We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Son had accident - not his fault but other party saying it was....
Ok, i'll try to keep this brief.
Last Nov my son had an accident. Basically there were two lanes of one way traffic in the city he was in, and a bus lane is "formed" from the RHS, meaning that the two lanes of traffic effectively move over for the start of the bus lane, leaving three lanes with the right hand one being the bus lane.
So, my son was in the right hand lane, and quite correctly moved to the left, following the lines on the road, at the point of the formation of the bus lane. Unfortunately the lady in the left hand lane didnt know the road and effectively drove in to the side of him.
I would stress that his lane didnt come to an end - it just "moved" over to become the middle lane.
So, significant damage to his car, and he put it through his insurance and (I) paid the excess, on the premise that it would be reclaimed through her insurance.
Basically, shes denying responsibility. She says he cut into her lane and drove in to her - even though my son has loads of photos showing the traffic lanes.
Her insurance company are offering 50 / 50, however, this would leave him (well, me) out the £700 excess, and his premiums sky-high as hes only 22.
We've engaged with a local solicitor to recover the excess, etc, from her insurance company, but they're not playing ball.
Our solicitor is saying next step is to take it through the courts, however he wants to meet my son to explain the potential risks - presumably he means that if my son loses then he would have to pay all costs, which i'm guessing would be very significant.
All seems grossly unfair - he wasnt at fault yet his insurance premiums will go through the roof, his insurance company are happy enough @ 50 / 50 and if he goes to court the judge might not uphold anything other than 50 / 50 anyway, so he ends up with high costs against him.
Anyone any thoughts on this?
I dont feel comfortable advising him to take it to court with associated risks but likewise its frustrating that the other party can just deny responsibility?
Last Nov my son had an accident. Basically there were two lanes of one way traffic in the city he was in, and a bus lane is "formed" from the RHS, meaning that the two lanes of traffic effectively move over for the start of the bus lane, leaving three lanes with the right hand one being the bus lane.
So, my son was in the right hand lane, and quite correctly moved to the left, following the lines on the road, at the point of the formation of the bus lane. Unfortunately the lady in the left hand lane didnt know the road and effectively drove in to the side of him.
I would stress that his lane didnt come to an end - it just "moved" over to become the middle lane.
So, significant damage to his car, and he put it through his insurance and (I) paid the excess, on the premise that it would be reclaimed through her insurance.
Basically, shes denying responsibility. She says he cut into her lane and drove in to her - even though my son has loads of photos showing the traffic lanes.
Her insurance company are offering 50 / 50, however, this would leave him (well, me) out the £700 excess, and his premiums sky-high as hes only 22.
We've engaged with a local solicitor to recover the excess, etc, from her insurance company, but they're not playing ball.
Our solicitor is saying next step is to take it through the courts, however he wants to meet my son to explain the potential risks - presumably he means that if my son loses then he would have to pay all costs, which i'm guessing would be very significant.
All seems grossly unfair - he wasnt at fault yet his insurance premiums will go through the roof, his insurance company are happy enough @ 50 / 50 and if he goes to court the judge might not uphold anything other than 50 / 50 anyway, so he ends up with high costs against him.
Anyone any thoughts on this?
I dont feel comfortable advising him to take it to court with associated risks but likewise its frustrating that the other party can just deny responsibility?
0
Comments
-
Unless there is any evidence, like camera footage, you're probably just going to have to suck it up; the risk of going to court is too great imho. It's unfair, but it's what insurance companies do. It may not be the other driver denying responsibility - the insurance company will never just admit liability when they can get away with only paying 50%0
-
If it ends up 50/50 you don't need to pay your own solicitor to get your excess back!
You will be easily able to get this back off the third party insurer (you will get 50% back along with 50% of all other uninsured losses)
If he has legal cover with his policy, they will get it for you at no cost, otherwise a simple letter to the insurer showing proof of your uninsured costs will do the trick.
He should take advice from his solicitor on the chances of winning in court - that's what he is paying for, and better than any advice you can get here.0 -
Meet with the solicitor and talk it over as he effectively changed lanes. You will need a ruling as to why she ran into the back of him rather than him changing lanes.
She probably denying responsibility as she sees it as the former.0 -
Silver-Surfer wrote: »Meet with the solicitor and talk it over as he effectively changed lanes. You will need a ruling as to why she ran into the back of him rather than him changing lanes.
She probably denying responsibility as she sees it as the former.
He didnt change lanes. The lane moved to the middle and is clearly marked as such. Her lane moved to the left.
She drove into the side of him.0 -
He didnt change lanes. The lane moved to the middle and is clearly marked as such. Her lane moved to the left.
She drove into the side of him.
You said he moved over and refer to the lady in the left hand lane.
Have you got a link as I can see why they want a 50/50 reads as both changed lanes. I know what you're saying about his lane ending but would have staying in the bus lane avoided the collision?0 -
Silver-Surfer wrote: »You said he moved over and refer to the lady in the left hand lane.
Have you got a link as I can see why they want a 50/50 reads as both changed lanes. I know what you're saying about his lane ending but would have staying in the bus lane avoided the collision?
I didnt say he moved over. I said the lanes moved over and he correctly followed his lane.
Had he stayed where he was he would have been breaking the law by entering a bus lane, where there are bus lane cameras.
Attempting to upload a pic, however photobucket isnt playing ball0 -
Don't bust a gut over photos.
Your son can't use MSE motoring forum opinions in court!
Be guided by his solicitor.0 -
I didnt say he moved over. I said the lanes moved over and he correctly followed his lane.
Had he stayed where he was he would have been breaking the law by entering a bus lane, where there are bus lane cameras.
Attempting to upload a pic, however photobucket isnt playing ball
Ok moved over then.
Bit like joining a motorway and having a crash when using the hard shoulder would have avoided it. Take out breaking the law and look at it as avoiding a certain accident. I'm not gong to argue but a judge may see it that way.
Like I said speak to the solicitor and see if they advise the gamble.0 -
Don't bust a gut over photos.
Your son can't use MSE motoring forum opinions in court!
Be guided by his solicitor.
Oh I know. Just curious as to what, statistically, people think his chances are, or what the outcome might be.
Lets be honest, the solicitor is going to use some wording like "on the day, it depends on the judge", etc. He wont say 99.99% chance of winning.0 -
As you already have 50/50, you need a significantly good chance of getting 100% (ie your son found blameless) to make it worthwhile paying for a hearing.
Any result other than that has the same effect as far as his insurance is concerned (ie. a fault claim + lose NCD + lose his proportion of his uninsured losses + loaded premiums)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards