Car accident not my fault but my insurers want to admit liability

csgohan4

I suggest getting a dash cam as well, cheap for what could you save in terms of claims. Instead of 100% liability, it could have been 50/50

katieort

Just a question on liability and the person saying it was there fault at the scene.
Hypothetically speaking, as I've not been in an accident, if you were to get your phone out and start recording the conversation you have about the accident, and you record (like in OP's post) the person you hit admitting liability, they literally say it was my fault etc. Would that stand when going through insurers as them being at fault, or would they just ignore that?
Just wondering if in the future something similar were to happen to me, should I start recording straight away the conversation just in case the other person changes their mind or whatever and says it wasn't their fault anymore.

Brodiebobs

katieort wrote: »

Just a question on liability and the person saying it was there fault at the scene.
Hypothetically speaking, as I've not been in an accident, if you were to get your phone out and start recording the conversation you have about the accident, and you record (like in OP's post) the person you hit admitting liability, they literally say it was my fault etc. Would that stand when going through insurers as them being at fault, or would they just ignore that?
Just wondering if in the future something similar were to happen to me, should I start recording straight away the conversation just in case the other person changes their mind or whatever and says it wasn't their fault anymore.

Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.

katieort

Brodiebobs wrote: »

Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.

Thanks for replying, it was hypothetical, and was curious if it would make any difference or not. I have a dash cam that would help prove anything anyway.

pjcox2005

Brodiebobs wrote: »

Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.

I haven't to date, I already have insurance against the risk of an accident. This is a necessity (and would be without the law) as the risk is too high given what costs could go to.


I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?


I'm sure as with all technology I'll come round in due course. I'm the same a bit on house security technology where i don't feel the need given the location makes it a unlikely target for robbers (a house in a remote location would probably give me more urgency to sort for example). It's basically why add to my issues to stop others misbehaving.

Brodiebobs

pjcox2005 wrote: »

.


I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?
.

I believe most start with the ignition (mine was a £35'er and does), so once its fitted you don't need to think about it.

But reading on these forums, and I know of many 'in real life' where a dashcam would have avoided all doubt, but if it wouldn't bother you being found at fault when you know you weren't then that's a personal choice.

spadoosh

pjcox2005 wrote: »

I haven't to date, I already have insurance against the risk of an accident. This is a necessity (and would be without the law) as the risk is too high given what costs could go to.


I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?


I'm sure as with all technology I'll come round in due course. I'm the same a bit on house security technology where i don't feel the need given the location makes it a unlikely target for robbers (a house in a remote location would probably give me more urgency to sort for example). It's basically why add to my issues to stop others misbehaving.

You say this, every single person i know who has had an accident panicked about their insurance premiums, every single one was massively surprised at how little it impacted them come renewal. On my own at fault accident, upon renewal my premiums actually went down.

My OH had an accident causing about £20k+ of damage, she took chunks out of the road and it needed resurfacing, and her premiums went up £56 per year, for that year, the year after it was lower than pre accident.

How much have you paid insuring your insurance for 23 years?

Lets say your insurance is £400 per year. A dashcam costs about £80ish, lots of options i get, if you have an at fault accident your insurance might go as high as £500 per year. The odds of someone having a crash arent that high.

Plus i couldnt think of anything worse than being that person that lets out an exciteed squeal exclaiming 'got that on dashcam'. I also think id be inclined to go hunting for an accident. I mean, ive got it, i paid for it, i want to get value for money and thats just a stupid way of thinking. You can see people do it on YT though, a dashcamer driving dangerously trying to bait someone who probably made a genuine mistake.

pjcox2005

spadoosh wrote: »

You say this, every single person i know who has had an accident panicked about their insurance premiums, every single one was massively surprised at how little it impacted them come renewal. On my own at fault accident, upon renewal my premiums actually went down.

My OH had an accident causing about £20k+ of damage, she took chunks out of the road and it needed resurfacing, and her premiums went up £56 per year, for that year, the year after it was lower than pre accident.

How much have you paid insuring your insurance for 23 years?

Lets say your insurance is £400 per year. A dashcam costs about £80ish, lots of options i get, if you have an at fault accident your insurance might go as high as £500 per year. The odds of someone having a crash arent that high.

Plus i couldnt think of anything worse than being that person that lets out an exciteed squeal exclaiming 'got that on dashcam'. I also think id be inclined to go hunting for an accident. I mean, ive got it, i paid for it, i want to get value for money and thats just a stupid way of thinking. You can see people do it on YT though, a dashcamer driving dangerously trying to bait someone who probably made a genuine mistake.

Sorry, the highlighted section you quoted, I'm saying insurance itself is a necessity (i.e. to cover the £20k+ damage your OH caused) not the dash cam.


Dash cam itself, I'm with you that I've never had the urge to get one although it does sound less hassle than i thought from Broidebobs response.

SharpMind

Just sue everyone to death, LOL

A_Lert

So much incorrect statements above I think. A rear-end impact is not always the rear driver's fault. In OP's case their statement is they were driving in their lane and had priority, and the other driver jumped the Give Way and cut OP up.


Similarly, if you're on the motorway doing 70 to overtake another car doing 60, and the other car suddenly changes into your lane and you hit the back of them, no reasonable person given the full facts and evidence would consider that your fault!


OP's problem is little or no evidence though.