Help please with accident
Discussion
Hi all.....hoping for some advice, please.
A couple of weeks ago, a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car. Fortunately I was driving slowly, and managed to swerve just enough - there was contact, but the pedestrian was not seriously hurt.
As it happens, there was a police van a couple of cars behind. He took over and took statements - and noticed that there was CCTV on the side of a pub looking towards the site of the accident.
He viewed the footage there and then, told me that you can see the pedestrian step out without looking, and said I did all I could to avoid. He issued me with an incident number and told me that he would seize the footage, and write a report as such. He then sent me on my way, and told me not to worry as it was not my fault.
I've now been contacted by my insurers for a claim against me for knocking down the pedestrian...... I've shared the incident number with my insurers, and spoken to the Police who confirm my story. My insurers have asked the Police for a copy of the report.
In the meantime, my other half had to renew her insurance, and the premium went up by £300 as the above claim is not resolved.
Should I be worried about the claim ? - and is there any way I can get the £300 back once all this is cleared up ?
Thanks for any advice.....
A couple of weeks ago, a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car. Fortunately I was driving slowly, and managed to swerve just enough - there was contact, but the pedestrian was not seriously hurt.
As it happens, there was a police van a couple of cars behind. He took over and took statements - and noticed that there was CCTV on the side of a pub looking towards the site of the accident.
He viewed the footage there and then, told me that you can see the pedestrian step out without looking, and said I did all I could to avoid. He issued me with an incident number and told me that he would seize the footage, and write a report as such. He then sent me on my way, and told me not to worry as it was not my fault.
I've now been contacted by my insurers for a claim against me for knocking down the pedestrian...... I've shared the incident number with my insurers, and spoken to the Police who confirm my story. My insurers have asked the Police for a copy of the report.
In the meantime, my other half had to renew her insurance, and the premium went up by £300 as the above claim is not resolved.
Should I be worried about the claim ? - and is there any way I can get the £300 back once all this is cleared up ?
Thanks for any advice.....
It's only gone up that much (I'd imagine) because you have the open claim. Once it's closed (in your favour hopefully) you can get them to update it as a non-fault claim and that should drop the premium resulting in a refund.
Sadly, you'll have to declare it regardless (but hopefully as non-fault) for the usual 3 - 5 years...
Sadly, you'll have to declare it regardless (but hopefully as non-fault) for the usual 3 - 5 years...
I would not make any estimates on how long this will take resolve, I got a claim lodged against me due to someone stating a registration incorrectly.
I could easily prove it wasn't my vehicle and I was elsewhere at the time, that took close on 6 months to resolve with me pushing it the way.
To get this closed off you need to keep pushing it along.
I could easily prove it wasn't my vehicle and I was elsewhere at the time, that took close on 6 months to resolve with me pushing it the way.
To get this closed off you need to keep pushing it along.
Pjhuk33 said:
You have a claim against you. With the Poli I'llce corroborating the events once it's worked itself through the system you will get your extra money back... About ten to sixteen weeks in my experience.
how?It is like whiplash claims there may not be visible bruises but they can still claim, the police report will just validate this. An impact at a few mph could cause damage and the ambulance chasers know this.
gottans said:
I would not make any estimates on how long this will take resolve, I got a claim lodged against me due to someone stating a registration incorrectly.
I could easily prove it wasn't my vehicle and I was elsewhere at the time, that took close 6 months to resolve with me pushing it the way.
To get this closed off you need to keep pushing it along.
I had exactly the same, my insurance company paid out anyway, and I had it on my record for the full five years or whatever it is. Never did get it sorted despite many phone callsI could easily prove it wasn't my vehicle and I was elsewhere at the time, that took close 6 months to resolve with me pushing it the way.
To get this closed off you need to keep pushing it along.
Thesprucegoose said:
Pjhuk33 said:
You have a claim against you. With the Poli I'llce corroborating the events once it's worked itself through the system you will get your extra money back... About ten to sixteen weeks in my experience.
how?It is like whiplash claims there may not be visible bruises but they can still claim, the police report will just validate this. An impact at a few mph could cause damage and the ambulance chasers know this.
R Mutt said:
Premiums still rise for non fault claims. Absolute disgrace.
As I understand it, it’s a well proven fact that an individual who has had an accident (inc no fault) is more likely to have another. So being more likily to claim, they pay more, that's how insurance works. Young people have to pay higher premiums too because they tend to cost more in claims. A work colleague of mine's wife had 3 no fault accidents in 2 years where people drove into the back of her car. As Hubby explained - "I keep telling her not to stop suddenly for no reason". Personally I'd avoid getting into a car with someone like that, let alone insure them.
OP hit "a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car". Based on that statement I suspect that this was an avoidable accident. Parked cars should be given more distance unless the driver can see clearly there is no pedestrian. Whilst it may not be "fair" to OP, I suspect the majority of drivers who hit pedestrians are driving without proper observation and anticipation. We KNOW that pedestrians step out without looking. As drivers of several tons of metal it’s down to us to try and avoid them; OP didn't.
Not being legally at fault doesn't mean the accident was unavoidable.
Highway Code said:
205
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
Edited by OverSteery on Friday 12th July 14:47
OverSteery said:
R Mutt said:
Premiums still rise for non fault claims. Absolute disgrace.
As I understand it, it’s a well proven fact that an individual who has had an accident (inc no fault) is more likely to have another. So being more likily to claim, they pay more, that's how insurance works. Young people have to pay higher premiums too because they tend to cost more in claims. A work colleague of mine's wife had 3 no fault accidents in 2 years where people drove into the back of her car. As Hubby explained - "I keep telling her not to stop suddenly for no reason". Personally I'd avoid getting into a car with someone like that, let alone insure them.
OP hit "a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car". Based on that statement I suspect that this was an avoidable accident. Parked cars should be given more distance unless the driver can see clearly there is no pedestrian. Whilst it may not be "fair" to OP, I suspect the majority of drivers who hit pedestrians are driving without proper observation and anticipation. We KNOW that pedestrians step out without looking. As drivers of several tons of metal it’s down to us to try and avoid them; OP didn't.
Not being legally at fault doesn't mean the accident was unavoidable.
Highway Code said:
205
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
Edited by OverSteery on Friday 12th July 14:47
OverSteery said:
R Mutt said:
Premiums still rise for non fault claims. Absolute disgrace.
As I understand it, it’s a well proven fact that an individual who has had an accident (inc no fault) is more likely to have another. So being more likily to claim, they pay more, that's how insurance works. Young people have to pay higher premiums too because they tend to cost more in claims. A work colleague of mine's wife had 3 no fault accidents in 2 years where people drove into the back of her car. As Hubby explained - "I keep telling her not to stop suddenly for no reason". Personally I'd avoid getting into a car with someone like that, let alone insure them.
OP hit "a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car". Based on that statement I suspect that this was an avoidable accident. Parked cars should be given more distance unless the driver can see clearly there is no pedestrian. Whilst it may not be "fair" to OP, I suspect the majority of drivers who hit pedestrians are driving without proper observation and anticipation. We KNOW that pedestrians step out without looking. As drivers of several tons of metal it’s down to us to try and avoid them; OP didn't.
Not being legally at fault doesn't mean the accident was unavoidable.
We all KNOW that some drivers prefer to look at there phones than where they are going. So maybe using your vast knowledge of driving skills and the highway code you could explain to me how I could avoid some idiot who drove into the back of me at 30 MPH after I had been stationary at the give way line, to enter a roundabout, for over a minute. They admitted they hadn't even seen the roundabout, let alone me!!
I would really like to know how you think I could improve my driving and avoid this situation happening again. Over to you.
NGee said:
It's good to see you have clearer picture of the accident than the copper who was actually there and has watched the CCTV replay.
We all KNOW that some drivers prefer to look at there phones than where they are going. So maybe using your vast knowledge of driving skills and the highway code you could explain to me how I could avoid some idiot who drove into the back of me at 30 MPH after I had been stationary at the give way line, to enter a roundabout, for over a minute. They admitted they hadn't even seen the roundabout, let alone me!!
I would really like to know how you think I could improve my driving and avoid this situation happening again. Over to you.
Re-read my post, I did not say I had a clearer picture. We all KNOW that some drivers prefer to look at there phones than where they are going. So maybe using your vast knowledge of driving skills and the highway code you could explain to me how I could avoid some idiot who drove into the back of me at 30 MPH after I had been stationary at the give way line, to enter a roundabout, for over a minute. They admitted they hadn't even seen the roundabout, let alone me!!
I would really like to know how you think I could improve my driving and avoid this situation happening again. Over to you.
I did imply that all non-fault accidents are still partly the "non-fault" driver's mistake. I didn't mean to imply that. There are accidents in which one driver is completely blameless. Your's would seem a good example.
I remain of the opinion that most non-fault accidents could have been avoided by a "non-fault" driver.
Regardless, OP was talking about insurance, which is based on statistics. Drivers who have an accident ARE more likely to have another, so pay more. Whether this is due to driving quality, where they park their car, or their chosen route to work doesn't change that.
Edited by OverSteery on Friday 12th July 16:24
OverSteery said:
R Mutt said:
Premiums still rise for non fault claims. Absolute disgrace.
As I understand it, it’s a well proven fact that an individual who has had an accident (inc no fault) is more likely to have another. So being more likily to claim, they pay more, that's how insurance works. Young people have to pay higher premiums too because they tend to cost more in claims. A work colleague of mine's wife had 3 no fault accidents in 2 years where people drove into the back of her car. As Hubby explained - "I keep telling her not to stop suddenly for no reason". Personally I'd avoid getting into a car with someone like that, let alone insure them.
OP hit "a pedestrian stepped out in front of me from behind a parked car". Based on that statement I suspect that this was an avoidable accident. Parked cars should be given more distance unless the driver can see clearly there is no pedestrian. Whilst it may not be "fair" to OP, I suspect the majority of drivers who hit pedestrians are driving without proper observation and anticipation. We KNOW that pedestrians step out without looking. As drivers of several tons of metal it’s down to us to try and avoid them; OP didn't.
Not being legally at fault doesn't mean the accident was unavoidable.
Highway Code said:
205
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
There is a risk of pedestrians, especially children, stepping unexpectedly into the road. You should drive with the safety of children in mind at a speed suitable for the conditions.
Edited by OverSteery on Friday 12th July 14:47
As I say, a disgrace.
I agree where you see idiots pulling out of a side road in front of you already with a dent in the side and have to laugh but were you to hit them, or a pedestrian as the OP has done, I can't see that you should be penalised unless there's a proven deficiency in your reaction time or sight, or concentration. I'd say that's where the correlation really stems from so adjust premiums for that, not non fault accidents caused by other idiots.
R Mutt said:
I fail to see how someone hitting my car while parked is a reflection of my driving. .
But it may be a reflection of your future risk of getting hit whilst parked. A % of people who suffer this type of claim do so because they regularly park in a badly lit or tight car park, or somewhere else where the risk is higher. Some people, when they park, actually look to park in the safest place possible, not on the bend, under the lights, or whatever. Others just plonk their car in the first space they see.
This time they left a note. Maybe not next time.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff