916135

DUTR wrote: »

Nuff said.

Yes it is, you seem to not understand the words -

"This policy covers you for all amounts which you legally have to pay as a result of an accident involving your vehicle"

The OP doesn't have to legally pay, as it is not their negligent act, so the insurance doesn't cover it.

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Do you and OP have some insurance company, or just assuming they're all worded the same?

What does your policy say?

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

How can something so obvious be made so complicated.

It was the OP's car that struck the passing vehicle therefore the accident did involve the insured vehicle, therefore the OP does legally have to pay, therefore the insurance policy will cover it.

The fact that the door was operated by a third party is neither here or there. If the OP wants to sue the passenger for the costs then he can try, but that doesn't change the facts.

It can and does, because the person that caused the accident was not the OP, the insured.

DUTR

Altarf wrote: »

I suggest that you go away and read your own insurance policy



And when the owner demonstrated that they were not negligent, I would have no claim against them or their insurance company.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3916135



Yes it is, you seem to not understand the words -

"This policy covers you for all amounts which you legally have to pay as a result of an accident involving your vehicle"

The OP doesn't have to legally pay, as it is not their negligent act, so the insurance doesn't cover it.

I'd love to see that defence work in the case we are reading about.
:eek:

Retrogamer

Regardless of the speed the other vehicle was doing, it doesn't mean you, or the passenger aren't liable for the accident.

If you see someone braking the speed limit for example, and pull out in front of them, you can still be found at fault because although they were speeding, you failed to ensure the road was clear before pulling out (or in your case the passenger opening the door)

JustinR1979

Altarf wrote: »

It can and does, because the person that caused the accident was not the OP, the insured.

I don't have any, and never have.
Over 18 years the savings have far outweighed the fines.

Jamie_Carter

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

You actually went and checked your own insurance policy? Wow. Kudos, but you must have too much time on your hands.


Leaving aside what the policy wording says, the OP should, IMO and morally speaking, let their insurer pay or pay up themselves. If they hadn't had the idiot passenger in their car, the other party's car would not have been damaged in this incident.


In my eyes, it's a case of "man the !!!! up and deal with the problem you were complicit in causing by putting that passenger in that seat on that day at that time".

Not forgetting that it was still the door of the vehicle that is insured by the OP that was allowed to be opened in the path of the other vehicle.

OddballJamie

Just read on the other thread the OP has running they only have TPFT insurance.

Explains why they are trying so hard to find a way to blame someone else, as not only do they stand to lose NCD, they have to also pay to fix their own car.

JustinR1979

OddballJamie wrote: »

Just read on the other thread the OP has running they only have TPFT insurance.

Explains why they are trying so hard to find a way to blame someone else, as not only do they stand to lose NCD, they have to also pay to fix their own car.

Sooner they're priced off the roads the better

Altarf

DUTR wrote: »

I'd love to see that defence work in the case we are reading about.
:eek:

If the OP would like it to, it will.

What people seem to get confused by is what the legal situation is, and what the moral situation is.

Will the OP tell the passenger, get lost, your problem, oh and by the way I am suing you for the damage to my car. No they won't. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't.

OddballJamie wrote: »

Just read on the other thread the OP has running they only have TPFT insurance.

Explains why they are trying so hard to find a way to blame someone else, as not only do they stand to lose NCD, they have to also pay to fix their own car.

But maybe in this case they will be...