car accident - pressured into saying its partly my fault

j2009

Can you be more specific about about how the lorry hit you, eg:
a) was it overtaking and clipped the front of you with its trailer?
b) was pulling in behind and clipped the rear of your car?
c) was alongside you and hit you with the middle or its trailer?
d) something else?

At the risk of asking things I am sure you have thought of:
1) Did you get any witnesses, has your insurer obtained their version of events?
2) Did you take any pictures - in particular damage to the lorry as that would show the side of impact?

Guesses

sams247 wrote: »

Hi

So, in 2018 I was in the slow lane of the motorway

There's no such thing as a "slow lane".

reeac

Guesses wrote: »

There's no such thing as a "slow lane".

Yes, but most of us will know what the OP means.

Mercdriver

Guesses wrote: »

There's no such thing as a "slow lane".

Thank you for your useful post.

Goudy

The insurers want to settle the accident claim 50/50 as there's little evidence either party is at fault, basically it's your word against theirs.
They won't go to court without being able to show the other party was, within all probability, at fault.

This will effect your compo claim, as it would be agreed you're both at fault.
So your claim for loss of earnings will die with the 50/50 decision.

You can of course ignore them and decide to take the accident AND compo claim to court, that is your right.
To do this you will be agreeing to pay for the solicitors costs (and the other parties costs) if you do not win.
Win and the other party pays.

Before you decide to do this, ask yourself what evidence have you got to reasonably prove your case that your insurances solicitor hasn't.
If you haven't got any, forget it.

Insurance companies aren't in the business to waste money, either paying out a claim or going to court with no evidence.
If there was enough evidence to win, you'd be in court while you can still taste this mornings toothpaste as they'd be able to recover all the costs, yours and theirs.

On a learning point, you've walked away from this with you health still intact and your insurance will have done what you signed up for it to do, they are pretty up front these days supplying customers with their terms and conditions.

Also a cheap dashcam would have caught enough evidence of the lorry cutting in on you, I know this sounds like shutting the barn door, but I presume you'll return to driving if you haven't already, invest a few quid in one.

Jumblebumble

sams247 wrote: »

Hi

So, in 2018 I was in the slow lane of the motorway when a huge lorry hit me on the drivers side, span me right across to hit the central reservation. Driver was from Lithuania and said he did not see me as he moved to the inside lane. He has now gone back to Lithuania and disappeared. Although my car was flattened and ripped off its axis I was not hurt. The police therefore did not make a report.

I have been claiming compensation for my losses since then. Now my solicitors (from the insurance company) are saying I should accept a 50/50 fault claim as they do not believe I would win a court case. They say as there is damage to the passenger side (where it hit the central reservation) the other side could say I hit them.

The first set of papers they sent me had the wrong driver, this set say I was in the middle lane and therefore could have hit the lorry. I was never in the middle lane. They say they will not represent me in court as they say I should accept the 50/50. They also say if I accept then their fees are in the claim but if I dont then I have to pay for the fees.

I feel pressured to accept, but its so wrong as I was the one who was hit.

What can I do?

Thank you

Did the driver tell the police that he had not seen you as he moved into the slow lane?
If you can get the police to confirm he did this would be very good news.

Mistral001

A car in the slow lane spinning round and crossing two lanes to hit the central reservation will not have gone unnoticed by other drivers. In fact many would have assumed that it was pretty serious accident. Did any of them stop to see if anybody was hurt? If they did, they could be your witnesses.

born_again

The police therefore did not make a report

So something that will have lead to the closure of the motorway due to the recovery of a car that hit the central barrier, which will have been damaged and required repair....

Don't believe it.

Any car behind will have had to stop. So there must be plenty of witnesses.

Shaun_of_the_Dead

born_again wrote: »

So something that will have lead to the closure of the motorway due to the recovery of a car that hit the central barrier, which will have been damaged and required repair....

Don't believe it.

Any car behind will have had to stop. So there must be plenty of witnesses.

What dont you believe?

Its unlikely if there was a full closure of the motorway to have happened until the police of HA arrived. Anyone stopped in the closure wont have seen the accident and those who had would be long gone.

Mercdriver

What should be remembered in all civil litigation is that the award of costs is a separate issue to damages. It is perfectly possible to be awarded £100 damages but to have costs of thousands awarded to the other side. This is why the legal team are unwilling to take the risk.

As far as witnesses are concerned, I am sure there were plenty, but it seems to have been inbred into people now to just shrug shoulders and say "Not my problem".