Insurance Woes - Feeling let down
Discussion
Hi all,
A little bit of background about a recent Collision I had.
I was returning home from my brothers one night when I was clipped as I was going round a roundabout. It is a 2 lane roundabout and I was in the right hand lane as I was going straight, which on this particular roundabout it allowed. They had entered the roundabout from the next entrance (one after myself). As I was coming off my exit, they had clipped the rear passenger wheel arch as they, I presume, was going straight.
When I was clipped the other driver had driven off, I saw the direction at which they were travelling so caught up with them to get their details. At the time I was very calm and had given them the benefit that they may have been in shock and their reaction was to drive off. When I was getting their insurance details I realised that there was a strong smell of alcohol emitting from their breath and they were slurring their words and stumbling. I enquired to see if they had been drinking, which was first met with denial then admittance. At this moment I informed them that due to them having had alcohol I must phone the police. As I was phoning the police the driver had entered their car and driven off. I decided that pursuing them would be more dangerous, and just continued my call with the authorities.
Unfortunately, a couple of days later, I got a call from the police notifying me that they had not caught them on the night.
No worries I thought, I'll just let insurance do the job, that's what I pay them for. Insurance company were very much agreeing that regardless of them being drunk or not, they were in the wrong. They then passed me to a accident claim company to sort it out.
I just got a phone call from the Accident Claim company informing me that the other party has denied liability, and suggested that I had caused the accident by switching lanes on the roundabout. First off, I do not remember switching lanes at all. The only point where I would have been making any corrective measures was when I realised she had pulled out, then maybe I would have made a slight adjustment to try and avoid (which never happened). They have also suggested that other than the front end damage (which is where their vehicle collided with my rear passenger side), there is also rear end damage caused by myself. I have stressed to the Accident Claims company that I only suffered the rear passenger side damage, and that I had no other contact with the other vehicle.
Now the Accident Claims company has suggested that because there is no independent witnesses, it would likely go 50/50, and they are contemplating on passing me back to my own insurers to deal with that.
From what I understand though, regardless of her versions of events, the damage to my vehicle can only be caused by her front contacting my rear. Furthermore, even if I did change lanes on the roundabout, I was already on the roundabout before she entered, therefore had right of way.
From the pistonheads experience, my question now is, should this go back to my insurance company then how likely is it going to go to 50/50 and are there any course of actions which I can take to escalate this?
A little bit of background about a recent Collision I had.
I was returning home from my brothers one night when I was clipped as I was going round a roundabout. It is a 2 lane roundabout and I was in the right hand lane as I was going straight, which on this particular roundabout it allowed. They had entered the roundabout from the next entrance (one after myself). As I was coming off my exit, they had clipped the rear passenger wheel arch as they, I presume, was going straight.
When I was clipped the other driver had driven off, I saw the direction at which they were travelling so caught up with them to get their details. At the time I was very calm and had given them the benefit that they may have been in shock and their reaction was to drive off. When I was getting their insurance details I realised that there was a strong smell of alcohol emitting from their breath and they were slurring their words and stumbling. I enquired to see if they had been drinking, which was first met with denial then admittance. At this moment I informed them that due to them having had alcohol I must phone the police. As I was phoning the police the driver had entered their car and driven off. I decided that pursuing them would be more dangerous, and just continued my call with the authorities.
Unfortunately, a couple of days later, I got a call from the police notifying me that they had not caught them on the night.
No worries I thought, I'll just let insurance do the job, that's what I pay them for. Insurance company were very much agreeing that regardless of them being drunk or not, they were in the wrong. They then passed me to a accident claim company to sort it out.
I just got a phone call from the Accident Claim company informing me that the other party has denied liability, and suggested that I had caused the accident by switching lanes on the roundabout. First off, I do not remember switching lanes at all. The only point where I would have been making any corrective measures was when I realised she had pulled out, then maybe I would have made a slight adjustment to try and avoid (which never happened). They have also suggested that other than the front end damage (which is where their vehicle collided with my rear passenger side), there is also rear end damage caused by myself. I have stressed to the Accident Claims company that I only suffered the rear passenger side damage, and that I had no other contact with the other vehicle.
Now the Accident Claims company has suggested that because there is no independent witnesses, it would likely go 50/50, and they are contemplating on passing me back to my own insurers to deal with that.
From what I understand though, regardless of her versions of events, the damage to my vehicle can only be caused by her front contacting my rear. Furthermore, even if I did change lanes on the roundabout, I was already on the roundabout before she entered, therefore had right of way.
From the pistonheads experience, my question now is, should this go back to my insurance company then how likely is it going to go to 50/50 and are there any course of actions which I can take to escalate this?
Take a step back, and lose the personal involvement for a minute.
A very minor bingle on a two-lane roundabout, with one car nudging the rear arch of the other car.
No witnesses.
Driver A says driver B pulled out into them.
Driver B says driver A changed lanes into them.
Driver A says driver B smelt of alcohol. Driver B (presumably) denies that, and there was no police report anyway, apart from a record of a phone call making the claim.
And... that's it. 100% of everything that there actually is.
You can see why 50/50 is being talked about, right...?
A very minor bingle on a two-lane roundabout, with one car nudging the rear arch of the other car.
No witnesses.
Driver A says driver B pulled out into them.
Driver B says driver A changed lanes into them.
Driver A says driver B smelt of alcohol. Driver B (presumably) denies that, and there was no police report anyway, apart from a record of a phone call making the claim.
And... that's it. 100% of everything that there actually is.
You can see why 50/50 is being talked about, right...?
TooMany2cvs said:
Take a step back, and lose the personal involvement for a minute.
A very minor bingle on a two-lane roundabout, with one car nudging the rear arch of the other car.
No witnesses.
Driver A says driver B pulled out into them.
Driver B says driver A changed lanes into them.
Driver A says driver B smelt of alcohol. Driver B (presumably) denies that, and there was no police report anyway, apart from a record of a phone call making the claim.
And... that's it. 100% of everything that there actually is.
You can see why 50/50 is being talked about, right...?
I completely understand as to why they would content is my word vs theirs.A very minor bingle on a two-lane roundabout, with one car nudging the rear arch of the other car.
No witnesses.
Driver A says driver B pulled out into them.
Driver B says driver A changed lanes into them.
Driver A says driver B smelt of alcohol. Driver B (presumably) denies that, and there was no police report anyway, apart from a record of a phone call making the claim.
And... that's it. 100% of everything that there actually is.
You can see why 50/50 is being talked about, right...?
But the damage to both vehicles don't seem to be consistent with their versions of events then? The only damage during the time was their front end on their Vehicle.
We had entered the roundabout from different entrances. I had right of way during this time. I was already navigating the roundabout when they had attempted to go straight on.
I fully understand that in some logical way, 50/50 would be the case here. But again, the areas of damage to both vehicles and the highway code should dictate that
Here is a sketch of the incident using google view.
If this does go 50/50 I will feel completely let down by the insurance company.
As I don't know either of you from a dog in the street, I fail to see why the damage could not just as easily been caused by you switching lanes into their path rather than them hitting your rear wheel arch.
If this goes to court it'll be settled 50/50 all day long. Your insurers are doing the right thing settling it 50/50 now. Saving everyone time and money.
If this goes to court it'll be settled 50/50 all day long. Your insurers are doing the right thing settling it 50/50 now. Saving everyone time and money.
Jayho said:
But the damage to both vehicles don't seem to be consistent with their versions of events then?
Yes, it does.I can see two scenarios:
- Two-lane exit from the r'a'b, they were going for L1, and assumed you were going for L2, only for you to then change into L1 - which they happened to be occupying.
- They say you were indicating right, and assumed you were continuing round the r'a'b, only for you to then chop across them for that exit.
FWIW, if you were coming from the 8o'c entrance onto that r'a'b, and heading for the 1o'c exit, while L2 at the entrance may well be signed as appropriate, I'd have been indicating left from the 11o'c entrance, and aiming to move into L1 at about that entrance. You also had PLENTY of time to see that there was somebody joined at that entrance and on your inside.
Looking at that map, I'd say 50/50 was absolutely fair.
Edited by TooMany2cvs on Wednesday 4th May 15:00
But surely, regardless of if I had switched lanes or not, I had complete right of way as I was already on the roundabout and she was joining?
If this goes 50/50 I will feel incredibly let down by the law and the insurance companies. I know that they will be trying to minimize financial costs and time. But this will only minimize their costs at the cost of me financially.
What's worse is that if she had been the innocent party in this, surely she wouldn't have driven off from the accident.
But the general consensus on this forum seems to be that it will go 50/50, so I better prepare for such a call from the Insurance Co.
If this goes 50/50 I will feel incredibly let down by the law and the insurance companies. I know that they will be trying to minimize financial costs and time. But this will only minimize their costs at the cost of me financially.
What's worse is that if she had been the innocent party in this, surely she wouldn't have driven off from the accident.
But the general consensus on this forum seems to be that it will go 50/50, so I better prepare for such a call from the Insurance Co.
Jayho said:
It is a 2 lane roundabout and I was in the right hand lane as I was going straight, which on this particular roundabout it allowed.
I can't see if there's lane markings on that roundabout (I've had a look on Google Earth) but it's always risky turning off roundabouts from the RH lane as you're cutting across the LH lane. If I was me in the LH lane I'd say it was your fault as you changed lanes when it wasn't safe to do so.If you don't want to crash or be crashed into you've got to drive around roundabouts ultra-cautiously and keep a clear safety bubble around you. You saw the other vehicle join - you should have anticipated they might go straight on. Instead you just let them crash into you.
The other way of handling roundabouts is to drive very forcefully and faster than everyone else. But that has its own risks.
I'd be most annoyed that the Police didn't manage to catch up with the other driver, although there's no certainty that would help.
The other driver claiming for damage that can't have happened in the accident may give some cause for hope.
Hold on a second OP. You aren't dealing with your insurers, they have fobbed you off onto a completely unrelated third party to handle your non-fault claim (so they don't have the hassle of doing it themselves)
The third party company have thought "hang on a second, this isn't cut and dry" so they understandably don't want to touch it. It is not remotely in their interests to fight this case as they only really make any money on total non-fault claims (if it goes 50/50 then who will be paying for their expensive hire car? No one will.)
Go back to your insurers and demand that they handle the claim themselves. They obviously thought it's not your fault in the beginning so hopefully they will be more helpful than the Accident Management company.
The third party company have thought "hang on a second, this isn't cut and dry" so they understandably don't want to touch it. It is not remotely in their interests to fight this case as they only really make any money on total non-fault claims (if it goes 50/50 then who will be paying for their expensive hire car? No one will.)
Go back to your insurers and demand that they handle the claim themselves. They obviously thought it's not your fault in the beginning so hopefully they will be more helpful than the Accident Management company.
This has happened twice to me over the years, it will go 50/50.
One of mine did even with a police report indicating what had happened.
Moral of the story for me, always expect this to happen at roundabouts. I've lost count of the times i've been side by side with someone at a roundabout and slowed right down only to see the left hand lane take the roundabout as if they were aiming for the apex on a racetrack. I'd probably go as far as saying i see it happen at least once a day.
One of mine did even with a police report indicating what had happened.
Moral of the story for me, always expect this to happen at roundabouts. I've lost count of the times i've been side by side with someone at a roundabout and slowed right down only to see the left hand lane take the roundabout as if they were aiming for the apex on a racetrack. I'd probably go as far as saying i see it happen at least once a day.
I fully appreciate all the replies so far.
I do understand that many have indicated that there is a very high chance of it going 50/50.
In terms of me having being able to avoid this collision. Playing back in my mind, I really doubt I could have done any different other than being on the left hand lane from the start and having her hit me earlier.
I will be in touch with my own insurance company very soon and hopefully they'll be more helpful.
In all honesty, as soon as I realised she was drunk, the damage to my car became less relevant to me at the time. The last thing I wanted was for her to continue driving that night and possibly causing more damage.
I do understand that many have indicated that there is a very high chance of it going 50/50.
In terms of me having being able to avoid this collision. Playing back in my mind, I really doubt I could have done any different other than being on the left hand lane from the start and having her hit me earlier.
I will be in touch with my own insurance company very soon and hopefully they'll be more helpful.
In all honesty, as soon as I realised she was drunk, the damage to my car became less relevant to me at the time. The last thing I wanted was for her to continue driving that night and possibly causing more damage.
Could you not have citezens arrested the drunk man?
haha.
http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/civil_rights/c...
As for your insurance issue, I would fight it personally. Don't let them get away with it, scumbags. A video / photo of the evenings fun would have helped as well probably. I would always take photos all around the car to show the damage.
haha.
http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/civil_rights/c...
As for your insurance issue, I would fight it personally. Don't let them get away with it, scumbags. A video / photo of the evenings fun would have helped as well probably. I would always take photos all around the car to show the damage.
xjay1337 said:
Could you not have citezens arrested the drunk man?
haha.
http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/civil_rights/c...
As for your insurance issue, I would fight it personally. Don't let them get away with it, scumbags. A video / photo of the evenings fun would have helped as well probably. I would always take photos all around the car to show the damage.
I was advised by the officer handling the case that because they never caught her on the night that they couldn't do her for drunk driving. As there would be no breath or blood samples. So again, like this incident, my word vs hers.haha.
http://findlaw.co.uk/law/government/civil_rights/c...
As for your insurance issue, I would fight it personally. Don't let them get away with it, scumbags. A video / photo of the evenings fun would have helped as well probably. I would always take photos all around the car to show the damage.
Unfortunately I have no dash cam. Don't often find myself in instances where there's a collision or a potential for collision. I've had someone ram into the back of me a couple of years ago, but that was dealt with swiftly and easily.
I'll just let my insurance company take over the case from the Accident Management company and hopefully they'll be willing to fight it.
Just out of curiosity. If this does go 50/50 in the end, and I wish to not have my car repaired by the insurance company but repaired by myself, will I still have to pay my excess?
I am going to play the bad man here and blame you (op) 100%. You were in the right hand lane going straight ahead, therefore leaving an empty lane on your left. It is then up to you to make sure it is safe to exit the roundabout by checking your nearside for cars that may be in the left lane. It seems that you didn't do this, you assumed that as it was 'your right of way', nobody would be there. On this occasion there was. You clipped their front end when you turned across in front of them.
Using your mirrors instead of assumption would have saved the day
Using your mirrors instead of assumption would have saved the day
TOPTON said:
I am going to play the bad man here and blame you (op) 100%. You were in the right hand lane going straight ahead, therefore leaving an empty lane on your left. It is then up to you to make sure it is safe to exit the roundabout by checking your nearside for cars that may be in the left lane. It seems that you didn't do this, you assumed that as it was 'your right of way', nobody would be there. On this occasion there was. You clipped their front end when you turned across in front of them.
Using your mirrors instead of assumption would have saved the day
From reading it, the third party hit his rear 3/4 ... ? Using your mirrors instead of assumption would have saved the day
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff