Car insurance dispute - undertaking

AdrianC

mikeyranson wrote: »

My car was hit on the front nearside wing. This was caused as the other driver was trying to pass at speed. Lets say, to race past to get in front.

Sounds like a good reason to keep out of their way, not get into it.

Even so, she still should have been more observant. agreed.

And that's why split liability is the right outcome.

I am arguing thecase, as i am ... a better driver than her.
...
I hate cyclists. They are a road problem.

You really aren't here to win friends, are you?

Mercdriver

How she positioned the car may have led the other driver to believe that she was seeking to join the other lane.

Bad road users are a road problem. Whatever it is they ride or drive or which gait they walk with.

Nobbie1967

mikeyranson wrote: »

I hate cyclists. They are a road problem.

Then I'm glad you're going to get shafted by your insurance company, but please waste a bit more money taking this to court first

:rotfl:

MEM62

AdrianC wrote: »

Who's the policyholder?

That is irrelevant. It will be the driver who has to give evidence and defend her case. The husband may be the policy holder but that does not allow him to determine liability.

straighttalker

I think Adrian C was trying to highlight the point you've just made.

The OP can bang on all he likes about whether his wife was at fault or not but ultimately, it was his wife who was driving and it'll be her who has to stand up in Court to provide her witness evidence.

Also, if the OP checks his terms and conditions, the insurance company can conduct any potential claim in whatever way they want.

almillar

So her lane merged with a bus lane, and she just moved left without looking, assuming that there wasn't anything in the bus lane at the time...?

(I can't see the image) If this is in fact what happened, then what would the wife's defence be if it had been a legitimate vehicle, like a BUS!?

Also, damaging the FRONT of your own car very much tells insurance that you hit the other party, not the other way around. Argue he shouldn't be there all you like, but assuming the above is correct, your wife performed a manoeuvre without the mirror, (possible) signal part. Depending on where exactly the damage is, you'd be arguing that the other car drove into the side of you by flying up the bus lane they shouldn't have been in.

megaginge

You're lucky it's gone 50/50.. Your car changed road position and struck another vehicle. It doesn't matter what speed that vehicle was doing; your wife instigated the accident.

Could be 100% blame on your side to be fair.