Advice regarding car accident.

annie12

I had a car accident in January, the other car drove through a red light and hit the car driver's side. My car had to be cut to get me out and police/paramedics also attended.

My car was written off and this is where the problems start.
The other driver has not admitted liability (a witness has provided a statement to say the driver drove through a red light).
My legal team have said that it's the other's drivers right to deny he was responsible, even though there was a witness.

So, it might have to go to court. My insurance company have paid me an amount for my car and I got insured on my son's car while I look for another. My son's insurance company have now come back to say the accident was an 'at fault' claim and we said 'not at fault' to them. I don't know how long this is going to take and I feel like I'm being penalised when none of this was my fault.

I'm so stressed and just looking for advice as I've not been in this situation before.

dacouch

Insurers generally regard an accident as being a fault accident until either they recover their outlay or you recover your costs eg your excess

annie12

dacouch wrote: »

Insurers generally regard an accident as being a fault accident until either they recover their outlay or you recover your costs eg your excess

Thanks. But, what I don't understand is why he can say it wasn't his fault when we have a witness who corroborates what we have said?
My legal team said that unless he admits liability there is nothing they can do. So I asked them what would happen if he never admits liability and they said it would have to go to court and they will decide.

DUTR

annie12 wrote: »

Thanks. But, what I don't understand is why he can say it wasn't his fault when we have a witness who corroborates what we have said?
My legal team said that unless he admits liability there is nothing they can do. So I asked them what would happen if he never admits liability and they said it would have to go to court and they will decide.

And that is the bottom line with a lot of these cases, irrespective of what 20 internet strangers post.
There is a high chance the complaint will be upheld, but don't rule out split liability.

annie12

DUTR wrote: »

And that is the bottom line with a lot of these cases, irrespective of what 20 internet strangers post.
There is a high chance the complaint will be upheld, but don't rule out split liability.

Split liability even though he ran through a red light?

AdrianC

He can swear black is white, for all he wants. Unless and until his insurer and your insurer agree he is 100% liable, or they admit stalemate and it goes to court, where it's decided he is 100% liable, your claim is out of your insurer's pocket, so it goes down as at-fault.

Think of "fault" as a euphemism for "paid out", if it makes it clearer.

DUTR

annie12 wrote: »

Split liability even though he ran through a red light?

Take the witness out of it for a moment...... the other party could claim it were you that ran a red light :eek:
For a time all the lights should be on red, was the witness a pedestrian?

AdrianC

There may also be a perfectly valid claim that, yes, he ran the red light - but there was plenty of opportunity to avoid a collision, but no attempt was made.

annie12

AdrianC wrote: »

He can swear black is white, for all he wants. Unless and until his insurer and your insurer agree he is 100% liable, or they admit stalemate and it goes to court, where it's decided he is 100% liable, your claim is out of your insurer's pocket, so it goes down as at-fault.

Think of "fault" as a euphemism for "paid out", if it makes it clearer.

Thank you.

DUTR wrote: »

Take the witness out of it for a moment...... the other party could claim it were you that ran a red light :eek:
For a time all the lights should be on red, was the witness a pedestrian?

No, it was the car behind him. My lights were on green, I was travelling straight on through the junction. He came from my right, he thought his lights had turned green (it was just a left filter) he put his foot down and ploughed in to me.

annie12

AdrianC wrote: »

There may also be a perfectly valid claim that, yes, he ran the red light - but there was plenty of opportunity to avoid a collision, but no attempt was made.

I was travelling 25mph through the junction, there was no way I could have avoided it.

DUTR

annie12 wrote: »

Thank you.



No, it was the car behind him. My lights were on green, I was travelling straight on through the junction. He came from my right, he thought his lights had turned green (it was just a left filter) he put his foot down and ploughed in to me.

Well it sounds like your complaint will be upheld, the 3rd party has a lot to defend and plenty to lose (so you can see why (in his shoes) he is trying to hope it was just all a bad dream.