Accident at Roundabout 3rd Party Denying Liability

Alfa156guy

Apologies in advance as this is quite a long one but any advice would be much appreciated.

So a couple of weeks ago, my girlfriend was driving my car and was cut up at a roundabout resulting in a minor collision.

My girlfriend was the 2nd car back in the left hand lane on approach to the roundabout, indicating left. The 3rd party was slightly ahead of her in the right hand lane.

As the roundabout cleared of traffic, the 1st vehicle in the left hand lane moved off and went left. As my girlfriend began to follow this vehicle, the 3rd party sped out and took a sharp left turn across the front of my vehicle before slamming on the brakes.

As a result, the offside front of my vehicle bumped the nearside rear quarter of theirs.

The 3rd party was apologetic and immediately accepted responsibility and passed on her details in case my girlfriend wanted to make a claim.

That night I looked the car over and as there was zero damage, decided not to pursue any claim. (We also have several photos showing that the 3rd party vehicle sustained no damage)

Fast forward to this afternoon and much to my astonishment, I receive a phone call from my insurer stating that she is claiming against my policy for damage sustained to her car when it was "rear ended" by my vehicle.

After a bit of digging online, I've discovered that the 3rd party's vehicles MOT expired, somewhat conveniently, the day after the collision and has JUST THIS MORNING failed it's MOT due to both rear tires being worn beyond the legal limit.

My insurer advised that the claim was made against my policy today - the day her car failed it's MOT - and that as we were denying liability and there were no witnesses and no dashcam footage, the best we could reasonably hope for was split liability. This despite the fact the advisor agrees it looks blatantly like this woman deliberately instigated a collision to claim against us.

Now my questions are:
Do we have grounds to say that her vehicle was unroadworthy when the accident happened if both rear tires were bald (road was damp and her vehicle is rwd btw) and can this help us?
Does the fact that her vehicle had no valid MOT at the time of her making this claim invalidate her insurance?
If there was no damage to her vehicle and we have photographic proof can this be used to dismiss the claim?

Thanks for reading!

Aylesbury_Duck

I'm afraid the answer to your first question is no because the MOT is a snapshot of the vehicle's condition today, not two weeks ago.

It's no to the second as well because she had a valid MOT at the time of the accident. Even if her MOT had expired before the accident, it wouldn't necessarily help you.

It's no to the third as well. Bumpers and panels can spring back and create the impression of no damage, yet there might be damage underneath. The photos prove nothing.

Did you have yours checked thoroughly to be certain there's no damage? There's no point going through the pain of a claim and your insurer paying out for the other party's damages and then you finding out at a later date that you have damage as well.

family4tunes

I have to agree with Aylesbury Duck all the way.

However, I would send the images to the insurers along with your maintained denial in the hope that they take up your side.

Another option is to report the fraudulent act to the Police and see if they act. If your insurers agree to a 50/50 split you can appeal the decision.

Also re-visit the site of the RTC and see if there are any public or private CCTV cameras around that might have footage you could apply for and use.

The latter? … take it on the chin and buy your girlfriend a dash-cam as a present

Alfa156guy

Aylesbury Duck - Thanks.
I did think we were kinda screwed on this. My main gripe is that she is claiming she was rear ended, when at the scene she was taking 100% of the blame for being in the wrong lane and cutting across my car.
My gf was stationary and as she started to release the clutch the other woman shot right across the front of her so my car was travelling less than 2mph. There wasn't even paint transfer from the "impact" however I did have the car looked at and it's completely fine.

I'm also interested to know what the damage is she's claiming for as she's lied about the circumstances and the "impact" area.

My insurer did state that her insurer was awaiting an engineer's report on the damage sustained which I thought they should have before pursuing a claim?

family4tunes - Thanks.

I've forwarded all images to my insurer including one which shows her car stopped diagonally across the junction from when the contact happened, images of the entire rear of her vehicle and images showing the layout of the roundabout.
The area 100% has no cctv unfortunately.
I had considered contacting the police but I'll see what the insurer comes back with first.
Dashcam is definitely coming next payday.

Aylesbury_Duck

If you're lucky, the other party will make an idiot of themselves by claiming for accident damage totally inconsistent with the photos. Perhaps they pranged their car on a bollard or wall or something in the last two weeks and will try and pass it off as arising from your girlfriend's crash.

AndyMc.....

Alfa156guy wrote: »

Aylesbury Duck - Thanks.
I did think we were kinda screwed on this. My main gripe is that she is claiming she was rear ended, when at the scene she was taking 100% of the blame for being in the wrong lane and cutting across my car.
My gf was stationary and as she started to release the clutch the other woman shot right across the front of her so my car was travelling less than 2mph. There wasn't even paint transfer from the "impact" however I did have the car looked at and it's completely fine.

I'm also interested to know what the damage is she's claiming for as she's lied about the circumstances and the "impact" area.

My insurer did state that her insurer was awaiting an engineer's report on the damage sustained which I thought they should have before pursuing a claim?

family4tunes - Thanks.

I've forwarded all images to my insurer including one which shows her car stopped diagonally across the junction from when the contact happened, images of the entire rear of her vehicle and images showing the layout of the roundabout.
The area 100% has no cctv unfortunately.
I had considered contacting the police but I'll see what the insurer comes back with first.
Dashcam is definitely coming next payday.

Why?

The RTA has been complied with and there aren't any witnesses.