Hit by stolen car, found at fault, please help

billyghom

Aretnap wrote: »

If you only have third party, fire and theft then you won't get anything from your insurers full stop. Accidental damage to your car is not covered by your policy, regardless of whether it's your fault, someone else's fault or nobody's fault in particular.

All you can do is pursue the other party's insurers for your costs - or the MIB if the driver of the other car cannot be identified. This will depend on proving that the other party was to blame for the accident - which means focussing on the specific acts of driving that caused the collision, not the fact that the car was stoled/uninsured/MOTless/full of laughing gas cannisters. If your insurance comes with legal expenses cover/Motor Legal Protection then your insurer will appoint a solicitor to help with the process IF they conclude that you have a reasonable chance of success. If it doesn't then you're on your own. You could try to find a claims management company to take on the case, but again they'll only be inetersted if they think there's a good chance of proving fault against the other party.

It's easy to be wise after the event, but insuring TPFT is something that you should really only do if losing your car is a risk that you can afford to take.

Thank you, that's very useful .

Comms69

billyghom wrote: »

Please remember, the BMW was really far away. They were clearly speeding, but I could not tell they were speeding at the time, because they were so far away. It's harder to judge the speed of something when it is far away.

Thank you.

But if they were speeding and that was clear, you shouldn't have been there. Otherwise you are just presuming they were.


I sympathise with you, I really do. See it all the time, but i refuse to put myself in that position, for this reason.

billyghom

Comms69 wrote: »

But if they were speeding and that was clear, you shouldn't have been there. Otherwise you are just presuming they were.


I sympathise with you, I really do. See it all the time, but i refuse to put myself in that position, for this reason.

Sorry, it was not clear to me. I did say I could not tell that the BMW was speeding at the time because it was so far away. But I have no doubt they were speeding and did not see me, otherwise with how far away it was, the BMW had plenty of time to slow down or stop, it did neither. In fact, it probably would not have had to slow down or stop at all, if it wasn't speeding.

Thank you.

Comms69

billyghom wrote: »

Sorry, it was not clear to me. I did say I could not tell that the BMW was speeding at the time because it was so far away. But I have no doubt they were speeding and did not see me, otherwise with how far away it was, the BMW had plenty of time to slow down or stop, it did neither. In fact, it probably would not have had to slow down or stop at all, if it wasn't speeding.

Thank you.

You said they were 'clearly' speeding. What I'm saying is, either that was clear, or you are presuming they were. It cant be both.


You might have 'no doubt', but your insurers do have doubt.


They may have had time to slow or stop, but ultimately you were blocking the carriageway.


You have to accept some of the responsibility. The road was not clear, you decided to bully your way through, because the other would stop. They didn't.


I think everyone sympathises with you, and be glad you are ok. But ultimately this is one of those things (its why you have insurance!) - otherwise you'd be paying out £30,000+ from your own pocket.

BoGoF

Speeding or not speeding, you say you saw the car coming and still decided to carry out the move in the hope there would be a gap in the traffic from your left before it reached you.

billyghom

BoGoF wrote: »

Speeding or not speeding, you say you saw the car coming and still decided to carry out the move in the hope there would be a gap in the traffic from your left.

Thank you.

Yes, it is not an illegal manoeuvre and it is done all the time. If you stand on any busy street for an hour, you will see it done at least two or three times, maybe more.

What changes things is that I was stationary when i was hit. i will copy and paste my reply on this to another member :

"Yes, I understand that. But what may change things in my favour is that I was stationary when I was hit. As I understand it, it is a generally accepted standard in the insurance industry that if a stationary vehicle is hit, the vehicle that hit the stationary car is at fault. Except my insurance company keep telling me I can't prove I was stationary. I remind them that there is no one on the other side to dispute if I was stationary, but that doesn't seem to matter to them (I realise the other insurance company could dispute it, but they weren't there on the night)."

Anyway, sincerely thank you for taking the time to read and reply, i know it was a long post.

marlot

billyghom wrote: »

...Yes, it is not an illegal manoeuvre and it is done all the time. If you stand on any busy street for an hour, you will see it done at least two or three times, maybe more...

Actually, it is an illegal move if there was a give way sign or give way line.

Where there is a GIVE WAY sign (diagram 602), regulation 16 requires that:
No vehicle shall cross the transverse line shown in diagram 1003 nearer to the major road at
the side of which that line is placed, or if that line is not clearly visible, enter that major
road, so as to be likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in any other vehicle or to
cause that driver to change the speed or course of his vehicle in order to avoid an accident.

Many of us do the same as you on a regular basis. Doesn't make it right though.

BoGoF

billyghom wrote: »

Yes, it is not an illegal manoeuvre and it is done all the time. If you stand on any busy street for an hour, you will see it done at least two or three times, maybe more.

You seem to have trouble accepting that you were in any way in the wrong so will leave you to it.

missile

PasturesNew wrote: »

We all do it - look right, look left, then judge whether we think the car from the left will pass...

Yes we all do it - and 99.99% of the time we're all lucky ...

Well I for one don't pull out from a side road and stop blocking the lane waiting for a queue of cars from the left to pass before turning right.
That is at the very least inconsiderate to other road users and IMHO the OP is at fault for this accident.

keith1950

Look, you obviously aren't listening , it doesn't matter how many times you repeat the same thing , you were in the wrong.
They may have been speeding and under the influence but you are going to get no where with this.
You can't prove you were stationary , you are just wasting your time argueing with people who are trying to give you advice. Can't you see from all the replies that you are the only one that thinks you have right on your side.
As the car was stolen makes your chances even worse....give up and get over it!