Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 11:20 AM
    • 29Posts
    • 0Thanks
    billyghom
    Hit by stolen car, found at fault, please help
    • #1
    • 11th Jan 18, 11:20 AM
    Hit by stolen car, found at fault, please help 11th Jan 18 at 11:20 AM
    Hi everyone,

    I was in a car accident with a stolen BMW which I have been found to be at fault by my insurance company. I would like advice on how to overturn the decision. I have tried my best to present the information of the incident as succinctly and clearly as possible.

    - I came out from a minor road into a major road (indicating right, alone in my car), because the BMW (on my right, nearest lane) was far away enough for me to do so.
    - I came out halfway and stopped and observed my left and waited for it clear so that I could go
    - Just as the last car on my left passed, I was hit by the BMW, while I was still stationary
    - the five occupants of the BMW came out of their vehicle and discarded onto the ground a large quantity of used nitrous oxide cannisters (also known as Cream Chargers, Hippy Crack, and Laughing Gas). The BMW interior was also littered with these used cannisters. These are used to get high (illegally)
    - I was physically attacked by the driver of the BMW (once we were both out of our vehicles after the collision), the attack was stopped by passing members of the public
    - I called the police, but they refused to attend as it was a car accident with no serious injuries and needed to be dealt with between the two parties involved, this was despite me telling them about the used cannister and attack (I did not know the car was stolen at this point)
    - The five occupants of the BMW fled the scene, abandoning their vehicle
    - I called the police a second time, and insisted they attend, as one or two of the BMW occupants kept returning and I did not feel safe (one of them returned to recover something from the boot of their vehicle before fleeing again)
    - The police arrived around 30 minutes after the collision and took statements, there was one witness but I am not confident how reliable he is as he was a homeless man, I told the police about the used nitrous oxide cannisters and physical attack (the cannisters were there for the police to see anyway)

    So my insurance company is finding me at fault on the basis that I came out from a minor road into a major road and the BMW had right of way. This is despite me being stationary when I was hit (my insurance company says I cannot prove this), the BMW being stolen with joyriders inside, and the used nitrous oxide cannisters (an illegal high) inside the BMW. A couple of things to note: 1.) my maneuver was not illegal and it is routinely done everyday on the roads and it was absolutely safe for me to begin the maneuver as the BMW was so far away on my right
    2.) the BMW does have insurance, but clearly the owner wasn't at the wheel on the night of the collision as it was reported stolen. It did not have MOT however (I learned this later after an online check). I cannot see my version of events being disputed by the other side as clearly they are in hiding from the police and are untraceable. The only people disputing my version of events is my insurance company.

    I have tried my best to present all the relevant information, but I may have missed something.

    Please help with any advice, I will be very grateful. I only have Third Party Fire and Theft cover, and will not get anything from my insurance company unless I can overturn the decision for fault.

    This seems really unfair that I get hit by joyriders getting high in a stolen car, and yet I am found to be at fault and receive nothing. The BMW driver most likely didn't even have a driving license. I struggle for money and suffer from depression, and my car meant a lot to me. It was one of the only things I had that bought me joy (it's been written off).

    The other party has not made a claim against my insurers.

    Thank you.
Page 4
    • Senseicads
    • By Senseicads 11th Jan 18, 3:57 PM
    • 112 Posts
    • 58 Thanks
    Senseicads
    Some tough love
    Just to clarify things a bit further for you, you don't claim for this through your insurer. As others have pointed out you are not covered for damage to your vehicle. If the other party are at fault(and it's a big if) then you can claim from their insurance as they will be covered for Third party damage. You will have to go get yourself a solicitor and get them to make the claim on your behalf. Lots of accident solicitors about, do some research and pick a good one.


    The problem that you have got is that you are at fault for the accident. It doesn't matter what the other driver was doing in terms of speeding and not paying attention etc. You as the driver of your vehicle are the judge of what makes a manoeuvre safe. As others have pointed out you have to give way to vehicle's on the major road when there is a give way on a minor road. He could have been driving at 150mph, but because you have pulled out when it was unsafe to do so you will be found at fault. The court would have ruled you had misjudged the speed of the oncoming vehicle. If it wasn't unsafe to do so they wouldn't have hit you. None of the other stuff you have said about it being stolen and such, even enters into it. if you could have proved they were under the influence then you might have had more of a case to get some contributory negligence applied to your case, but given that they hadn't given a blood sample or anything you aren't going to get anywhere with that. The bare truth is, if you are pulling out of a side road and you collide with another car then you are fault...almost everytime.

    There was even a case whereby someone pulling out of a minor road collided with a lorry coming down the major road that was also signalling left. they pulled out when they thought it was safe, lorry driver hit them. it was the person in the car's fault for pulling out when its not safe.


    Sorry to be the bearer of some tough love here, but it's just tough, the onus is on the driver pulling out to ensure the way is clear and safe. A collision occurred so it clearly wasn't. I'll put a quote from the summary judgement at the bottom of this for you so that you can see what I mean. if you want to google it then it was Davis v Swinwood(2002) but the judgement went as follows...
    ...the case of Davis v Swinwood (2002) in which the court found in the insuredís favour. In this case the defendantís car was stationary at a junction with the intention to emerge from the minor road onto the major road. The claimantís lorry was travelling along the major road. The defendantís evidence was that he looked to his left and his right and saw the claimantís left indicator flashing and he noted that the claimant was travelling at a slow speed. Based on these two points, the defendant emerged from the minor road and a collision occurred. The court held in favour of the claimant travelling on the major road. Although the judge found that the claimantís indicator had been flashing for at least some of his journey down the main road, this was not the relevant issue in the case. The defendant had been seeking to enter a major road from a minor road. The claimant had precedence on the road and the onus was clearly on the defendant to enter the major carriageway safely, which he had failed to do. The defendantís claim was dismissed in its entirety.
    So you have two options...
    1) go get a solicitor, and see if anything is able to be done...It won't be and if you pay to go to court you will lose.
    2) chalk it up to experience, let it go, and try and move on with your life.
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 11th Jan 18, 4:01 PM
    • 2,976 Posts
    • 2,490 Thanks
    Aretnap
    A fair chance each insurer has agreed to cover their own and as OP only has TP they have dipped out.
    Originally posted by molerat
    You're about 25 years out of date there. Knock for knock agreements were phased out in the 1990s and didn't work like that with regard to TPFT customers anyway. There's no chance that this is what has happened.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 4:15 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    Just to clarify things a bit further for you, you don't claim for this through your insurer. As others have pointed out you are not covered for damage to your vehicle. If the other party are at fault(and it's a big if) then you can claim from their insurance as they will be covered for Third party damage. You will have to go get yourself a solicitor and get them to make the claim on your behalf. Lots of accident solicitors about, do some research and pick a good one.


    The problem that you have got is that you are at fault for the accident. It doesn't matter what the other driver was doing in terms of speeding and not paying attention etc. You as the driver of your vehicle are the judge of what makes a manoeuvre safe. As others have pointed out you have to give way to vehicle's on the major road when there is a give way on a minor road. He could have been driving at 150mph, but because you have pulled out when it was unsafe to do so you will be found at fault. The court would have ruled you had misjudged the speed of the oncoming vehicle. If it wasn't unsafe to do so they wouldn't have hit you. None of the other stuff you have said about it being stolen and such, even enters into it. if you could have proved they were under the influence then you might have had more of a case to get some contributory negligence applied to your case, but given that they hadn't given a blood sample or anything you aren't going to get anywhere with that. The bare truth is, if you are pulling out of a side road and you collide with another car then you are fault...almost everytime.

    There was even a case whereby someone pulling out of a minor road collided with a lorry coming down the major road that was also signalling left. they pulled out when they thought it was safe, lorry driver hit them. it was the person in the car's fault for pulling out when its not safe.


    Sorry to be the bearer of some tough love here, but it's just tough, the onus is on the driver pulling out to ensure the way is clear and safe. A collision occurred so it clearly wasn't. I'll put a quote from the summary judgement at the bottom of this for you so that you can see what I mean. if you want to google it then it was Davis v Swinwood(2002) but the judgement went as follows...

    So you have two options...
    1) go get a solicitor, and see if anything is able to be done...It won't be and if you pay to go to court you will lose.
    2) chalk it up to experience, let it go, and try and move on with your life.
    Originally posted by Senseicads

    Thank you, that is very useful. The best response given. I don't disagree that, by letter of the law, I was at fault. But who can honestly say, as a layman, that being hit by a car full of joyriding teenagers getting high vs. an uninebriated driver legally on the road and with 10 years of experience without incident, that the legal driver is likely to be at fault? It is insanity that I have to take fault.

    But I understand that that is by-the-by and irrelevant (although it shouldn't be), so let's move on. . . Based on what you've said, would you say an MIB claim against an untraceable and uninsured driver is worth a shot?

    Thanks once again for your help.
    • BoGoF
    • By BoGoF 11th Jan 18, 4:24 PM
    • 3,216 Posts
    • 2,540 Thanks
    BoGoF
    4 pages and 63 posts later we have an admission of fault.......
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 4:28 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    4 pages and 63 posts later we have an admission of fault.......
    Originally posted by BoGoF
    No, I said by letter of the law, which is not the same thing and does not necessarily make it just. Thank you for your response, anyway.
    • forgotmyname
    • By forgotmyname 11th Jan 18, 4:29 PM
    • 27,231 Posts
    • 10,970 Thanks
    forgotmyname
    Who can honestly say? Anyone that has read the highway code?

    They were on the main road, they had right of way you denied them that right of way.

    Its not insanity that you have to take the blame, its called growing up and admitting that you caused the accident so are the one to blame.

    A claim against an uninsired driver, no issues. But not when you were at fault. You caused it.
    Punctuation, Spelling and Grammar will be used sparingly. Due to rising costs of inflation.

    My contribution to MSE. Other contributions will only be used if they cost me nothing.

    Due to me being a tight git.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 4:39 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    I know what posting on an online forum is like. It is part of the internet, after all. One expects 80-90% of replies to be unhelpful, personal attacks, and point scoring. But you put up with that for the one or two posters who genuinely want to help and offer something useful. You can recognise them because they usually only post once, unless asked a direct follow up question. I've had a few of those and to them I am grateful and say thank you. To the rest, I have thanked as many of you as I could, regardless.
    Last edited by billyghom; 11-01-2018 at 4:47 PM.
    • billyghom
    • By billyghom 11th Jan 18, 4:43 PM
    • 29 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    billyghom
    Okay folks, I'm calling it. Thank you all for your help and enjoy the rest of your evening. Cheers.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

183Posts Today

1,839Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ah these care free days of watching #ENG score 5 goals in the first half of a World Cup match. It reminds me of... Never.

  • Then it should be. It's not some accident. It's deliberate grappling https://t.co/UxVTuUSNio

  • Penalty yes but time someone was sent off for these wrestling moves #WorldCup

  • Follow Martin