Son had accident - not his fault but other party saying it was....

motorguy

Silver-Surfer wrote: »

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.

I think he genuinely didnt expect her NOT to follow her lane. Its not like he ploughed into the side of her rather than drive in the bus lane.

Not sure if this link works... using a crappy laptop at min.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.5960235,-5.9300251,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxIeesi1Sdp57Ft1r7sogmg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

AdrianC

The link takes us to Google Maps, but zoomed out so far the entire earth fits seven times on my screen...

jbainbridge

When you say the lane "moved over" ... do the lane markings make this clear?

I take it pictures and diagrams have been sent to the insurance company?

New_World_Order

motorguy wrote: »

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?

I had an at fault accident at 19, my insurance didn't sky rocket in fact it came down come renewal. Take the 50/50 .

rich13348

jbainbridge wrote: »

When you say the lane "moved over" ... do the lane markings make this clear?

I take it pictures and diagrams have been sent to the insurance company?

This is the bit to which the OP refers.



https://goo.gl/maps/gHJ7tBfRkvj

Norman_Castle

The other driver ignored the shape or direction of the painted lanes and followed the natural flow of the lane. Slightly confusing layout but thats not your sons fault. I would contact the insurers again with pictures showing the layout. Ask them to explain exactly what they think he did wrong.

Highway code.
Rule 131

Lane dividers. These are short, broken white lines which are used on wide carriageways to divide them into lanes. You should keep between them.

The white lines appear to be hazard lines.

Rule 127

A broken white line. This marks the centre of the road. When this line lengthens and the gaps shorten, it means that there is a hazard ahead. Do not cross it unless you can see the road is clear and wish to overtake or turn off.


New online Highway Code which is good to use. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code

reeac

Seems to me that the key question is who crossed over lane markings. The OP is saying, or implying, that his son remained within his lane and there was no merging of lanes in which case the other person changed lanes I.e. Crossed the lane marking. That makes them responsible.

CHR15

I'm glad that was clarified, it sounded like both cars had to filter into the same lane.
Just state the other woman changed lanes and hit him, your son did not change anything, he remained within his lane (saying he moved all over the show confused things).

caliew

Hi I have worked in the insurance industry for sometime I have just recently left due to childcare reasons. There are two types of claims 'fault' and 'non fault' if accidents are under investigation they will always go down as 'fault' until it's discovered as 'non fault' (which may or may not be the case on your sons part). The reason it gets logged as 'fault' when pending investigation is because the insurance company look at the incidents as worse case scenario so you don't get hit with any nasty premiums later on down the line and are out of pocket. If it's 50/50 unfortunately in will go down as a 'fault' incident on both parts and both parties can be potentially affected on their premiums. If 50/50 then usually 50 percent or more of the excess monies could be kept back and not returned due to payouts, fees and investigations (unless you have an excess protection policy so even if son was deemed at 'fault' you would still get the excess money back - some people tend to take them extra upgrades out on policies with a high excess, however that plan cannot be taken out after an incident) With regards to a motor legal plan running alongside the policy solicitors only tend to take on the legal side if they have a successful chance of winning that's say 51 percent chance of success in favour of your son, if it's not looking too good then they don't tend to represent but there might be independent solicitors that could help other than referring to a motor legal plan (that's of course if you took out a separate motor legal plan, again if you haven't then pre existing problems cannot be taken on within a new plan). Hope this helps

tykesi

caliew wrote: »

Hi I have worked in the insurance industry for sometime I have just recently left due to childcare reasons. There are two types of claims 'fault' and 'non fault' if accidents are under investigation they will always go down as 'fault' until it's discovered as 'non fault' (which may or may not be the case on your sons part). The reason it gets logged as 'fault' when pending investigation is because the insurance company look at the incidents as worse case scenario so you don't get hit with any nasty premiums later on down the line and are out of pocket. If it's 50/50 unfortunately in will go down as a 'fault' incident on both parts and both parties can be potentially affected on their premiums. If 50/50 then usually 50 percent or more of the excess monies could be kept back and not returned due to payouts, fees and investigations (unless you have an excess protection policy so even if son was deemed at 'fault' you would still get the excess money back - some people tend to take them extra upgrades out on policies with a high excess, however that plan cannot be taken out after an incident) With regards to a motor legal plan running alongside the policy solicitors only tend to take on the legal side if they have a successful chance of winning that's say 51 percent chance of success in favour of your son, if it's not looking too good then they don't tend to represent but there might be independent solicitors that could help other than referring to a motor legal plan (that's of course if you took out a separate motor legal plan, again if you haven't then pre existing problems cannot be taken on within a new plan). Hope this helps

Might help if you could add paragraphs rather than posting a wall of text.