car insurers not interested in fighting accident liabilty

Jk2000

Hi .
I'm insured as a main driver on a car I own, my wife is a named driver on this policy too.
My wife was parked on a street, when a car travelling along attempted to pull in front of my wife , the third party pulled in at too severe an angle causing their front wing, tyres and passenger door to scrape along my cars wing/front drivers corner.
No witnesses, no dash cams.
but took pictures of the damage at the time.

We contacted out insurers, who were initially helpful stating that as my car was stationary the third party’s would be 100% fault without question.

next step , i sent pictures of the damage .

fast forward a couple of weeks the third part insurers have claimed my wife pulled out into the third party’s car .

following this and in further conversations with my insurers it now appears they are not very interested in fighting this, possibly they may push for fifty/fifty.

I asked my insures to review the pictures as I believed they would prove my car was not moving. They tell me an engineer has looked the pictures and they do not in their opinion prove either way .
I disputed this and asked my insurer to send out an engineer to look over the car in person , they refused . That’s where I’m up to .

So my question is - as I believe my insurer are going to back down from fighting this can I compel them to take the investigation seriously? And can I compel them to send an engineer to gather evidence from my car’s damage.
i feel that if i do nothing I will be incorrectly held responsible for the incident.


Any advice appreciated.Thanks

jk0

Of course they want to blame your wife in some way. That way, they can jack up your premium next year.


I would cancel the claim, and sue the other driver yourself.

Aylesbury_Duck

How do your photographs of the damage prove your car was stationary?

I can't see how even with someone coming to look at your car they will find conclusive evidence that your car was stationary at the time of impact. Without camera or independent witness evidence you'll never have proof. I can see why the insurers are behaving as they are, it's basically the other party's word against yours.

I agree with jk0. Cancel the claim and claim directly off the third party's insurance and see where that gets you.

maisie_cat

Insurance companies are businesses and they do better if they can justify a 50:50 they really do not give a toss about their customers. unless you have cctv or other indisputable evidence I would just move on, and never insure with them again that's all you can realistically do.

Jk2000

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

How do your photographs of the damage prove your car was stationary?

I can't see how even with someone coming to look at your car they will find conclusive evidence that your car was stationary at the time of impact. Without camera or independent witness evidence you'll never have proof. I can see why the insurers are behaving as they are, it's basically the other party's word against yours.

I agree with jk0. Cancel the claim and claim directly off the third party's insurance and see where that gets you.

you may well be right about the photos not demonstrating my car was not moving ,

one theory I have is - my car's damage was essentially to one corner , the third party's car damage is along about 1/2 the length of that car's length . would this not suggest the third party was moving alone?

Secondly - the design of my allow wheel means their 7 spokes are a bit proud of the tyre.
There is a clear tyre mark from the third party's tyre to ONE of my alloy wheel spoke only.
If my car was moving it's wheel would be turning so more than one of my alloy wheel spoke would have been marked up as it moved against the third part's car.

how do those two theories stand up as an impartial reader?

sevenhills

Jk2000 wrote: »

My wife was parked on a street, when a car travelling along attempted to pull in front of my wife , the third party pulled in at too severe an angle causing their front wing, tyres and passenger door to scrape along my cars wing/front drivers corner.
No witnesses, no dash cams, but took pictures of the damage at the time.

We contacted out insurers, who were initially helpful stating that as my car was stationary the third party’s would be 100% fault without question.

If the other driver is saying your wifes car was being driven, then they are committing insurance fraud. You need to find out if that is the case and speak to your insurers and possibly te police.

Aylesbury_Duck

Jk2000 wrote: »

you may well be right about the photos not demonstrating my car was not moving ,

one theory I have is - my car's damage was essentially to one corner , the third party's car damage is along about 1/2 the length of that car's length . would this not suggest the third party was moving alone?

Secondly - the design of my allow wheel means their 7 spokes are a bit proud of the tyre.
There is a clear tyre mark from the third party's tyre to ONE of my alloy wheel spoke only.
If my car was moving it's wheel would be turning so more than one of my alloy wheel spoke would have been marked up as it moved against the third part's car.

how do those two theories stand up as an impartial reader?

I don't disbelieve you but I don't think they stand up particularly.

Your first point can be disputed because if the relative speeds of the two cars were different you'd see the same, e.g, if the other car was moving at 20mph and your wife (as alleged) pulled out at say, 5mph, you'd see the same sort of damage. It doesn't prove your wife was stationary, it just suggests the other car was moving faster than hers which fits the other party's narrative.

The second point is incredibly detailed and I just can't see the insurer sending out a forensic expert to test the theory. It sounds reasonable but is it proof? I wouldn't think so.

sevenhills

Jk2000 wrote: »

how do those two theories stand up as an impartial reader?

Not sure, just a theory; maybe there is CCTV. But since it is only a motor accident, you may need to gather the evidence yourself.

a.turner

Jk2000 wrote: »

you may well be right about the photos not demonstrating my car was not moving ,

one theory I have is - my car's damage was essentially to one corner , the third party's car damage is along about 1/2 the length of that car's length . would this not suggest the third party was moving alone?

Secondly - the design of my allow wheel means their 7 spokes are a bit proud of the tyre.
There is a clear tyre mark from the third party's tyre to ONE of my alloy wheel spoke only.
If my car was moving it's wheel would be turning so more than one of my alloy wheel spoke would have been marked up as it moved against the third part's car.

how do those two theories stand up as an impartial reader?

No, your wife turned into the path of a moving vehicle.

a.turner

sevenhills wrote: »

If the other driver is saying your wifes car was being driven, then they are committing insurance fraud. You need to find out if that is the case and speak to your insurers and possibly te police.

Best of luck with that one.

Marvel1

jk0 wrote: »

Of course they want to blame your wife in some way. That way, they can jack up your premium next year.


I would cancel the claim, and sue the other driver yourself.

Even if the third party is 100% fault, the premium will still rise.