Who is at fault?
Discussion
Hi Guys.
Back in Feb this year my Wife dropped me off at an RAF base down south and headed home to North Yorks.
She entered the M40 (J9) motorway down the slip of the to stop start traffic.
She joined in front of an artic truck but was stop start for only going a few meters in 2 minutes, stopped with her handbrake on when he hit the back of her. It pushed the back wheels over to the left of the white lines to join the M'way making it look like she cut him up.
She was shaken and he was from Ireland, he started shouting at her, and she had a go at him saying he was not paying attention. He said you better phone the Police which she did but they were not interested as no one injured. They exchanged details and she managed to drive it home minus 1 back light and with a bent bumper.
Next morning she woke with neck pains, these lasted a few weeks and she was off work for a while and is actually still in slight pain even now.
Our insurance took the car and repaired it, costing us nothing and not loosing my NCB.
My wife was put in touch with a solicitor by insurance as I am well covered, who are getting her compensation for her injury/ loss of earnings/ taxis etc.
Now she has just recieved a letter saying the third party is saying she was driving dangerously and pulled in front of him over 2 solid white lines. Their insurance are saying they hold my Wife fully responsible
On his statement he also says he got out and she said she is a student and in a hurry. His drawing is of my wife at a right angle to traffic too.
This conversation never happened, she is not a student and never crossed the white lines as she joined from the right hand lane of the approaching slip road and was actually in front of him stopped for 2 minutes before he nudged her.
So what will be the course of action now? As we thought it was a clear case of him hitting the back of her, and now he is making stories up as he knows there are no witnesses.
She did take pictures of the road/ cars and damage, but as he knocked the back of the car over the lines it looks like she has cut in front of him.
What usually happens in a case like this?
Back in Feb this year my Wife dropped me off at an RAF base down south and headed home to North Yorks.
She entered the M40 (J9) motorway down the slip of the to stop start traffic.
She joined in front of an artic truck but was stop start for only going a few meters in 2 minutes, stopped with her handbrake on when he hit the back of her. It pushed the back wheels over to the left of the white lines to join the M'way making it look like she cut him up.
She was shaken and he was from Ireland, he started shouting at her, and she had a go at him saying he was not paying attention. He said you better phone the Police which she did but they were not interested as no one injured. They exchanged details and she managed to drive it home minus 1 back light and with a bent bumper.
Next morning she woke with neck pains, these lasted a few weeks and she was off work for a while and is actually still in slight pain even now.
Our insurance took the car and repaired it, costing us nothing and not loosing my NCB.
My wife was put in touch with a solicitor by insurance as I am well covered, who are getting her compensation for her injury/ loss of earnings/ taxis etc.
Now she has just recieved a letter saying the third party is saying she was driving dangerously and pulled in front of him over 2 solid white lines. Their insurance are saying they hold my Wife fully responsible
On his statement he also says he got out and she said she is a student and in a hurry. His drawing is of my wife at a right angle to traffic too.
This conversation never happened, she is not a student and never crossed the white lines as she joined from the right hand lane of the approaching slip road and was actually in front of him stopped for 2 minutes before he nudged her.
So what will be the course of action now? As we thought it was a clear case of him hitting the back of her, and now he is making stories up as he knows there are no witnesses.
She did take pictures of the road/ cars and damage, but as he knocked the back of the car over the lines it looks like she has cut in front of him.
What usually happens in a case like this?
What are your insurers saying?
One thing I did in circumstances a bit similar to yours (100% non fault accident) is that I refused the insurance company's idea to call it 50/50. The other party then issued a claim which I then began to defend - about 7 days before the hearing his insurer paid out 100%.
One thing I did in circumstances a bit similar to yours (100% non fault accident) is that I refused the insurance company's idea to call it 50/50. The other party then issued a claim which I then began to defend - about 7 days before the hearing his insurer paid out 100%.
Why do people get so excitable about this.
Your insurers have already allowed your NCD, so they clearly see it as non-fault. Let them deal with it, its why you pay a premium. The ABI guidance is pretty clear on this, the damage to your car will tell the story as well.
Just tell your insurers whatever they need and let them deal.
Your insurers have already allowed your NCD, so they clearly see it as non-fault. Let them deal with it, its why you pay a premium. The ABI guidance is pretty clear on this, the damage to your car will tell the story as well.
Just tell your insurers whatever they need and let them deal.
R1 Loon said:
Your insurers have already allowed your NCD, so they clearly see it as non-fault.
Errr, not necessarily. The wording of the OP merely says his vehicle was repaired without him "loosing" (sic) his NCB which might mean it was protected. If the TP's Insurers are still pursuing a claim liability is still to be decided.
Thanks for the responses,
No I dont have protected NCB. I have since renewed with another company and the old insurance sent me proof with all my NCB on.
As I said we thought it was a clear cut case, he was not paying attention and hit the back of our Celica.
Not sure if its no win no fee, its paid for by my insurance. I am wondering if its just easy claims they are after. They even phoned her to say "He is a foriegner (Irish) and the claim could take ages, do you still want to claim?"
Now the new letter from our insurance says the third party hold her fully responsible, please send photos/ witness details etc. We have no witnesses. My wife was genuinly scared at the time. She is only 4'9" and was on her own at the side of a motorway, our car was damaged and the big bloke that did it was shouting at her. i was no use as was on my way to the Falklands at the time. She wasnt sure what to do and was in shock. She called the police who were not interested, she phoneed breakdown to get the car taken home as there was no lights on one side, they refused as it was an accident and said she wasnt covered. So she had to drive it home another 200 miles.
Then her neck problems and the fact she couldnt drive/ work etc. She even had to have friends cook, take her to physio etc for the couple of weeks.
Not a pleasant experiance for her.
You can see it was a pretty big lorry.
No I dont have protected NCB. I have since renewed with another company and the old insurance sent me proof with all my NCB on.
As I said we thought it was a clear cut case, he was not paying attention and hit the back of our Celica.
Not sure if its no win no fee, its paid for by my insurance. I am wondering if its just easy claims they are after. They even phoned her to say "He is a foriegner (Irish) and the claim could take ages, do you still want to claim?"
Now the new letter from our insurance says the third party hold her fully responsible, please send photos/ witness details etc. We have no witnesses. My wife was genuinly scared at the time. She is only 4'9" and was on her own at the side of a motorway, our car was damaged and the big bloke that did it was shouting at her. i was no use as was on my way to the Falklands at the time. She wasnt sure what to do and was in shock. She called the police who were not interested, she phoneed breakdown to get the car taken home as there was no lights on one side, they refused as it was an accident and said she wasnt covered. So she had to drive it home another 200 miles.
Then her neck problems and the fact she couldnt drive/ work etc. She even had to have friends cook, take her to physio etc for the couple of weeks.
Not a pleasant experiance for her.
You can see it was a pretty big lorry.
Edited by nottyash on Tuesday 14th September 22:24
If she'd have cut him up, there'd be damage to the side of her car, not the rear. That pic looks like you said - the lorry's in her rear (oh er). The only way I can see to get that pic is if she'd cut in and then slammed on the brakes.
Just be prepared to go to court and show them.
Just be prepared to go to court and show them.
Edited by defblade on Tuesday 14th September 22:51
The damage to your car being on the back prooves that your wife was not just entering the carriagway so should not be too hard to defend. I doubt anyone outside of the court room will have enough sense to realise this though so, as said above, she should expect to attend court.
Good luck.
Good luck.
Does the picture help your case? Of course I don't know all the facts, but to my layman eyes that photo could easily show a late joining cut up, it at least suggests the car was not straight in the lane when the impact occured. Is the damage to the tail light the driver's side as well?
streaky said:
nottyash said:
... the Police ... were not interested as no one injured.
I'm surprised that the police were not interested in an RTA on a motorway, even with no injuries - StreakyThe first one I had, I'd just started to pass parked cars when a car crested the brow of the hill coming the other way. To say he was travelling was an understatement. I stopped without skidding in a meter or two, he slid the entire length of the parked cars and still hit me doing 20-30mph.
Bib turned up and stated "there's no evidence to suggest he was speeding, it'll go 50-50" despite me and the witnesses all saying he was skidding with smoke coming off his tyres and I was stationary! Oh, and after a few months of wrangling, not helped by the insurance company of the young lad who hit me repeating constantly the copper's words, it has gone 100% his fault. Thank goodness.
The 2nd accident I got T-boned by some guy in a transit who pulled straight from a junction onto the DC I was travelling along. The Police turned up and despite the blatant evidence that he drove into the side of my car, they still reported me for the consideration of blah blah. Next day the BiB phoned me and told me that he'd viewed the CCTV now and it was obvious that I'd been driven into. Well no sh
t Sherlock! Edited by Pannywagon on Wednesday 15th September 09:37
Edited by Pannywagon on Wednesday 15th September 09:38
Write down as much as you can remember, make your side of the story clear and stick to it. Pick holes in the other driver's version of events if he is making it up.
Don't leave it all to the insurers, they will need your input to counter the other insurer's claims.
Chances are, the driver of the other vehicle will lose interest and stop responding to his insurers after which point they will have nothing to go on. Use the phase "on the balance of probabilities" to show that your version of events is more likely, as that is what is decided upon in court.
Don't leave it all to the insurers, they will need your input to counter the other insurer's claims.
Chances are, the driver of the other vehicle will lose interest and stop responding to his insurers after which point they will have nothing to go on. Use the phase "on the balance of probabilities" to show that your version of events is more likely, as that is what is decided upon in court.
saaby93 said:
R1 Loon said:
It's a 100% non-fault. Leave it to the insurers to sort out.
What happens where the OP has changed insurer meantime?
The new company were not liable for anything that happened prior to the policy with them being taken out.
Beyond Rational said:
Does the picture help your case? Of course I don't know all the facts, but to my layman eyes that photo could easily show a late joining cut up, it at least suggests the car was not straight in the lane when the impact occured.
Any further photos, particularly of car offside/rear and lorry front/NSF?If the insurance works the same as in NL in this element, they don't persue foreign companies as it gets them nowhere, especially Polish etc. You don't lose NCD there either when hit by foreign cars.
Not sure if it is the same in the UK, and not sure if Ireland is seen as part of the UK as far as insurance is concerned.
Not sure if it is the same in the UK, and not sure if Ireland is seen as part of the UK as far as insurance is concerned.
Well, I guess the policy could be on a "Risks Incepting" basis, but I would hazard a good guess that it "Claims Made"
Bear in mind, the two liabilities (Damage and PI) are not linked. They *must* not be linked (altough obviously 100% non fault in one gives you a good feeling about the other), you are entirely free to persue your PI claim irrespective of the AD. Although as R1Loon says, the insurer clearly thinks this is an "Obvious non fault" as they have allowed the NCD. So they think they have a good chance of recovery.
Let your PI solicitor do the worrying about the other party being silly, they are used to it.
Bear in mind, the two liabilities (Damage and PI) are not linked. They *must* not be linked (altough obviously 100% non fault in one gives you a good feeling about the other), you are entirely free to persue your PI claim irrespective of the AD. Although as R1Loon says, the insurer clearly thinks this is an "Obvious non fault" as they have allowed the NCD. So they think they have a good chance of recovery.
Let your PI solicitor do the worrying about the other party being silly, they are used to it.
EU_Foreigner said:
If the insurance works the same as in NL in this element, they don't persue foreign companies as it gets them nowhere, especially Polish etc. You don't lose NCD there either when hit by foreign cars.
Not sure if it is the same in the UK, and not sure if Ireland is seen as part of the UK as far as insurance is concerned.
It's not. Any idea what county the driver was from or any better picks of the truck? Do you know who he was driving for OP?Not sure if it is the same in the UK, and not sure if Ireland is seen as part of the UK as far as insurance is concerned.
When i first saw the photos she took i asked if she pulled in front of him as thats what it looks like to me at first glance. She is not happy, as she said she was stopped for up to a couple of minutes in front of him.
She was over to the left of the lane,and the impact pushed the back to the left giving the impression she was pulling in front of him.
His story about her being a student and in a hurry is easy to pick holes in.
also his sketch of the scene with her car at right angles. It clearly is not in the pics.
He is trying it on as he has been a lorry driver for 30 odd years and thinks he is perfect.
If it looks like he is not paying attention it cant do his career any good.
Glad I wasnt there to be honest as with his attitude towards her at the scene I would probably of hit him and landed myself in the poo.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff