50/50 car accident - any advice?

Face

Hi,

Looking for a bit of advice please about a car insurance claim that looks like it may well be going to court as I won't accept a 50/50 settlement.

Basically, we have a fairly long drive on which my wife had parked her car. She was going out in the car and had put our toddler in the car seat.

As she was backing down the driveway she saw another car across the road reversing towards her, so she stopped her car - still completely on our driveway, albeit close to where our drive meets the pavement - to let the other car finish their reversing.

She checked her mirrors to see if the other car had gone but he was still coming right at her! She hit her horn to warn the other driver but it was too late and he hit her car - which as I said was still parked on our private driveway.

The other driver got out of his car and was apologetic, saying that he though he'd heard a horn was was being distracted by the children in his car.

He offered to pay for the damage, which didn't appear to be major, so my wife got some quotes from local garages, including one where she works out. her garage gave a good price to help both my wife and the other guy out.

But when the guy saw the cost of the repairs, he said it'd have to go through the insurance...

And this is where things started to get interesting. My wife is with NU Direct and the other driver is with Tesco. Tesco have always maintained it is 50/50 and NU have said no it isn't - in fact, my wife never even had to pay any excess payments. The accident happened 1st June last year, and after a couple of months of to-ing and fro-ing we didn't hear anything until about three weeks ago when NU rang to say that they couldn't get Tesco to accept full liability and that Tesco would still only accept 50/50.

Turns out the other driver is now saying that my wife was still reversing at the point of impact (which she says she wasn't). A neighbour who heard the collision and turned round to see what had happened has said that my wife's car definitely wasn't on the road, but as she's a neighbour her account apparently has no bearing as she's not impartial enough.

It also turns out the the other driver, who has family living down our road, has done something similar before down our road - he hit another car and drove straight off, but another neighbour saw him do it and reported him.

We have constantly refused to accept 50/50 as we cannot see how my wife can be liable as she was stationary on private property, but as it seems to be my wife's word against the third parties it appears that the matter will be going to court.

Does anyone have any advice on preparing for this? Will we have to pay our costs, regardless of whether we win or not? My wife had motor legal cover on her policy, but they are saying that this only covers reclaiming of uninsured losses.

Any guidance and information would be greatly appreciated.

Face

mattymoo

Costs should be paid if the legal expenses people and your insurers are backing you.
Legal expenses people pay to pursue your claim and if successful will recover from Tesco.
Your insurers pay theother sides costs if you lose.

Prep wise, should be a pretty informal hearing assuming amounts at stake are less than £5k. They should hear the neighbours testimony as well although less weight will apply to it if neighbour is a friend.

At the end of the day, the judge will decide who, on the "balance of probabilities" he believes the most. The Bal of Prob means that if he is 51% convinced you were telling the truth, you will win.
By comparison, the criminal requirement is "beyond reasonable doubt" and that is viewed as 80% in numerical terms.

Face

Thanks, Mattymoo

Do you think we'll be able to bring up his previous hit-and-run accident, as this surely helps to define his character and "word".

I hope that this goes to court soon, as he's just had a mohican haircut and I can't help but think that this can only help our case! Gotta keep smiling, I guess

jessjess_2

Face wrote: »

Thanks, Mattymoo

Do you think we'll be able to bring up his previous hit-and-run accident, as this surely helps to define his character and "word".

I hope that this goes to court soon, as he's just had a mohican haircut and I can't help but think that this can only help our case! Gotta keep smiling, I guess

no offence but what does his haircut have to do with a RTA?

mattymoo

Quite a lot actually. Judges tend to be pretty old school and will be swayed by looks. If you put a Miss Marple lookalike up against Mr Mohican, it is quite likely Miss Marple will win everytime. Wrong but thats how it is in real life.