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

EmmyLou30

This is exactly what dash cams are for. It would have proven that they pulled out in front of you without stopping at the give way markings and therefore was their fault and not yours. Without video evidence it's always going to go in favour of the car in front that's been rear ended. Get a dash cam!!

tanvir

A_Lert wrote: »

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.

Yep this is exactly my issue. If you hit from the back your at fault by default unless you can prove otherwise :mad: even though you was in the right and had priority.

eddddy

A_Lert wrote: »

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.

I agree.

A key piece of evidence is where the collision occurred in relation to the junction.

• If the collision occurred, say, 20 meters from the junction - that's evidence that the other car pulled out into the path of the OP, and the OP didn't have sufficient breaking distance to stop.

• But if the collision occurred, say, 100 meters from the junction - that suggests that the OP should have had sufficient breaking distance to avoid a collision. (And suggests that perhaps the OP wasn't paying enough attention.)