Accident Advice - Solicitors/Court

[Greengecko]

Will try and keep this as brief as possible.

Late last year, the girlfriend was parking up in a Park & Ride car park. It is laid out in a such a way as you can effective drive round the edge of the car park (like a ring) with bays going across the middle. As such she drove round the edge of this ring to where she normally parks, she has right of way as the ring acts as the major road with the rows of bays effective being the minor road. As she was driving round a car came out of one minor roads with the bays in and T-Boned the side of her car.

The damage starts at approximately the passenger door handle and ends just before the rear bumper. Her car was pushed maybe about a foot, the other car she estimates was travelling at about 20mph. She hit her head and shoulder on the window causing some quite bad bruising unfortunately.

The driver of the other car immediately reversed her car, admitted it was her fault. An elderly couple came over to see if they were ok, however she didn't get the details of these two unfortunately. They exchanged insurance details, before the other drive then drove the wrong way round the one way bit of the car park to find a space. All of this happened very quickly according to her, and she was quite shaken up by it all.

Now since then a lot of developments have taken place and a court date should be set within the next few weeks.

Firstly the other drive mananged to obtain a witness, who accussed my girlfriend of speeding. This isn't true, the car who hit her entered behind her. This actually turned out to be a friend of the other drive, who effectively lied for her. We had to go through the hassle of proving they knew each other etc, and it is now accepted that this was fabricated by both solicitors.

Secondly, her solicitors are saying that if a 50/50 gets offered they need to seriously consider accepting it. I am simply lost for words, in my eyes this is extremely clear cut, especially from the damage. The other insurers are actually saying it's her fault for not 'swerving to avoid a collision' or 'swerving into the defendants car'.

The other drivers car has been repaired (assuming she paid the excess), whereas the girlfriends car hasn't (she point blank refused to pay her excess), it's still driveable, but is a bit of hassle trying to close either of the passenger doors.

She does have legal cover also if that's of any help. We ideally need some advice on how to reply/what to say to her solicitors, for them to under no circumstances to accept 50/50. It's honestly rediculous that it's been allowed to get this far.

Many Thanks for any help.

[nipsips]

I'm presuming that the claim has been passed over to solicitors because your insurers couldn't reach an agreement with the other side.

The problem you have is that its your word against hers. The witness statement saying your girlfriend was travelling to fast is hogwash anyway, speed cannot be proven and can only really be judged to be "too fast" by a police officer. Regardless of this, the damage is in your favour, and the circumstances provided by you match this damage. Do you know what the third party is alleging you did?

Bear in mind that if you do get 50/50 offered, its a lot less stressful, you get half your excess reimbursed and 50% of any injury paid.

[SLCZ3]

Greengecko said:

Will try and keep this as brief as possible.

Late last year, the girlfriend was parking up in a Park & Ride car park. It is laid out in a such a way as you can effective drive round the edge of the car park (like a ring) with bays going across the middle. As such she drove round the edge of this ring to where she normally parks, she has right of way as the ring acts as the major road with the rows of bays effective being the minor road. As she was driving round a car came out of one minor roads with the bays in and T-Boned the side of her car.

The damage starts at approximately the passenger door handle and ends just before the rear bumper. Her car was pushed maybe about a foot, the other car she estimates was travelling at about 20mph. She hit her head and shoulder on the window causing some quite bad bruising unfortunately.

The driver of the other car immediately reversed her car, admitted it was her fault. An elderly couple came over to see if they were ok, however she didn't get the details of these two unfortunately. They exchanged insurance details, before the other drive then drove the wrong way round the one way bit of the car park to find a space. All of this happened very quickly according to her, and she was quite shaken up by it all.

Now since then a lot of developments have taken place and a court date should be set within the next few weeks.

Firstly the other drive mananged to obtain a witness, who accussed my girlfriend of speeding. This isn't true, the car who hit her entered behind her. This actually turned out to be a friend of the other drive, who effectively lied for her. We had to go through the hassle of proving they knew each other etc, and it is now accepted that this was fabricated by both solicitors.

Secondly, her solicitors are saying that if a 50/50 gets offered they need to seriously consider accepting it. I am simply lost for words, in my eyes this is extremely clear cut, especially from the damage. The other insurers are actually saying it's her fault for not 'swerving to avoid a collision' or 'swerving into the defendants car'.

The other drivers car has been repaired (assuming she paid the excess), whereas the girlfriends car hasn't (she point blank refused to pay her excess), it's still driveable, but is a bit of hassle trying to close either of the passenger doors.

She does have legal cover also if that's of any help. We ideally need some advice on how to reply/what to say to her solicitors, for them to under no circumstances to accept 50/50. It's honestly rediculous that it's been allowed to get this far.

Many Thanks for any help.

Ok a couple of questions first, why are the solicitors involved, what involvement have the insurance companies had so far, was the accident reported to the police, and who is doing what to who in court.
Just to add, these things do tend to shake up the Ladies more than the fellas I find, it would have been to her great advantage if your girlie had thought to photograph the scene of the carnage, I mean come on she must have been texting etc-(stock PH statement)
A sketch of the before and actual vehicle positioning can go a long way in this sort of situation, in addition the agreement that the other person was lying ref the "witness" could be a game changer, also how can she be cited for not swerving and for swerving in the same breath, they should be saying "for swerving into" where as, "not swerving" to avoid in the situation stated would indicate that the girlfriend had no chance of swerving due to the unexpected/surprising arrival of the other vehicle from the incorrect direction as indicated by arrows/ road layout etc.
Hopefully with more info the massed cerebral power and amassed eons of experience of PH will be able to save the day.

[Greengecko]

SLCZ3 said:

Ok a couple of questions first, why are the solicitors involved, what involvement have the insurance companies had so far, was the accident reported to the police, and who is doing what to who in court.
Just to add, these things do tend to shake up the Ladies more than the fellas I find, it would have been to her great advantage if your girlie had thought to photograph the scene of the carnage, I mean come on she must have been texting etc-(stock PH statement)
A sketch of the before and actual vehicle positioning can go a long way in this sort of situation, in addition the agreement that the other person was lying ref the "witness" could be a game changer, also how can she be cited for not swerving and for swerving in the same breath, they should be saying "for swerving into" where as, "not swerving" to avoid in the situation stated would indicate that the girlfriend had no chance of swerving due to the unexpected/surprising arrival of the other vehicle from the incorrect direction as indicated by arrows/ road layout etc.
Hopefully with more info the massed cerebral power and amassed eons of experience of PH will be able to save the day.

Sure, am happy to answer all this.

- Solicitors are involved because I believe the other party accused the girlfriend of being entirely at fault, her insurance agreed with her (still confused as to how, possibly because of the 'pretend' witness statement).
- It's all gone through her insurance, a big orange supermarket (naming rules!).
- Accident wasn't reported to the police, CCTV was avaliable, however by the time she or her insurance requested it, it had disappeared.
- Photos were taken at the scene by the girlfriend. However the other drive immediately reversed her car after the incident.
- Just read the witness statement 'Green car came round the corner too quickly and on the wrong side of the road'. This is from the made up witness, who states she was reversing in a friends car and on the bus at the same time
- This is the image we have already given to solicitors / insurance company:


In additional it wasn't the other solicitors saying she was negligent for both swerving into or not swerving. They simply listed 6 points on which they think she 'could' have been negligent. Two of them were as above either 'not swerving to avoid an incident' or 'swerving into'. Impossible as there is no frontal damage to our car.

Edited by Greengecko on Friday 5th December 15:27

[PurpleMoonlight]

The fact that the other party failed to stop at the give way lines is a slam dunk in my view.

I'm confused who is the applicant and who is the defendant in the court claim though.

[Greengecko]

PurpleMoonlight said:

The fact that the other party failed to stop at the give way lines is a slam dunk in my view.

I'm confused who is the applicant and who is the defendant in the court claim though.

Indeed, apologies I may have got them mixed up. Our solicitors have started proceedings against them, but have stated we should take serious consideration in accepting a 50/50 offer.

I'm still at a loss to think of a reason why the other parties insurance is fighting this so hard.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Greengecko said:

Indeed, apologies I may have got them mixed up. Our solicitors have started proceedings against them, but have stated we should take serious consideration in accepting a 50/50 offer.

Ta.

If it were me I would not be accepting 50:50.

The other parties solicitor is just trying to scare her by suggesting she could be negligent by not getting out of the way. She was hit in the side and therefore by definition would have had very little time to react.

[JustinP1]

Greengecko said:

Our solicitors have started proceedings against them, but have stated we should take serious consideration in accepting a 50/50 offer.

I'm still at a loss to think of a reason why the other parties insurance is fighting this so hard.

Your question is answered by your first sentence.

It's a game of poker.

[aw51 121565]

PurpleMoonlight said:

If it were me I would not be accepting 50:50.

It's the TP's insurers' decision and not the TP's decision - the TP can shout and rant all they want that they are not in any way to blame until they sweat blood and die, sadly, but if the insurers decide 50/50 then that's probably 'it'.

Going 50/50 is a LOT cheaper than litigation in this matter. As any insurers' duty is to minimise their costs, my utterly cynical random number generator indicates 50/50 in this case . I'm happy to be shown to be wrong in my cynicism when the dust settles, though .

With hindsight, photographs taken at the scene would have been helpful; but the muck's just hit the fan, it's stressful and these things unfortunately get overlooked in the heat of the moment .

[PurpleMoonlight]

aw51 121565 said:

It's the TP's insurers' decision and not the TP's decision - the TP can shout and rant all they want that they are not in any way to blame until they sweat blood and die, sadly, but if the insurers decide 50/50 then that's probably 'it'.

Going 50/50 is a LOT cheaper than litigation in this matter. As any insurers' duty is to minimise their costs, my utterly cynical random number generator indicates 50/50 in this case . I'm happy to be shown to be wrong in my cynicism when the dust settles, though .

With hindsight, photographs taken at the scene would have been helpful; but the muck's just hit the fan, it's stressful and these things unfortunately get overlooked in the heat of the moment .

I guess you missed the bit where the OP girlfriend is not claiming on their own insurer and is claiming direct against the TP's insurer. The TP's insurer cannot force the OP's girlfriend to accept 50:50.

[Greengecko]

Ok so here's what the defence says:

'The defendant's insured will say that they were proceeding correctly in her lane of traffic, when the Claimant strayed onto her side of the road causing a collision.'

'The collision was caused and / or contributed to by the negligence of the Claimant'.

[PurpleMoonlight]

Lying sts.

Was there a car parked in the end space by the junction? Do the pics show this?

If so, and what they say happened, your girlfriend would more than likely have hit that too.

[SLCZ3]

Greengecko said:

Ok so here's what the defence says:

'The defendant's insured will say that they were proceeding correctly in her lane of traffic, when the Claimant strayed onto her side of the road causing a collision.'

'The collision was caused and / or contributed to by the negligence of the Claimant'.

Sounds very weak that, if that was the case shirley your GF should have damage to the front and offside of her car.

[allergictocheese]

aw51 121565 said:

Going 50/50 is a LOT cheaper than litigation in this matter.

Not necessarily. Solicitors acting for large insurers (even assuming they're not part of the same organisation, as an ABS) will often process minor bumps for free in order to get access to the juicy stuff. Junior barristers can appear in small claims at a low, flat rate for the same reasons. If it's going to cost little more than £250 to fight off a claim for £2k-£3k then it might be viewed as worth doing so.

[Sheepshanks]

Greengecko said:

The other drivers car has been repaired (assuming she paid the excess), whereas the girlfriends car hasn't (she point blank refused to pay her excess), it's still driveable, but is a bit of hassle trying to close either of the passenger doors.

What's the extent of the damage - is any paint broken?

Can't believe she's left it unrepaired for a year.


I'm baffled by people's attitude with stuff like this. You pay for fully comp insurance - surely the whole point of which is that if/when st happens you claim on your insurance and they sort it out. OK, it might cost a bit, but what's the cost of year plus of hassle and driving a broken car?

[KungFuPanda]

Why is the Defence pleaded as "The defendant's insured"? Is the insurance company itself named as the defendant? Sounds like bad drafting to me.

[Greengecko]

KungFuPanda said:

Why is the Defence pleaded as "The defendant's insured"? Is the insurance company itself named as the defendant? Sounds like bad drafting to me.

Yes the insurance company is named as the defendant.

[Greengecko]

Sheepshanks said:

What's the extent of the damage - is any paint broken?

Can't believe she's left it unrepaired for a year.


I'm baffled by people's attitude with stuff like this. You pay for fully comp insurance - surely the whole point of which is that if/when st happens you claim on your insurance and they sort it out. OK, it might cost a bit, but what's the cost of year plus of hassle and driving a broken car?

Yes, there is damage to both doors, paint is scuffed and they're pushed slightly in.

Honestly though the car is only worth about £500 or so, and is just being run into the ground so to speak. The excess is £300, so to it's not really worth paying the excess, when it will just be wrote off and we'll buy it back - until it dies and then scrap it.

If it was a car worth something then of course we would have done the above.

[pork911]

PurpleMoonlight said:

The fact that the other party failed to stop at the give way lines is a slam dunk in my view.

That is yet to be established and based on the following the other driver would appear to be suggesting she hadn’t yet reached let alone crossed the give way –

Greengecko said:

Ok so here's what the defence says:
'The defendant's insured will say that they were proceeding correctly in her lane of traffic, when the Claimant strayed onto her side of the road causing a collision.'
'The collision was caused and / or contributed to by the negligence of the Claimant'.

Looks like other driver is saying OP’s partner turned left into that row and took it wide. Imagine she will say her car remained where it was while OP’s partner moved her car before the pictures were taken. Op, this stuff you said about your partner not swerving or whatever what’s the exact wording on that?

OP what is your partner’s claim – injury (surprised you’ve not been slated for that – PH hates compo culture don’t you know), circa £500 car write off with no hire, what else?

You say both Solicitors accept the witness was a fabrication – really? Or they just aren’t relying on her anymore?

Your partner should merely reiterate what she believes about the circumstances and that she is not at all willing to accept 50/50 – they will advise her accordingly.

[Greengecko]

pork911 said:

Looks like other driver is saying OP’s partner turned left into that row and took it wide. Imagine she will say her car remained where it was while OP’s partner moved her car before the pictures were taken. Op, this stuff you said about your partner not swerving or whatever what’s the exact wording on that?

OP what is your partner’s claim – injury (surprised you’ve not been slated for that – PH hates compo culture don’t you know), circa £500 car write off with no hire, what else?

You say both Solicitors accept the witness was a fabrication – really? Or they just aren’t relying on her anymore?

Your partner should merely reiterate what she believes about the circumstances and that she is not at all willing to accept 50/50 – they will advise her accordingly.

That would be impossible. I assume you're saying the other insurance will say: My girlfriend swerved into the minor road and attempted to enter one of the bays? As they car park bays were full, also to suggest my girlfriend then reversed back onto a major road, before moving forward and then getting out to take photos is simply absurd.

There are simply 6 points listed, of where they believe she could have been negligent. These are all very generic, the swerving one:
- Failed to stop, slow down, steer or otherwise control their vehicle so as to avoid a collision with the Defendants insured's vehicle.

The other party is claiming fully against my partner, including personal injury and around £2,500 repair costs. The only things we are claiming for is the damage to our car and the exact physio costs (no claim for personal injury as such). Regardless of PH point view, the majority of people here would've submitted a personal injury claim, which we have not done.

The witness statement is no longer being used by the Defendants solicitor.