Fighting a potential 50:50 insurance claim
Discussion
I’m interested in the collective legal opinions on fighting what I expect may turn into a 50:50 insurance claim.
Basic info: Yesterday morning my girlfriend was negotiating a large roundabout, in the inside lane, intending to take exit 3. She was indicating appropriately. At the same time an elderly lady entered the roundabout from the same entry point in the outside lane, heading for exit 2. In the process she wandered into the inside lane and took out the nearside front of my girlfriend’s car with the offside rear of hers.
My g/f thinks the nose of her car was about level with the driver’s door when she started to close the gap, and despite braking and sounding her horn she couldn’t get out of the way quickly enough to avoid the inevitable.
Exit 2 on this roundabout is approximately at the 2 o’clock position, and I have to say I have lost count how many times I’ve seen people cut across to the inside lane when going in that direction, it’s the obvious “racing line”. Thankfully not many people are stupid enough to do it while there is another car beside them.
The third party was very indignant to her and when told that she had cut her up and hit her, her husband replied “absolute bollox” and the old dear driving claimed my girlfriend “was speeding”.
There are unfortunately no witnesses. I suspect the insurance companies will end up settling this 50:50 as it’ll be too much bother for them to argue. But, we would strongly disagree with this, as the old dear was patently at fault. I attended the scene a few minutes later (we live close) and took photos of both cars, the roundabout from several angles etc.
For a start, if she claims my girlfriend was speeding, then she must have seen her. If she saw her, why did she still drive into her? Duh.
Anyway, if the insurance comes back and says its going to settle 50:50 – can we refuse to accept this decision and make them fight it?
Excess is £600 – repairs to g/f car probably not much more than that (mostly cosmetic to front bumper). Other car costs likely to be less. NCB is protected.
Any other considerations or words of advice much appreciated.
Basic info: Yesterday morning my girlfriend was negotiating a large roundabout, in the inside lane, intending to take exit 3. She was indicating appropriately. At the same time an elderly lady entered the roundabout from the same entry point in the outside lane, heading for exit 2. In the process she wandered into the inside lane and took out the nearside front of my girlfriend’s car with the offside rear of hers.
My g/f thinks the nose of her car was about level with the driver’s door when she started to close the gap, and despite braking and sounding her horn she couldn’t get out of the way quickly enough to avoid the inevitable.
Exit 2 on this roundabout is approximately at the 2 o’clock position, and I have to say I have lost count how many times I’ve seen people cut across to the inside lane when going in that direction, it’s the obvious “racing line”. Thankfully not many people are stupid enough to do it while there is another car beside them.
The third party was very indignant to her and when told that she had cut her up and hit her, her husband replied “absolute bollox” and the old dear driving claimed my girlfriend “was speeding”.
There are unfortunately no witnesses. I suspect the insurance companies will end up settling this 50:50 as it’ll be too much bother for them to argue. But, we would strongly disagree with this, as the old dear was patently at fault. I attended the scene a few minutes later (we live close) and took photos of both cars, the roundabout from several angles etc.
For a start, if she claims my girlfriend was speeding, then she must have seen her. If she saw her, why did she still drive into her? Duh.
Anyway, if the insurance comes back and says its going to settle 50:50 – can we refuse to accept this decision and make them fight it?
Excess is £600 – repairs to g/f car probably not much more than that (mostly cosmetic to front bumper). Other car costs likely to be less. NCB is protected.
Any other considerations or words of advice much appreciated.
Hi
If insurance co/ Legal Expense cover is anything like mine then probably not.
I was hit while stationary waiting to turn right on a bend in the road. the other vehicle crossed the line and hit me head on but as there were no witnesses I had to settle 50:50 because the legal expense cover had small print that said along the lines of "If we do not think that we can win a court case then we reserve the right to withdraw legal expense cover". This meant that if I wanted to contest the insurance co's decision to settle 50:50 then I would have to finance any legal costs myself.
If insurance co/ Legal Expense cover is anything like mine then probably not.
I was hit while stationary waiting to turn right on a bend in the road. the other vehicle crossed the line and hit me head on but as there were no witnesses I had to settle 50:50 because the legal expense cover had small print that said along the lines of "If we do not think that we can win a court case then we reserve the right to withdraw legal expense cover". This meant that if I wanted to contest the insurance co's decision to settle 50:50 then I would have to finance any legal costs myself.
My roundabout incident was rather less grey (I'm not in any doubt the old biddy caused this accident, but in terms of the 50:50 loving Unsurance company's position it is). I had some dimwit pull out from exit 3 as I was on my way from exit 1 around to 4, signalling etc. He went, stopped, went, stopped and just as it was too late for me to come to a complete standstill went again. I stove in the side of his car and knocked the front wheel off.
He immediately claimed it was 50:50 but later told his insurance company that it was actually my fault, bizarrely, as he "was on the roundabout first". I told my insco that under no circumstances whatsoever would I accept any blame and that indeed (just like your GF from the sound of it) it was only good defensive driving on my part that caused that accident to be as minor as it was in the face of his reckless manouvre.
Six months later the excess cheque arrived.
But we all see feckwits often old duffers who can't drive safely doing this all the time. So I'm thinking your insco must have seen the same sort of thing so many times they have an algorithm?
SM
He immediately claimed it was 50:50 but later told his insurance company that it was actually my fault, bizarrely, as he "was on the roundabout first". I told my insco that under no circumstances whatsoever would I accept any blame and that indeed (just like your GF from the sound of it) it was only good defensive driving on my part that caused that accident to be as minor as it was in the face of his reckless manouvre.
Six months later the excess cheque arrived.
But we all see feckwits often old duffers who can't drive safely doing this all the time. So I'm thinking your insco must have seen the same sort of thing so many times they have an algorithm?
SM
justinp1 said:
I think it would depend on the exact position of the accident.
What goes against you is if your girlfriend was alone and there was a passenger in the other car. That means they could construct anything to suit their argument.
Did the accident occur in your girlfriends lane?
What goes against you is if your girlfriend was alone and there was a passenger in the other car. That means they could construct anything to suit their argument.
Did the accident occur in your girlfriends lane?
Surely the passenger in the other car can't be treated as an independent witness?'Cos I would imagine they'd be anything but...
Sorry but. How could the old dear take out the nearside front of your girlfriends car while crossing from the outside to the inside? I don’t see how this could happen under braking, the old dear would have clipped the offside not the nearside. It sounds like your girlfriend was accelerating and clipped the rear offside of the old dear. This is not to say that the old dear was in the right lane, but then neither was your girlfriend.
herewego said:
Sorry but. How could the old dear take out the nearside front of your girlfriends car while crossing from the outside to the inside? I don’t see how this could happen under braking, the old dear would have clipped the offside not the nearside. It sounds like your girlfriend was accelerating and clipped the rear offside of the old dear. This is not to say that the old dear was in the right lane, but then neither was your girlfriend.
As I read it the OP's GF was in the inside(nearest to island) lane of the R/A.Old biddy was in outside,ie other,lane and crossed lanes (straight lined?)infront of GF's car.I may have the wrong end of the stick here....
esselte said:
herewego said:
Sorry but. How could the old dear take out the nearside front of your girlfriends car while crossing from the outside to the inside? I don’t see how this could happen under braking, the old dear would have clipped the offside not the nearside. It sounds like your girlfriend was accelerating and clipped the rear offside of the old dear. This is not to say that the old dear was in the right lane, but then neither was your girlfriend.
As I read it the OP's GF was in the inside(nearest to island) lane of the R/A.Old biddy was in outside,ie other,lane and crossed lanes (straight lined?)infront of GF's car.I may have the wrong end of the stick here....
Oh heck, inside, outside, my humble apologies.
esselte said:
herewego said:
Sorry but. How could the old dear take out the nearside front of your girlfriends car while crossing from the outside to the inside? I don’t see how this could happen under braking, the old dear would have clipped the offside not the nearside. It sounds like your girlfriend was accelerating and clipped the rear offside of the old dear. This is not to say that the old dear was in the right lane, but then neither was your girlfriend.
As I read it the OP's GF was in the inside(nearest to island) lane of the R/A.Old biddy was in outside,ie other,lane and crossed lanes (straight lined?)infront of GF's car.I may have the wrong end of the stick here....
Correct.
No supporting witness evidence?
No photographic evidence of the accident location showing the cars in situ?
Accident damage towards from of g/f's car, rear of third party car?
Accident on a roundabout?
50/50 all the way, wouldn't do better than that at court, not worth fighting, will not improve on that at all.
Trust me, until recently, I dealt with 400 road traffic accidents at any one time, on behalf of one of the UK's biggest car insurers, as a RTA PI Solicitor...
No photographic evidence of the accident location showing the cars in situ?
Accident damage towards from of g/f's car, rear of third party car?
Accident on a roundabout?
50/50 all the way, wouldn't do better than that at court, not worth fighting, will not improve on that at all.
Trust me, until recently, I dealt with 400 road traffic accidents at any one time, on behalf of one of the UK's biggest car insurers, as a RTA PI Solicitor...
I hate to say anymore after my misunderstanding but if the lanes are marked out on the road and the old dear swept into the right-hand lane in the process of turning left then I’d say the old dear’s driving was careless. Is it possible there is a skid mark showing your girlfriend’s location when she braked that you could photograph as evidence? Or did the old dear admit that she’d strayed into the wrong lane? If there’s no evidence then I think you’re going to be relying on the old dears honesty.
This is the roundabout. Photo taken from the road where the two cars joined. The exit the old dear was taking is to the right of the trees in the background - i.e. it's not straight on, you have to actually go around the roundabout a bit first - this is why nearly everyone short-cuts accross the inside lane to get there. There's more than enough room for two vehicles to go around this together - done it hundreds of times myself.
x marks the spot.
x marks the spot.
The problem isn't that your g/f is right or wrong, it's just that it can't be PROVEN. and where cases are unproven, 50/50 is the best that can be achieved. Yes, it looks from the photo that the old woman is in the wrong, but they will have an alternative (untruthful) account and in the absence of other evidence, the Judge would not be able to find against either person and a 50/50 split would be the outcome for sure.
If you other half is telling the truth then deffo take it further.In my claim I was hit in the middle lane by somebody trying to get off the roundabout.The thing that worked in my favour was it had road markings stating what lane goes where,if the roundabout this accident was on has them you may be ok..I had to take pics,write statements,draw pics and even got the bodyshop to say my car would have been in front when the impact happened.I used the free legal cover on my insurance and had many conversations with lawyers,ended up in court and won..
Give Steve Greensmith (Anniesdad on here) a shout as the compnay he runs specialises in non-fault accident claims/advice.
At the very least he'll be able to give you some help on what to do - if not take on your case if he feels you're not at fault.
His website is www.europaconsultants.co.uk - look for Steve on the contacts page.
He's helped a lot of PHers out (myself included) and I'd never use anyone else in this sort of situation.
At the very least he'll be able to give you some help on what to do - if not take on your case if he feels you're not at fault.
His website is www.europaconsultants.co.uk - look for Steve on the contacts page.
He's helped a lot of PHers out (myself included) and I'd never use anyone else in this sort of situation.
colonel_smith said:
If you other half is telling the truth then deffo take it further.In my claim I was hit in the middle lane by somebody trying to get off the roundabout.The thing that worked in my favour was it had road markings stating what lane goes where,if the roundabout this accident was on has them you may be ok..I had to take pics,write statements,draw pics and even got the bodyshop to say my car would have been in front when the impact happened.I used the free legal cover on my insurance and had many conversations with lawyers,ended up in court and won..
yes, but no arrows in this instance... (even if there was, there is no PROOF as to who moved over)
Edited by richburley on Thursday 1st February 13:03
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff