Should I go to court?

SamYorkshire

In January I had a car accident which I believe I am not at fault for. I would like to know if you think I should attend court for it and if you think I am to blame / at fault at all.

Here are the circumstances:

7:30am. I was in my car in front of the lorry that hit me. The lorry came from behind me in the overtaking lane (not a motorway - max speed limit 40 I think) but the road signs and floor signs said no overtaking and to merge from overtaking lane into my lane. The driver carried on in the over taking lane. I thought they were going to merge, but then they tried to push past me. I moved to the side, away from them, to allow more room. We were doing 5mph at the most, and there was a car in front of me and behind me. The lorry was now to my right hand side and a grass banking to the left, so I couldn't really go anywhere, although I know I could have stopped sooner so they could have merged more easily. The driver merged and scraped the driver's side rear wheel arch and a bit of the bumper area of my car. The road was extremely busy and it was not safe for me to stop, so I beeped my horn, they beeped back and I went to find a safe place to stop. I assumed they had felt the collision and would follow me but they didn't. I got their registration plate and informed my insurance company.

No liability has been settled as 3rd party are saying they were not there. I have given all the details I had and the circumstances of the accident, including pictures of the road and my vehicle, including the damage. I could not give pictures of their vehicle as they did not stop and I wasn't going to use my phone to take a picture. No witnesses have come forward and we have checked nearby businesses for CCTV but nothing has come from it. An inspection of their lorry has been done, but they are not allowing my insurers to see it - I don't know why. My insurers are asking if I would be willing to go to court. I haven't committed to going to court yet as I want to know if they and you think it is worth it.

Thank you.

Keep_pedalling

Asking if you were willing to go, does not necessarily mean you have to, but if you say no that will probably be the end of your insurer pursuing the 3rd party and they will pay out on your policy which will impact you NCB.

Personally I would say yes.

SamYorkshire

Thank you for your reply. The way this claim is going, it seems I will have to go to court. Does that mean, if I say yes, that I will actually have to attend? Or will my insurers act on my behalf, as they already have my version of events anyway, and I would just be repeating that. I am happy to attend court if needed, but if I don't actually need to I would rather not as it would cause inconvenience and possibly a day's pay at work.

Quentin

When you took out your policy you will have agreed to assist your insurer to recoup money they have paid out from any liable third party.


So if this does end up in court you will need to attend and give evidence (your insurer wasn't present at the incident!)


Without getting any liability for this incident then it would end up as you making fault claim (lose your excess/any other uninsured losses/lose NCD if unprotected etc), so you do have an "incentive" to counteract the inconvenience should this end up in court

Crazy_Jamie

SamYorkshire wrote: »

Thank you for your reply. The way this claim is going, it seems I will have to go to court. Does that mean, if I say yes, that I will actually have to attend? Or will my insurers act on my behalf, as they already have my version of events anyway, and I would just be repeating that. I am happy to attend court if needed, but if I don't actually need to I would rather not as it would cause inconvenience and possibly a day's pay at work.

If you are successful the Court has the power to award witness expenses, which includes travel and loss of earnings, though the latter is capped at £95. That may be less than you would actually lose, but it's better than nothing. More importantly if you are not successful in this case then the claim will be considered a 'fault' claim for all intents and purposes, so the greater benefit of potentially winning the case is that you would avoid further financial detriment that would come from having a fault claim.

In terms of the merits of the case, the one difficulty with the Defendant's case is the glaring question of how you have their vehicle details if they were not at the scene of the accident. Whilst the burden is on you to prove your case, it would generally be expected of them to produce evidence to support their contention that the vehicle wasn't in the area at the time of the accident (for example, in the form of tachograph records or delivery schedules).

I would certainly attend court in your position. Your insurer will arrange for you to have legal representation, probably in the form of a barrister, so all you need to do is turn up and answer some questions in cross examination, which in the circumstances are unlikely to be overly taxing. It will be up to your representative to make submissions on your behalf and highlight flaws in their case.

jobdone1

Give way to the right look at the highway code in my view you failed to do this in your comments correct me if I'm wrong please

Crazy_Jamie

jobdone1 wrote: »

Give way to the right look at the highway code in my view you failed to do this in your comments correct me if I'm wrong please

You have to give way to traffic coming from your right, not traffic that is on your right. The rule is there for junctions and roundabouts, not a two lane road where one lane merges into the other. In the scenario that the OP has mentioned the onus in on the lorry driver to ensure that there is sufficient space in the left hand lane to move in to before he merges.

SamYorkshire

jobdone1 wrote: »

Give way to the right look at the highway code in my view you failed to do this in your comments correct me if I'm wrong please

I was already established in my lane and the lorry driver was coming from behind me, trying to merge into the lane I was in. This was on a 2 lane road, not a roundabout or junction. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am sure as are my insurers that it was my right of way and the onus was on the lorry driver to ensure he had sufficient space between me and him to merge.

undaunted

as others have already suggested it's to your advantage to agree to go to Court.


Whether you will actually have to do so will depend upon whether the two insurers then reach a resolution without doing so or not. Unless they have strong evidence to show that the lorry was not there as you claim my guess is that his insurers would probably eventually accept liability on this one - but your insurers will need you to confirm your evidence / willingness to swear it in court in order to take it that far.

SamYorkshire

Thank you everyone for your replies. I have now told my insurers that, if needs be, I will go to court. However, the 3rd party are still not letting my insurers see the report that was written in response to the investigation of damage on their vehicle and they are also no longer co-operating with my insurers. This seems to me as if they have something to hide, but I am inexperienced with all of this, so what do you think?

Quentin

If it ends up in court you will get to see their case