|
craig51
Original Poster
42 posts
18 months
|
Ok,
I was driving on a road westbound which has 3 lanes.
Lane 1 goes straight ahead
Lanes 2+3 turn right only.
I was on lane 2 and the 3rd party on lane 3
As we came around the corner, the 3rd party was approx level with my rear door. Once around the corner she moved from her lane into my vechile, hit my right hand side alloy and front bumper, swerved back into her lane and then came to a stop.
Luckily, she admitted full liability at the road side, and i have it all captured on my roadhawk.
The next morning (saturday)i get an estimate done at a gargae of my choice, and the damage comes to £380 approx.I called my insurance aswell and reported this giving a description over the phone. They then passed me onto my legal cover company, and they treid to contact the 3rd party to get their liability recorded but she was out.
At 1705 on saturday evening, i receive an email from my ins co (not the legal cover co) stating that based on the evidence they have they think it should be 50:50. I was annoyed by this, as they havnet even recieved the statement from the 3rd party. I called my legal cover co, and they informed me that the 3rd party did call back and admitted full liability.
So, my questions.
I am assuming my ins co have briefly looked at my case, and ignoring the fact i have it recorded and she has admitted liability (legal co has the call recorded), sent out a standard email to me?
I dont want to get my car fixed until i hear from the 3rd party ins co that they agree to my costs (£380 and courtesy car ).
I emailed my ins co stating i dispute their initial findings, included screenshots from my footage clearly showing her coming into my lane and hitting me and asked them to revisit it in my favour, aswell as taking into her admission.Being a sunday i have not heard back and probally wont until monday.
Can my insurance company, even with the above proof/admission still decide they want to settle 50:50? IMO at the time of the email, they probally hadnt heard from my legal cover co, so were not aware of the 3rd party admission.
|
|
|
k99
243 posts
37 months
|
One thing that could go against you from a liability point of view is whether they can say you were undertaking the other car from your vid?
I always try and make sure I don't get in the situation where another car moves into my lane without seeing me.
I will either pull back so i wont get hit or move forward a little so the other car can't fail but see me. Always assume the other driver hasn't seen you and will change lane without looking or indicating ;-)
|
|
|
14-7
5,714 posts
60 months
|
If it is lane marked and the other car has moved over without seeing you then they are 100% at fault in my opinion.
The problem is whether the insurance see it that way as they are only there to protect their assets not your no claims.
|
|
|
davepoth
19,939 posts
68 months
|
14-7 said: If it is lane marked and the other car has moved over without seeing you then they are 100% at fault in my opinion.
The problem is whether the insurance see it that way as they are only there to protect their assets not your no claims. With the other party admitting full liability that seems a little perverse though. Unless of course both parties insure with the same underwriter...
|
|
|
Fireblade69
474 posts
72 months
|
k99 said: One thing that could go against you from a liability point of view is whether they can say you were undertaking the other car from your vid?
I always try and make sure I don't get in the situation where another car moves into my lane without seeing me.
I will either pull back so i wont get hit or move forward a little so the other car can't fail but see me. Always assume the other driver hasn't seen you and will change lane without looking or indicating ;-) From the description, the OP was being overtaken by the TP so I don't see how it was their fault. I'd tell the insurer to take a running jump and pay up. Aso, and I'm not sure if it has bearing here, admitting liability at the scene is something that insurers require you not to do or you risk invalidating your insurance isn't it? Almost without fail that happens at roundabouts so Im always ready with a close encounter, (near enough to startle but not near enough to hit), and a large blast on the horn to wake them up when they do it.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
LoonR1
12,484 posts
46 months
|
50/50 is a standard for this type of accident where both sides deny liability. If one has been good enough to admit it was their fault then it will go 100% in your favour.
There is zero benefit for any insurance co to settle 50/50 where they have a full liability admission from the other side. I know PH likes the Urban Myth that it's otherwise but sadly for the tinfoil hat brigade it's not true.
|
|
|
mjb1
662 posts
28 months
|
LoonR1 said: 50/50 is a standard for this type of accident where both sides deny liability. If one has been good enough to admit it was their fault then it will go 100% in your favour.
There is zero benefit for any insurance co to settle 50/50 where they have a full liability admission from the other side. I know PH likes the Urban Myth that it's otherwise but sadly for the tinfoil hat brigade it's not true. Have you actually read this thread?
|
|
|
Purity14
211 posts
14 months
|
mjb1 said: Have you actually read this thread? It will go 50/50 because they always do, it wont be in the benefit for either insurance company to go to court to prove who is at fault, because it will cost more than the payout. If the third party says they aren't at fault, and the OP says he isn't at fault, then it will be 50/50. Unless you run up someones rear, just say it was there fault - EVEN IF it was all your fault, that way 50/50 will follow. But with his camera evidence it MAY change things, but it is not an absolute fact.
|
|
|
LoonR1
12,484 posts
46 months
|
mjb1 said: Have you actually read this thread? Yes thanks. I stand by my comments.
|
|
|
LoonR1
12,484 posts
46 months
|
Purity14 said: It will go 50/50 because they always do, it wont be in the benefit for either insurance company to go to court to prove who is at fault, because it will cost more than the payout.
If the third party says they aren't at fault, and the OP says he isn't at fault, then it will be 50/50.
Unless you run up someones rear, just say it was there fault - EVEN IF it was all your fault, that way 50/50 will follow.
But with his camera evidence it MAY change things, but it is not an absolute fact. No it won't. If the other side has admitted liability then it will go 100% in the OPs favour.
|
|
|
k99
243 posts
37 months
|
Can we have a look at the video please.
|
|
|
Purity14
211 posts
14 months
|
LoonR1 said: No it won't. If the other side has admitted liability then it will go 100% in the OPs favour. As stated "If the third party says they aren't at fault, and the OP says he isn't at fault, then it will be 50/50." If the third party is admitting liability, I agree it will go 100% in the OPs favour as you say. But the third party might wake up tomorrow and change her mind.
|
|
|
LoonR1
12,484 posts
46 months
|
Purity14 said: As stated "If the third party says they aren't at fault, and the OP says he isn't at fault, then it will be 50/50."
If the third party is admitting liability, I agree it will go 100% in the OPs favour as you say.
But the third party might wake up tomorrow and change her mind. I'll agree with that. Although if they already have an admission of liability to the legal side then unlikely to change her mind.
|
|
|
simoid
8,452 posts
27 months
|
k99 said: One thing that could go against you from a liability point of view is whether they can say you were undertaking the other car from your vid?
I always try and make sure I don't get in the situation where another car moves into my lane without seeing me.
I will either pull back so i wont get hit or move forward a little so the other car can't fail but see me. Always assume the other driver hasn't seen you and will change lane without looking or indicating ;-) A. Nobody died, nobody was undertaken. B. As mentioned by Fireblade, the OP was being overtaken. Hopefully the video of the OP fully in his lane when then third party drifts out of theirs isn't required 
|
|
|
k99
243 posts
37 months
|
simoid said: A. Nobody died, nobody was undertaken. B. As mentioned by Fireblade, the OP was being overtaken. Hopefully the video of the OP fully in his lane when then third party drifts out of theirs isn't required That he was not undertaking is only an assumption on Fireblades's part as the OP doesn't state this in his post. :-)
|
|
|
simoid
8,452 posts
27 months
|
craig51 said: Ok,
As we came around the corner, the 3rd party was approx level with my rear door. Once around the corner she moved from her lane into my vechile, hit my right hand side alloy and front bumper, swerved back into her lane and then came to a stop. The 3rd party goes from level with OP's rear door, then further on in time, hits his front bumper. This would suggest the 3rd party was going faster than the OP.
|
|
|
mrmr96
11,958 posts
73 months
|
craig51 said: she admitted full liability...I called my insurance Why did you call your insurer? No need to involve them at all IMO. The proper procedure (assuming honesty from her) would be she reports the claim to her insurer and gives you their phone number and a claim reference number she was provided with. You call up their insurer and then they get you to get a quote for the work and then they pay for it. Standard, simple, efficient. Why involve your insurer at all, unless she was being an arse, which it sounds like she wasn't.
|
|
|
k99
243 posts
37 months
|
simoid said: The 3rd party goes from level with OP's rear door, then further on in time, hits his front bumper. This would suggest the 3rd party was going faster than the OP. Yes you're quite right :-!
|
|
|
craig51
Original Poster
42 posts
18 months
|
Thanks all.
Firstly, yes the 3rd party was driving faster than me when she drifted into my lane.
All credit to the 3rd party, she admitted full liability, isnt playing games so nor will I.
My legal company called her but didnt get in touch with her so left a message. She called them back, admitted liability over the phone etc. My legal co have now informed my insurasnce company of said call. I am now to call my legal company when i have my car booked in, and they will provde me with my courtesy car.
|
|
