Insurance claim advice - two vehicles colliding at low speed

judygarland

About a month ago, I was involved in a low speed collision in a business park car park. I was driving out of a car park space, the route was clear, and a vehicle appeared from nowhere and made contact with my vehicle.

My door was hit by the other drivers corner of his bumper. He did not hit me with the front of the vehicle. There was very little damage other than some scratches to his bumper. I ended up with £350 worth of damage which I have had repaired. I have photos of the damage to his vehicle but not my own.

I went to see the driver's boss to give him my insurance details and he said not to worry as there was very little damage. Because of this, I do not have the other driver's details or the full registration (just the first bit of it in my photos).

Surprise surprise I now have a letter from my insurer asking me to comment on what happened as they have received a claim from the company he works for. They have not gone into any detail though. Am I entitled to know what they are claiming for?

I think the other driver was doing excessive speed as one minute it was clear and then he hit me. He appeared out of nowhere. The car park has a 15 mph speed limit but I suspect that he was exceeding this.

I noticed that there were cameras up and I have had a look at the footage, but it is not rolling footage, it's time lapse and it's not very good. I thought it might be useful but the camera is quite a distance.

I'm just a bit worried that the insurance company will just pay up without properly investigating it all. If there were any witnesses, they would be colleagues of the driver, so not really independent.

Also, the damage to his bumper could be sorted for less than £200. It is an 8 year old vehicle. If it does turn out to be my fault, I would rather pay for the repair.

Is the onus of proof on the other driver to prove that he was not at fault?

Quentin

judygarland wrote: »

About a month ago, I was involved in a low speed collision in a business park car park. I was driving out of a car park space, the route was clear, and a vehicle appeared from nowhere and made contact with my vehicle.....


I think the other driver was doing excessive speed as one minute it was clear and then he hit me.......


Also, the damage to his bumper could be sorted for less than £200. It is an 8 year old vehicle. If it does turn out to be my fault, I would rather pay for the repair.

When you write your report take care - here you first tell us the collision was at "low speed" then tell us the other vehicle was doing excessive speed and appeared from nowhere!


(You not pursuing the other side and paying your own repairs doesn't look as though you were blameless)


If you are found liable then you can reimburse your insurer their outlay and thereby get your lost NCD reinstated

Car_54

Did the other driver stop? If he didn't, that must weaken his case.

But if he did, why don't you have his details? Did he refuse to give them?

Astronaughtwannabe

Six and two threes. He's made a claim against you so contact your insurer and do likewise.

rs65

judygarland wrote: »

Is the onus of proof on the other driver to prove that he was not at fault?

The onus is on any party to prove the other is at fault.

In your circumstances, it sounds like you pulled out from a space into the path of an oncoming vehicle. The areas of damage agree this.

Iceweasel

No offence to the OP but why do people consider that scratches to the paint on a bumper is 'very little damage'?

If you can feel the scratches with your finger nail they need filling and repainting professionally - a rattle can is no good.

It would cost me over £200 to have my front or rear bumper properly re-sprayed.

Smart repairs are often more costly that most folks think.

Unfortunately the culprits in the last car-park where it happened made off and said nothing.

If I were to trace them (fat chance of that) they would likely be shocked at the cost of making good a 'few scratches'.

maninthestreet

Cars do not 'appear out of nowhere' - you failed to observe properly before pulling out of the car parking space.

littlerock

Had a very similar experience recently. After a lot of toing and froing with the insurers, turns out if you pull out into another lane, and are hit by oncoming car, it is your fault regardless if you are doing 10 mph and oncoming is doing 40mph. Onus is on you not to pull out. (Bit like assumption that if you run into back of someone else it is your fault).
So now you have to tell your insurers.

stator

maninthestreet wrote: »

Cars do not 'appear out of nowhere' - you failed to observe properly before pulling out of the car parking space.

You don't have enough information to judge that. If there was parking all around the 'junction' that might be the reason there is a 15 mph 'speed limit'. At any junction you could be blindsided by an oncoming car if they are going fast enough, no matter how careful you are.
So it's not a clear cut case. Having stills from the video might help your case if you can show that conditions made the emerge difficult

Astronaughtwannabe

littlerock wrote: »

Had a very similar experience recently. After a lot of toing and froing with the insurers, turns out if you pull out into another lane, and are hit by oncoming car, it is your fault regardless if you are doing 10 mph and oncoming is doing 40mph. Onus is on you not to pull out. (Bit like assumption that if you run into back of someone else it is your fault).
So now you have to tell your insurers.

Isn't that a bit obvious?


I suppose the point you're making is that if you are proceeding carefully and the other driver is speeding? In which case there could be contributory negligence (for arguments sake).

littlerock

We had a long discussion with the insurers over this, as OH was changing lanes, cautiously, in order to turn right, (no other way to get to exit at this particular interchange) and mini cab driver came round the corner from the other side and decided to race him to the junction. OH stopped as soon as he realised what was happening and other car took off his wing mirror and they nudged left and right sides of front wings. Minimal damage. However other party was a minicab driver in firms car and in due course their claim arrived.

OH disputed strongly and was told by insurers claim assessors that if it went to court judge would inevitably find for mini cab driver as if you move into someone's path, regardless if you are going very slow and they are going fast, the default legal position adopted by courts is it is your fault. Whoever is in the lane and not changing lanes, is assumed to have right of way.

Not sure about car parks but if the same principle applies then you are liable. Agreed it is a form of rough justice, just as going into the back of someone is your fault, also is. Seems they take this view to avoid lengthy disputes.