Insures want to admit liability to claim which is not my fault

tanvir · 15 January 2020 at 4:34PM

**Raising on motoring forum as i created on insurance forum **

A week before xmas i was involved in a car accident where i went into the back of 3rd party at about 15-20mph, I fully believe this was not my fault.
I was travelling on the dual carriageway at 50mph, There is a private road from where you turn left at a giveway to join the dual carriageway. The 3rd party just joined without stopping at the giveway which resulted in me braking and going into the back of him as there wasn't enough stopping distance nor was he travelling at a high enough speed to keep a decent gap.

At the scene he admitted liability and was ready to settle this outside of insurance and said will be in touch in the new year to arrange payment.
Fast forward the new year and my insurers tell me his insurers hold me liable and his submitted an injury claim .

The issue is my insurance are saying they don't wish drag this on as i hit him from the back so 99% he is going to win and I would have to admit liability. They are not interested that he made a dangerous entry onto the dual carriageway etc and just want to settle this which i find very strange for an insurance company.

There is no CCTV footage as the council confirmed it wasn't recording at the time and no witnesses available.

Is there anything I can do to pressure my insurance to at least fight this properly? At the very least its my word against his since he has no CCTV or witness either, but my insurers want to admit liability and settle this?

What can I do?

foxy-stoat · 15 January 2020 at 4:43PM

If only you had some dash camera footage to back up your version of events....his statement was, pulled out onto a dual carriageway with lots of room to spare and the third party went into the back of me.

If it went to court with no witnesses then its likely they would side with the other party...if he pulled out and hit your passenger side then it would be different.

You can do very little, unless you can get a witness to come forward.

Mistral001 · 15 January 2020 at 4:52PM

foxy-stoat wrote: »

If only you had some dash camera footage to back up your version of events....his statement was, pulled out onto a dual carriageway with lots of room to spare and the third party went into the back of me.

If it went to court with no witnesses then its likely they would side with the other party...if he pulled out and hit your passenger side then it would be different.

You can do very little, unless you can get a witness to come forward.

Or if only the OP had called the police as it was clearly careless driving by the other driver.

AdrianC · 15 January 2020 at 5:01PM

How near this junction was the impact? Do you have photographs?

It was a dual carriageway - was your carriageway a single lane, did the driver of the vehicle in the other lane stop and offer to give a witness statement?

They're right - 99% of the time, "I drove into the back of somebody on a straight bit of wide road" is going to be the fault of the driver behind - and it's going to be very hard to show yours is the 1% without some pretty compelling evidence.

It's a very similar situation to this thread, and there's going to be a huge degree of crossover between the answers.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=6091773

Car_54 · 15 January 2020 at 5:03PM

Mistral001 wrote: »

Or if only the OP had called the police as it was clearly careless driving by the other driver.

Clearly? Based on what?

Mistral001 · 15 January 2020 at 5:11PM

Car_54 wrote: »

Clearly? Based on what?

Based on the OP's description. Based on the other driver's admission.

AdrianC · 15 January 2020 at 5:14PM

Mistral001 wrote: »

Based on the OP's description.

If it's accurate.

Based on the other driver's admission.

You mean based on the OP's claims about the other driver's admissions.

I'm not saying the OP is lying. I'm saying that there is no evidence either way. Two people know the truth, and they're saying different things. They may very well both believe their account is accurate. That is not enough for any kind of prosecution.

Mistral001 · 15 January 2020 at 5:35PM

AdrianC wrote: »

If it's accurate.

You mean based on the OP's claims about the other driver's admissions.

I'm not saying the OP is lying. I'm saying that there is no evidence either way. Two people know the truth, and they're saying different things. They may very well both believe their account is accurate. That is not enough for any kind of prosecution.

I am giving the benefit of the doubt to the OP.

debtdebt · 15 January 2020 at 5:44PM

The insurer can dispose of any third party clams as they like. It is contained in the terms and conditions of your policy.

Mercdriver · 15 January 2020 at 5:49PM

Mistral001 wrote: »

I am giving the benefit of the doubt to the OP.

That would not be enough for a criminal case to be brought which you are suggesting this could be.

AdrianC · 15 January 2020 at 5:51PM

Mistral001 wrote: »

I am giving the benefit of the doubt to the OP.

"Beyond reasonable doubt"?

Insures want to admit liability to claim which is not my fault

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free