Not Happy with 50:50 Fault

spadoosh

KarachiKid wrote: »

Spadoosh, you're a colossal idiot.
I was maintaining speed whilst beeping. The gap between myself and the car in front was maintained. The gap between myself and the car behind was also maintained. The gap between me and the driver who ran out of road was decreased to the point of a collision because he failed to brake.
This was not about superiority points. I couldn't give a bag of bothereds whether I make it to work one car length behind when I would have. If there was room for me to manoeuvre then I would have. There wasn't.
Take your psychic powers elsewhere. You literally have no clue, you presumptuous !!!!!!.

If all the gaps where maintained where was the drive supposed to fit in. Where was he going after he braked, just sat in the outside lane waiting for someone to let them in? My experience tells me thats unlikely to happen.

You shouldve braked. Believe it or not, when a car brakes, more often than not, the car behind them brakes too. Otherwise wed have a lot more crashes.

You literally saw it happening and did nothing to stop it apart from beep your horn. Simple fact is you shouldve breaked, you didnt, you had a crash.

I know you dont like hearing my view and i struggle with a nicer way to say it but you couldve avoided this and you know you couldve avoided it. Next time, avoid it. Or youll be in the same situation again.

maisie_cat

I'd recommend just getting over it. do not let it chew you up. My one and only accident was in 2005 after 22 years of driving. A BMW hit me while I was stationary but claimed I was moving. I stupidly assumed that there would be evidence and the insurance company would get to the truth. The insurance company decided on 50:50 and I lost my excess. I decided that life is too short, my no claims was protected & my insurance didn't increase by that much.

SonOf

ripplyuk wrote: »

I’m guessing this was on a motorway because the other driver didn’t just stop when he ran out of road. If that’s the case, then surely the OP would have ended up with a fault claim anyway if they had braked hard enough for someone to go into the back of them?

Equally, if the OP has driven the car in a way that would require them to slam the brakes on during a merge point, that is potentially poor driving by the OP.

comeandgo

OP, can I suggest you enroll on an advanced drivers course. Driving is also about keeping yourself and others safe. Would you still feel so hard done by if there had been a fatality due to your poor driving.

lisyloo

ripplyuk wrote: »

Yes, on normal roads but I thought there were rules against braking hard on motorways. I could be wrong though.

Your wrong, why couldn’t there be a deer or a horse running onto a motorway?

If you are maintaining the proper gaps you should be able to deal with hard braking.
Take a course and save yourself some money an hassle.
The police say most a accidents are preventable and most of that is simply maintaining big enough gaps.

KarachiKid

The thing is, I deliberately left out details about what happened and how because I really don't care about the opinion of who was at fault as I am 100% convinced that I was not. Whether you agree or disagree is a moot point. My initial questions were:

Do I seek legal action through a solicitor?
Could I go it alone, representing myself, and bank on the lay of the land to basically prove my point for me?
Do I just accept 'defeat' and lose out because ultimately it'll cost a load more if I take it further anyway?

But most decided to play armchair judge and jury, without seeing any evidence what-so-ever.

I think my initial query has been answered though and, as I conceded before, I wouldn't even be able to afford the court costs to find out. So that's that.

cajef wrote: »

They didn't get their car written off by being pig headed and not letting someone merge in.

Neither did I. Unless you share the same psychic abilities as doosh, or you have some omnipresence super power, I don't think you're in a position to judge what my state of mind was. Nor was my car written off. It was cash in lieu of repair.

BoGoF

Thing is, your insurance company doesn't really care about your opinion either. Ironic eh?

Aretnap

ripplyuk wrote: »

Yes, on normal roads but I thought there were rules against braking hard on motorways. I could be wrong though.

There is no specific law against braking hard anywhere. Braking hard for no good reason because you think someone is driving too close behind you would likely amount to careless or dangerous driving, on or off a motorway, because it falls below the standard expected of a competent, careful driver. Braking hard to avoid an accident is legal, for reasons which require no explanation. Though putting yourself in a position where you have to brake hard to avoid an accident might amount to careless driving depending on whether a competent careful driver would have anticipated the hazard better and reacted differently.

Aretnap

To go back to the original question, you can complain to the Financial Ombudsman at no cost to you. However the Ombudsman is unlikely to intervene unless they think the insurer's decision is unreasonable in the face of the evidence available. Nothing you've said suggests that it was an unreasonable decision for the insurer to have reached, even though you personally disagree with it.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance/motor-insurance/fault-claims-no-claims-bonuses

A court is even less likely to intervene - it might well take a strict view of the terms of your contact with the insurer and say that the insurer has the right to decide how to settle the claim as it chooses and doesn't have to justify its decision at all.

RoamingJedi

KarachiKid

Answering your last post whether it is wise to go to court. I'd advise against it.

I'm currently going through a legal process where it's night and day clear, witnesses, a supporting police report, scene photos from the police, everything apart from it on film basically. An it's soul destroying, into month 2, we could have another 2 months of this milling about until we can actually request a court date. (Other side has an astoundingly long legal right to gather evidence to respond) An this whole time Solicitors are being paid to see the process through. Once we are at the end, if they decide to go to court, I've been told by a barrister it could be a further couple of months to get a court date.

I'm only doing this for 2 reasons:
1- I was very seriously injured and will have (hopefully minor) but permanent changes to my body. Chances of be breaking bones again massively increased (especially considering the activities I enjoy)
2 - I had 100k of legal cover on my insurance.

If you go to court, you open yourself up to worst case, the judge ruling against you. Even if he doesn't he could decide it was 50/50 and order you to pay the other sides legal costs. Speaking to a barrister this kind of stuff depends yes on the claim, but also a lot on who you get as a judge, some will take his side, some yours, most will probably be 50/50 due to lack of evidence either way. Unless you are out of pocket 10's of thousands of pounds I wouldn't even consider it.

I've been in this exact same situation before so I understand why you are annoyed, I slammed on the brakes and got away with it and cursed the guy under my breath. Sounds like the highway code was on your side, if someone was injured and the police had investigated they might have sided with you. But insurance really doesn't work like that, they just want the matter closed as cheaply as possible, only real way to fight a claim is to go to court and its dam expensive.