Odds of going 50/50?

[Andyjc86]

My wife was involved in a small bump today. In a carpark, she was straightening up after a poor attempt at parking. In the process of reversing, an old lady drove into her. Both cars need a new bumper, so nothing serious, but still annoying.

At the time she was about 6ft out of the space, is it worth us claiming that the lady should have given her space/time? Or take it on the chin, and teach her to park first time?

Thanks

[ferrariF50lover]

Your wife was parking and some old Doris just drove into her? How is that 50/50? Call the DVLA, have the mental old bat taken off the road.

Simon.

[Andyjc86]

Our insurance have decided that as she was reversing then it's automatically her fault. I disagree, they've told me to prove otherwise. So much for being on our side!

But yes, the old dear must have been in her 80's, and didn't look particularly mobile to say the least.

[anonymous-user]

Andyjc86 said:

Our insurance have decided that as she was reversing then it's automatically her fault. I disagree, they've told me to prove otherwise. So much for being on our side!

But yes, the old dear must have been in her 80's, and didn't look particularly mobile to say the least.

As she was reversing out of the space and moving it is a bit unfair to say that the other party drove into her, as they obviously drove into each other.

It sounds like your wife reversed into the path of the the other party so it is very likely to go against her

[Steffan]

desolate said:

Andyjc86 said:

Our insurance have decided that as she was reversing then it's automatically her fault. I disagree, they've told me to prove otherwise. So much for being on our side!

But yes, the old dear must have been in her 80's, and didn't look particularly mobile to say the least.

As she was reversing out of the space and moving it is a bit unfair to say that the other party drove into her, as they obviously drove into each other.

It sounds like your wife reversed into the path of the the other party so it is very likely to go against her

I agree. The insurance co are experienced in such matters. I think their view is probably the most practical. Your wife, sadly. reversed into the path of another vehicle. Best to forget it and move on.

[Andyjc86]

This was my first thought too, wife's fault. However certain aspects of the situation don't stack up. It would appear the elderly driver (62 plate Alto) was planning on turning into the space opposite, and had positioned her car accordingly (she was in the process of swinging in on impact). She managed to produce a 4 wheel lock up, with 12 inch skid marks from all 4 wheels.

I'm more annoyed at the fact her no claims wasn't protected, and it's renewal time in 2 weeks. 6 years NCB wasted

[anonymous-user]

Andyjc86 said:

This was my first thought too, wife's fault. However certain aspects of the situation don't stack up. It would appear the elderly driver (62 plate Alto) was planning on turning into the space opposite, and had positioned her car accordingly (she was in the process of swinging in on impact). She managed to produce a 4 wheel lock up, with 12 inch skid marks from all 4 wheels.

I'm more annoyed at the fact her no claims wasn't protected, and it's renewal time in 2 weeks. 6 years NCB wasted

You will only lose a couple of years bonus.

[Efbe]

Andyjc86 said:

This was my first thought too, wife's fault. However certain aspects of the situation don't stack up. It would appear the elderly driver (62 plate Alto) was planning on turning into the space opposite, and had positioned her car accordingly (she was in the process of swinging in on impact). She managed to produce a 4 wheel lock up, with 12 inch skid marks from all 4 wheels.

I'm more annoyed at the fact her no claims wasn't protected, and it's renewal time in 2 weeks. 6 years NCB wasted

don't think it works like that

[Andyjc86]

I've no idea how it works, I'm (unlike her) a driving god, so would never crash! I am genuinely new to all this. I wont bother fighting it.

The excess is only £250, for that we're getting:
Both cars repaired, 2 hire cars and £403 worth of car seats (insurance said they have to be replaced). Bargain

[ging84]

you normally won't lose a full 6 year no claims, they'll reduce it probably by about 2-3 year

[ferrariF50lover]

Andyjc86 said:

Our insurance have decided that as she was reversing then it's automatically her fault. I disagree, they've told me to prove otherwise. So much for being on our side!

But yes, the old dear must have been in her 80's, and didn't look particularly mobile to say the least.

So, I just happen to be straightening up the Jag after parallel parking when an untaxed, untested, stolen car driven dangerously by an uninsured, unlicensed, drunk, stoned driver piles into me at 176mph and it's my fault because I happen to have been in reverse? I don't think so, sonny Jim.

Surely the reversing needs to be materially relevant to the incident? Would little old Doris have acted any differently had your wife been in a different gear? No, of course she wouldn't. It's entirely immaterial what gear your wife happened to have been in. All that matters is that Doris punted her motor into yours and there was sod all your wife could reasonably have done about it. No, it won't cost you much, but that's not really the point. If I break into your house and steal your TV, it won't really cost you much to replace it, but it's still bloody wrong of me to nick your st.

If this is all insurance companies are going to do, we might as well get rid of the idea of premiums and what not and just all chuck £250/year into a big pot and all drivers who crash just get their cars repaired with money from the fund with a automatic £250 excess.

Simon.

[Strangely Brown]

Andyjc86 said:

This was my first thought too, wife's fault. However certain aspects of the situation don't stack up. It would appear the elderly driver (62 plate Alto) was planning on turning into the space opposite, and had positioned her car accordingly (she was in the process of swinging in on impact). She managed to produce a 4 wheel lock up, with 12 inch skid marks from all 4 wheels.

You're right. That doesn't stack up. But not in the way that you'd like.

I simply don't believe an old lady in a car fitted with ABS could produce 12" skid marks from all four wheels whilst turning into a space. Got any photographic evidence?

It sounds to me more like your wife reversed out of a space with limited visibility and didn't see the other car. I would think it will go 50/50 at best and against you at worst.

[Andyjc86]

I couldn't believe it too, here's the snaps I took.

Visibility (wife is meriva)



Both bumps





Skid marks, I may go and get a better photo if it's worth me appealing



Like I said, we are taking the blame , but if it's worth fighting then I will

[hadenough!]

If.the old lady had to brake hard enough that she skidded it would suggest your wife revered in front of her? I can't see you doing better than 50/50.

[Andyjc86]

50/50 is what I'm hoping for, at the minute it's 100 us

[RegMolehusband]

A few years ago my ex-wife reversed out of parking space in the supermarket, stopped, and engaged first gear. Then someday reversed into the back of her. That was 50/50 apparently, so in my experience insurance companies don't think too hard about these things.

[AndyNetwork]

I would also suggest to the insurance company that if the old dear stamped on the brakes and was able to skid 12" then perhaps she was travelling too fast to stop in the space she could see to be clear, and certainly too fast for in a car park.

[herewego]

Would there be a financial benefit from getting 50:50?

[Strangely Brown]

Andyjc86 said:

I couldn't believe it too, here's the snaps I took.

Well bugger I down dead! That does surprise me and I stand corrected.

With your wife reversing out of a space I still can't see it going any better than 50/50 though. Good to see that you are taking the pragmatic view.

At the risk of raising an old chestnut, this, ladies and gentlemen, is why we reverse in and drive out unless there is a very good reason not to.

Edited by Strangely Brown on Tuesday 17th June 11:15

[TwigtheWonderkid]

When you're reversing the onus to avoid any collision is 100% on you.