Road Accident - no one present at scene but now a witness!
Discussion
Wife and kids were hit by a car on the way back from school yesterday. She was standing at a T junction waiting to turn left where a car cut across her turning right misjudging the turn and clipping the front bumper in the process and causing some damage. He kept saying it was her fault blah blah where as he was the one to hit her so not sure what he was on!
There were no people present at the scene of the accident at the time (was a quite road). They both exchanged insurance details and left the scene. Yesterday evening wife receives a text from the chap saying that he found a witness after my family left the scene and the witness agrees she was t fault but there was certainly no one there at the time of the accident!
It seems to me that he has got a mate to jump in as a witness for a couple of pints of beer and to me this is highly illegal. I have spoken to the insurers and have offered to give them evidence of his text message but they don't seem to bothered with this witness appearing after my family left the scene.
Where do we stand - any point involving the police now - guess it's too late and no one was injured so they won't want to be involved.
There were no people present at the scene of the accident at the time (was a quite road). They both exchanged insurance details and left the scene. Yesterday evening wife receives a text from the chap saying that he found a witness after my family left the scene and the witness agrees she was t fault but there was certainly no one there at the time of the accident!
It seems to me that he has got a mate to jump in as a witness for a couple of pints of beer and to me this is highly illegal. I have spoken to the insurers and have offered to give them evidence of his text message but they don't seem to bothered with this witness appearing after my family left the scene.
Where do we stand - any point involving the police now - guess it's too late and no one was injured so they won't want to be involved.
With someone hitting you, you're already 99% of the way towards it being a no-fault accident from your side of things.
If your wife was stationary, it would be interesting to hear what this potential new "witness" can add which would in any way shape or form make it suddenly your wife's fault.
If your insurance company don't want the text (at the moment) monitor situation with your insurance company and don't allow them to settle in the other driver's favour.
If your wife was stationary, it would be interesting to hear what this potential new "witness" can add which would in any way shape or form make it suddenly your wife's fault.
If your insurance company don't want the text (at the moment) monitor situation with your insurance company and don't allow them to settle in the other driver's favour.
PrancingHorses said:
I have spoken to the insurers ... but they don't seem to bothered with this witness appearing
Probably because they know that the physical evidence does not support your wife being at fault in any way, so the witness is clearly lying.It's entirely possible that the witness doesn't actually exist, and is just a lame attempt to intimidate her into shrugging, accepting fault, and paying cash rather than go through insurance.
TooMany2cvs said:
Probably because they know that the physical evidence does not support your wife being at fault in any way, so the witness is clearly lying.
It's entirely possible that the witness doesn't actually exist, and is just a lame attempt to intimidate her into shrugging, accepting fault, and paying cash rather than go through insurance.
Ermm not sure about this. The physical evidence is actually the other way around.It's entirely possible that the witness doesn't actually exist, and is just a lame attempt to intimidate her into shrugging, accepting fault, and paying cash rather than go through insurance.
There is damage on her front bumper and on the side of the other car if I understand it. Therefore the 'physical evidence' is more likely to point to the fact she was going forward and hit the side of his car. The physical evidence doesn't exonerate her as you suggest.
Can't prove she was stationary unless they talk to my kids (eldest being 15) who was in the car at the time of the accident. He also kept telling her he has a dashcam but she was too shaken to actually see if he had one or not...if he has a dashcam would be interesting to see if he gives them the evidence! We have told our insurers that he had said he has a dashcam.
PrancingHorses said:
Wife..was standing at a T junction waiting to turn left where a car cut across her turning right misjudging the turn and clipping the front bumper in the process and causing some damage.
In no way am I implying the OPs wife was guilty but the other driver will just say that as he was turning right she moved forward causing the accident, as stated by his witness who saw it all, and 'let's face it the OPs wife would say there were no witnesses wouldn't she'. Who does the insurance company believe?
I do feel sorry for the OP but can't see this going anyway except 50/50.
NGee said:
In no way am I implying the OPs wife was guilty but the other driver will just say that as he was turning right she moved forward causing the accident, as stated by his witness who saw it all, and 'let's face it the OPs wife would say there were no witnesses wouldn't she'.
Who does the insurance company believe?
I do feel sorry for the OP but can't see this going anyway except 50/50.
The main issue would seem to be if he claims the op's wife was trying to turn right. Unless the road she was turning into was very narrow? Who does the insurance company believe?
I do feel sorry for the OP but can't see this going anyway except 50/50.
If the driver turning right was not cutting the turn, the op's wife was not turning right and the road is of normal width it would not be possible for a collision to occur. The junction effectively forms a bend, the drivers are using none overlapping road space.
I had an accident a few years ago where a witness suddenly appeared after the fact (complete fraud), the insurance companies don't seem interested in cracking down on these fraudsters for some reason. Luckerly in my case the case was so clear cut (rear ended whilst stationary) that they pretty much dismissed the obvious false statement that didn't match the scene.
rambo19 said:
I, cannot for the life of me understand why anyone who comes on here(motoring website after all) does not have a dashcam.
Its exactly this kind of situation where a dashcam can save you.
Genuine question - in the situation described in the OP would it really be useful enough to be clear-cut? I've also read insurance companies are reluctant to accept them as evidence.Its exactly this kind of situation where a dashcam can save you.
We've seen footage on here several times that PHers have posted convinced they were in the right only to be torn to shreds by other posters.
Sheepshanks said:
Genuine question - in the situation described in the OP would it really be useful enough to be clear-cut?
It would show her, stationary, as another car cuts the corner and collides with her in the manner described. Not sure why you think it wouldn't be useful? 
As mentioned, without any ACTUAL evidence to the contrary, the other guy saying OP's wife moved forward as he was turning in is just as believable.
With regards to insurance companies cracking down on this kind of "witness fraud"; how exactly are they supposed to do that? How would they go about proving there were no witnesses present?
PrancingHorses said:
herewego said:
I assume you have his contact details so how about asking him to send you a copy of the dashcam recording?
I did ask but was told he has given it to the insurance company directly and I should ask my insurer for the copy! Sheepshanks said:
We've seen footage on here several times that PHers have posted convinced they were in the right only to be torn to shreds by other posters.
Only because those posters had questionable driving themselves!If you're stood still and someone drives into you the footage will be pretty bloody useful!
OP I feel for you, similar thing happened to me, where a bogus witness turned up to say the accident was all my fault, despite me being stationary. I know the witness was bogus because ( besides describing a whole different accident at another location) the other party left the scene before me.
If they've gone to the trouble to get someone to perjure themselves they're probably also going to go the whole nine yards on the whiplash, claim management thing.
Maybe you should find yourself a 'witness' or they're heading for a big payday.
Is the damage to your car consistent with their claim? If not you could get a motor engineer's report on the likely cause of the damage.
If they've gone to the trouble to get someone to perjure themselves they're probably also going to go the whole nine yards on the whiplash, claim management thing.
Maybe you should find yourself a 'witness' or they're heading for a big payday.
Is the damage to your car consistent with their claim? If not you could get a motor engineer's report on the likely cause of the damage.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff