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
    • tanvir
    • By tanvir 15th Jan 20, 3:09 PM
    • 53Posts
    • 5Thanks
    tanvir
    Car accident not my fault but my insurers want to admit liability
    • #1
    • 15th Jan 20, 3:09 PM
    Car accident not my fault but my insurers want to admit liability 15th Jan 20 at 3:09 PM
    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 liabilty and settle this?

    What can I do?
Page 1
    • Mistral001
    • By Mistral001 15th Jan 20, 3:19 PM
    • 4,270 Posts
    • 3,281 Thanks
    Mistral001
    • #2
    • 15th Jan 20, 3:19 PM
    • #2
    • 15th Jan 20, 3:19 PM
    What did the police report say?

    PS. You might get more replies on the motoring sub-forum.
    • tanvir
    • By tanvir 15th Jan 20, 3:30 PM
    • 53 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tanvir
    • #3
    • 15th Jan 20, 3:30 PM
    • #3
    • 15th Jan 20, 3:30 PM
    What did the police report say?

    PS. You might get more replies on the motoring sub-forum.
    Originally posted by Mistral001
    There was no police report as we both agreed it was minor collision and he admitted liability at the scene so there was no need for police.

    Thanks for pointing this out, i'll create a thread on motoring forum.
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 15th Jan 20, 7:44 PM
    • 3,571 Posts
    • 3,188 Thanks
    Aretnap
    • #4
    • 15th Jan 20, 7:44 PM
    • #4
    • 15th Jan 20, 7:44 PM
    If you drive into the back of someone there is a strong presumption that you were to blame, so without more evidence than you saying "but I really didn't have time to stop" it is unlikely that your insurer would win this one. So I fully understand why they would want to cut their losses and pay out now rather than run up legal costs fighting a case which they will very probably lose anyway.

    Ultimately there is very little you can do - when you take out an insurance policy you agree to let the insurer settle claims as they see fit - it is after all their money, not yours, that they are handing over.
    • FutureGirl
    • By FutureGirl 15th Jan 20, 8:23 PM
    • 1,218 Posts
    • 506 Thanks
    FutureGirl
    • #5
    • 15th Jan 20, 8:23 PM
    • #5
    • 15th Jan 20, 8:23 PM
    We only have your version of events.

    I am going to bet that the other driver is either saying that;

    a) they did not enter the carriage way where you say they did, and that they were already in front of you, correctly proceeding straight on when you hit them

    or

    b) they joined the carriage way where you say they did, BUT the accident happened further down the road than where you are saying it happened

    Either of the above would put more 'blame' onto yourself.

    You insurer wouldn't just say you're at fault based on your version of events, which makes me believe there is something else that we're not aware of.
    Goal; Debt free by Oct 2020.
    • Malkytheheed
    • By Malkytheheed 16th Jan 20, 8:27 AM
    • 48 Posts
    • 44 Thanks
    Malkytheheed
    • #6
    • 16th Jan 20, 8:27 AM
    • #6
    • 16th Jan 20, 8:27 AM
    i went into the back of 3rd party
    going into the back of him
    there wasn't enough stopping distance
    keep a decent gap.
    Originally posted by tanvir
    Sorry. You don't have a leg to stand on.
    A deer once jumped into the side of my car at speed. Literally nothing I could do. Alas as far insurance cares it was "my fault" as no other cars were there to apportion blame onto. Life isnt fair when it comes to insurance.
    • eddddy
    • By eddddy 16th Jan 20, 8:57 AM
    • 8,930 Posts
    • 9,321 Thanks
    eddddy
    • #7
    • 16th Jan 20, 8:57 AM
    • #7
    • 16th Jan 20, 8:57 AM
    Sorry. You don't have a leg to stand on.
    A deer once jumped into the side of my car at speed. Literally nothing I could do. Alas as far insurance cares it was "my fault" as no other cars were there to apportion blame onto. Life isnt fair when it comes to insurance.
    Originally posted by Malkytheheed
    That's completely different.

    An insurer's definition of a "fault claim" is one where they cannot recover funds from the other party.

    In your case, the deer was at fault, but your insurers were unable to recover funds from the deer - so they recorded it as a "fault claim".

    In the OPs case, the OP says the other driver was at fault, and so the OP wants their insurer to recover funds from the other driver.

    (i.e. You can take a driver to court to claim damages, but you can't take a deer to court to claim damages.)


    The fundamental point here is that somebody was probably negligent which resulted in a crash.
    • If the OP was negligent, the OP (or their insurers) should pay all costs.
    • If the other party was negligent, the other party (or their insurers) should pay all costs.

    The argument is over which person was negligent.
    • Malkytheheed
    • By Malkytheheed 16th Jan 20, 9:36 AM
    • 48 Posts
    • 44 Thanks
    Malkytheheed
    • #8
    • 16th Jan 20, 9:36 AM
    • #8
    • 16th Jan 20, 9:36 AM
    The argument is over which person was negligent.
    Originally posted by eddddy
    And the argument doesn't even begin if you go into the back of someone. You are at fault. end of.
    • tanvir
    • By tanvir 16th Jan 20, 10:00 AM
    • 53 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tanvir
    • #9
    • 16th Jan 20, 10:00 AM
    • #9
    • 16th Jan 20, 10:00 AM
    Thanks for all your responses.. Looks like I have no way to dispute this. It's just so annoying because they admitted liability at the scene and wanted to settle after xmas only to go and make a claim and say they're injured.
    Guess the insurance game is really unfair for honest drivers
    • Malkytheheed
    • By Malkytheheed 16th Jan 20, 10:03 AM
    • 48 Posts
    • 44 Thanks
    Malkytheheed
    Thanks for all your responses.. Looks like I have no way to dispute this. It's just so annoying because they admitted liability at the scene and wanted to settle after xmas only to go and make a claim and say they're injured.
    Guess the insurance game is really unfair for honest drivers
    Originally posted by tanvir
    It is unfair. It's pretty rotten. I would have called the police no matter how small the accident.
    • tanvir
    • By tanvir 16th Jan 20, 10:09 AM
    • 53 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    tanvir
    It is unfair. It's pretty rotten. I would have called the police no matter how small the accident.
    Originally posted by Malkytheheed
    Definitely a lesson learnt
    • csgohan4
    • By csgohan4 16th Jan 20, 10:48 AM
    • 6,886 Posts
    • 4,720 Thanks
    csgohan4
    I suggest getting a dash cam as well, cheap for what could you save in terms of claims. Instead of 100% liability, it could have been 50/50
    "It is prudent when shopping for something important, not to limit yourself to Pound land/Estate Agents"
    • katieort
    • By katieort 16th Jan 20, 10:58 AM
    • 24 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    katieort
    Just a question on liability and the person saying it was there fault at the scene.
    Hypothetically speaking, as I've not been in an accident, if you were to get your phone out and start recording the conversation you have about the accident, and you record (like in OP's post) the person you hit admitting liability, they literally say it was my fault etc. Would that stand when going through insurers as them being at fault, or would they just ignore that?
    Just wondering if in the future something similar were to happen to me, should I start recording straight away the conversation just in case the other person changes their mind or whatever and says it wasn't their fault anymore.
    • Brodiebobs
    • By Brodiebobs 16th Jan 20, 11:16 AM
    • 904 Posts
    • 3,511 Thanks
    Brodiebobs
    Just a question on liability and the person saying it was there fault at the scene.
    Hypothetically speaking, as I've not been in an accident, if you were to get your phone out and start recording the conversation you have about the accident, and you record (like in OP's post) the person you hit admitting liability, they literally say it was my fault etc. Would that stand when going through insurers as them being at fault, or would they just ignore that?
    Just wondering if in the future something similar were to happen to me, should I start recording straight away the conversation just in case the other person changes their mind or whatever and says it wasn't their fault anymore.
    Originally posted by katieort
    Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

    Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.
    • katieort
    • By katieort 16th Jan 20, 11:21 AM
    • 24 Posts
    • 5 Thanks
    katieort
    Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

    Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.
    Originally posted by Brodiebobs
    Thanks for replying, it was hypothetical, and was curious if it would make any difference or not. I have a dash cam that would help prove anything anyway.
    • pjcox2005
    • By pjcox2005 16th Jan 20, 11:54 AM
    • 673 Posts
    • 783 Thanks
    pjcox2005
    Your insurance documents always say do not admit fault. And I'm not sure even if someone was recorded saying it was their fault this would stand up in court as no doubt their insurer/solicitor would say they were in shock, pressured etc.

    Best course of action is a dash cam, they are so cheap and readily available I don't know why every driver doesn't have one.
    Originally posted by Brodiebobs


    I haven't to date, I already have insurance against the risk of an accident. This is a necessity (and would be without the law) as the risk is too high given what costs could go to.


    I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?


    I'm sure as with all technology I'll come round in due course. I'm the same a bit on house security technology where i don't feel the need given the location makes it a unlikely target for robbers (a house in a remote location would probably give me more urgency to sort for example). It's basically why add to my issues to stop others misbehaving.
    • Brodiebobs
    • By Brodiebobs 16th Jan 20, 12:02 PM
    • 904 Posts
    • 3,511 Thanks
    Brodiebobs
    .


    I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?
    .
    Originally posted by pjcox2005
    I believe most start with the ignition (mine was a 35'er and does), so once its fitted you don't need to think about it.

    But reading on these forums, and I know of many 'in real life' where a dashcam would have avoided all doubt, but if it wouldn't bother you being found at fault when you know you weren't then that's a personal choice.
    • spadoosh
    • By spadoosh 16th Jan 20, 12:03 PM
    • 8,036 Posts
    • 11,986 Thanks
    spadoosh
    I haven't to date, I already have insurance against the risk of an accident. This is a necessity (and would be without the law) as the risk is too high given what costs could go to.


    I resist a dash cam as it feels like I'm trying to insure my insurance (if that makes sense), so do i want the hassle of connecting/disconnecting and ensuring it's on for every journey (I'm sure that's only minutes but a faff) when I've not had an accident in the 23 years of driving. All basically to potentially keep premiums slightly lower if I have an accident with a dishonest person?


    I'm sure as with all technology I'll come round in due course. I'm the same a bit on house security technology where i don't feel the need given the location makes it a unlikely target for robbers (a house in a remote location would probably give me more urgency to sort for example). It's basically why add to my issues to stop others misbehaving.
    Originally posted by pjcox2005
    You say this, every single person i know who has had an accident panicked about their insurance premiums, every single one was massively surprised at how little it impacted them come renewal. On my own at fault accident, upon renewal my premiums actually went down.

    My OH had an accident causing about 20k+ of damage, she took chunks out of the road and it needed resurfacing, and her premiums went up 56 per year, for that year, the year after it was lower than pre accident.

    How much have you paid insuring your insurance for 23 years?

    Lets say your insurance is 400 per year. A dashcam costs about 80ish, lots of options i get, if you have an at fault accident your insurance might go as high as 500 per year. The odds of someone having a crash arent that high.

    Plus i couldnt think of anything worse than being that person that lets out an exciteed squeal exclaiming 'got that on dashcam'. I also think id be inclined to go hunting for an accident. I mean, ive got it, i paid for it, i want to get value for money and thats just a stupid way of thinking. You can see people do it on YT though, a dashcamer driving dangerously trying to bait someone who probably made a genuine mistake.
    Don't be angry!
    • pjcox2005
    • By pjcox2005 16th Jan 20, 12:19 PM
    • 673 Posts
    • 783 Thanks
    pjcox2005
    You say this, every single person i know who has had an accident panicked about their insurance premiums, every single one was massively surprised at how little it impacted them come renewal. On my own at fault accident, upon renewal my premiums actually went down.

    My OH had an accident causing about 20k+ of damage, she took chunks out of the road and it needed resurfacing, and her premiums went up 56 per year, for that year, the year after it was lower than pre accident.

    How much have you paid insuring your insurance for 23 years?

    Lets say your insurance is 400 per year. A dashcam costs about 80ish, lots of options i get, if you have an at fault accident your insurance might go as high as 500 per year. The odds of someone having a crash arent that high.

    Plus i couldnt think of anything worse than being that person that lets out an exciteed squeal exclaiming 'got that on dashcam'. I also think id be inclined to go hunting for an accident. I mean, ive got it, i paid for it, i want to get value for money and thats just a stupid way of thinking. You can see people do it on YT though, a dashcamer driving dangerously trying to bait someone who probably made a genuine mistake.
    Originally posted by spadoosh


    Sorry, the highlighted section you quoted, I'm saying insurance itself is a necessity (i.e. to cover the 20k+ damage your OH caused) not the dash cam.


    Dash cam itself, I'm with you that I've never had the urge to get one although it does sound less hassle than i thought from Broidebobs response.
    • SharpMind
    • By SharpMind 16th Jan 20, 1:50 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    SharpMind
    Just sue everyone to death, LOL
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

3,884Posts Today

5,634Users online

Martin's Twitter