Car Accident Question.

wannabedebtfreee

hi,
I recently was involved in a damage only rtc. it happened on a country road in wet conditions. I saw the other vehicle coming and was going slow enough to stop my van, he, on the other hand was going too fast (although not speeding) to stop and hit my drivers wing and damaged every nearside panel on the stone wall. His parting comment to me was "im sorry about that mate, my car just didnt want to stop".

my question is this,

Will my insurance company pursue his based on the above facts or will they just go knock for knock? thus leaving me with an excess bill, which i dont think is fair seeing as my vehicle was stopped at the time of impact!

thanks for your help

anewman

You'll probably have to argue your case, especially if he says you hit him. Proof in the damage itself could be that damage on your car is in the middle but damage on his is on one corner, as it would be very difficult for your car to move sideways into his.

Good luck :beer:

Happychappy

All depends what the other driver says to his insurance company and whether you have any independent witness ? what the other driver says at the scene is rarely what they say to the insurance company, so be prepared for a knock for knock.?

arealhighlander

"(although not speeding)"

He was obviously driving too fast for the road conditions. I'll guarantee he will tell his insurance company a different story. If it was just the two of you, it will probably end up being knock for knock.

wannabedebtfreee

oh, yeh he was driving too fast for the wet conditions, if my insurance company decide to go k for k can i then instruct one of these no fees solicitors to fight it instead?

Doozergirl

You can but a witness would help I think.

I witnessed an accident that sounds like yours. The driver who couldn't stop (didn't attempt to actually) nearly hit me but hit the van driver behind instead. His van was stationary after him having to emergency stop to prevent himself from hitting me after my emergency stop.

The insurance companies found 50/50 but the old boy (who was to blame) took the van driver to court for his excess. I turned up as witness and with all the evidence it was obvious what had happened - especially as the old boy stated several times that 30-35mph was appropriate for a near blind bend on a tiny lane and insisted that I and the van driver knew each other and had purposely caused the accident between us :rolleyes:. He dug his own rather bizarre hole especially by shouting 'LIES' a few times! :rotfl: His evidence didn't match with his own photos taken of the scene.

It ended up that it would actually go back to the insurance companies that fault lay with old man (only 82 mind :eek:) and that his insurance company would have to reimburse the van driver's. If you have the legal cover then I guess it's worth a shot because people can hang themselves very easily given the correct rope.