50/50 liabilty offer- refuse or accept

unholyangel

lluzers wrote: »

If I was a judge , my personal bias would be against the OP, my mileage across U K roads is over 1m miles , I would give 50/50.I have never crashed cars that badly , so I suspect OP is partly responsible.I have seen 3 or 4 real lucky escapes in about 30 years , this happens partly when people are speeding .

Sorry to be negative , just trying to open a different view , so you know it may go this way.

It can also happen as per the OP.

Do you have access to additional information the OP hasn't shared in this thread?

Just wondering where the "crashed cars that badly" comes from or the relevance of speeding given we don't know the speed OP was going, never mind what the limit of the road was, driving conditions etc.

lluzers

George_Michael wrote: »

What was it you stated on a different thread?

Would those "stupid people" include someone who thinks advising another person to commit perjury is a sensible idea?

No !:rotfl:
Committing perjury is not a good idea , because "no liar has the memory to be a successful liar" and not everyone can lie successfully.

lluzers

unholyangel wrote: »

Do you have access to additional information the OP hasn't shared in this thread?

Just wondering where the "crashed cars that badly" comes from or the relevance of speeding given we don't know the speed OP was going, never mind what the limit of the road was, driving conditions etc.

I was merely the judge's bias or an example of it .All humans have cognitive biases .We usually see situations according to our biases.I was merely putting a different view of what he might get in court.

Speed etc is relevant to the road conditions , but also drive at a speed to be able to stop safely.Something is missing here .

Dandytf

unholyangel wrote: »

OP do you know what the other party are alleging happened?

If for example they're alleging you crossed into their lane, it should be an easy one to dispute. If you were (for example) in the left lane, they were to the right of you and crossed into your lane, I'd expect you to have hit the wall on your left.
.

Thanks for describing what happened
To add speed wasnt a concern due to major roadworks were ongoing a few years.

EssexExile

I'm confused, what court are we talking about?

lluzers

The OP is likely to go to court , I am trying to give him an idea of the unexpected.

The OP has his own bias of what happened , but it is what the judges see in court that matters.
The judges may see a totally different scenario.

Psychological bias – also known as cognitive bias – is the tendency to make decisions or take
action in an illogical way. Psychological bias is the opposite of common sense and clear,
measured judgment.Judges are open to irrational decisions , based on their biases.

Nice article on biases of judges
Cognitive Biases Make Judges & Juries Believe Weird Things

AndyMc.....

lluzers wrote: »

I think this is 50/50 from how the insurers expect to fight in court .It might go like this

From the first post , both cars were moving , OP should have anticipated , MAYBE HE WAS DRIVING TOO FAST AND RECKLESSLY , to be able to avoid the accident.The OP did not see the other car until the last minute , because he was not paying attention.Was there any damage to the third party ?If none , how can one prove the negligence.Third party can say ,they did nothing wrong .Do you have any written text exchanges or written admission of liability?

Did you see the other driver before the accident , did you see their vehicle?

Your own insurers may have detailed a report , it may show other damage .the other insurers can put £14,000 in court , the judges may not award anymore.

I think , the insurers think they can get away with 50/50 , that they should not be totally liable.I think the 50/50 is more to do with liability , or they can get a case dismissal.

Is there any NCB protection?How much do you lose?

As regards valuation ,you may have a recent garage booking form , with the condition of the car.

If I was a judge , my personal bias would be against the OP, my mileage across U K roads is over 1m miles , I would give 50/50.I have never crashed cars that badly , so I suspect OP is partly responsible.I have seen 3 or 4 real lucky escapes in about 30 years , this happens partly when people are speeding .

Sorry to be negative , just trying to open a different view , so you know it may go this way.

It can also happen as per the OP.

So let's get this straight, you've driven a little over a mile on the roads since you obtained your provisional licence?

lluzers

AndyMc..... wrote: »

So let's get this straight, you've driven a little over a mile on the roads since you obtained your provisional licence?

Yes ,40 years , in the 1980s was doing 50 to 75k a year..

AndyMc.....

lluzers wrote: »

Yes ,40 years , in the 1980s was doing 50 to 75k a year..

So you've gone from early 20s to late 50s all in the time it takes to come back from a PPR?

lluzers

AndyMc..... wrote: »

So you've gone from early 20s to late 50s all in the time it takes to come back from a PPR?

I thought this was an open discussion board , of opinions as opposed to actual legal binding advice.

Anyway ,if the OP googles 50 /50 settlement on car accidents , he will get an idea of results.