Friend hit cyclist - claiming not her fault. Next steps?

[anonymous-user]

If it was my wife’s friend, I would keep out of it

[Monkeylegend]

Richard-D said:

Monkeylegend said:

Snails said:

Richard-D said:

I would urge her to go straight to the police and her insurance company. being as she is so keen to lie I'd bet her 'cyclist at fault' incident is more than likely down to her. In that situation making a song and dance about it will be bound to cost her money and cause her grief. Which is what people like that deserve.

This was my first thought. If she is so willing to consider submitting a fraudulent claim, I would doubt her version of events too.

According to OP's opening post the police were involved and said there would be no further action taken against either party.

Remember that this information was given to the OP by their dishonest friend.

So it is the cyclist who maybe should be advised to go to the police then if her version of events are a fabrication. He could well have been the innocent party in all this.

Except nobody knows who he is or any of the witnesses apparently.

[NDA]

Your wife's friend sounds a delight. As others have said, her version of events must now be doubted.

[Richard-D]

Monkeylegend said:

Richard-D said:

Monkeylegend said:

Snails said:

Richard-D said:

I would urge her to go straight to the police and her insurance company. being as she is so keen to lie I'd bet her 'cyclist at fault' incident is more than likely down to her. In that situation making a song and dance about it will be bound to cost her money and cause her grief. Which is what people like that deserve.

This was my first thought. If she is so willing to consider submitting a fraudulent claim, I would doubt her version of events too.

According to OP's opening post the police were involved and said there would be no further action taken against either party.

Remember that this information was given to the OP by their dishonest friend.

So it is the cyclist who maybe should be advised to go to the police then if her version of events are a fabrication. He could well have been the innocent party in all this.

Except nobody knows who he is or any of the witnesses apparently.

Maybe, but that isn't an option on the table as the OP doesn't know who they are. I am suggesting that the OP's wife's dog's roommate's cousin's friend appears very keen to fib to make a situation better for her. I think it's safe to say that we can believe she had an accident with a cyclist but I would be suspicious over the rest of the story. As she is so keen to lie to profit from the situation I would usher her towards a situation where she will dig her own hole.

[Monkeylegend]

This "friend" of your wife OP........................

[IJWS15]

That the police are taking no action doesn't mean the cyclist isn't claiming against her.

[Whitester]

If it was my missus I would have already dealt with it...

Yes I doubt the version of events as it seems a lot of hassle over something that could be easily sorted.

Advice to contact the insurers has been passed on but will likely be ignored.

Thanks for helpful comments.

[budgie smuggler]

How's she planning to pretend to be injured?

Also driving round with a damaged windscreen is asking for the police to pull you over so even neglecting the reduced visibility aspect she should get that sorted pronto.

Edited by budgie smuggler on Tuesday 23 April 12:47

[jrallye]

Personally think it's just a case of fixing the windscreen and getting on with life

'said that there’d be no further action taken against any party'
If no-one was deemed at fault at the scene surely it ends there

As for trying to fraud insures don't think it's worth the risk, claiming she's injured is unlikely to go her way if the squishy cyclist got out without serious injury

The cyclist won't be insured so would she be claiming money directly from the cyclist and not through insurance can't see that working or it even being possible

Assuming she was following the flow of traffic at 25mph no cyclist would just pull out in front of a steady row of cars and if she was alone driving 25mph through a junction even if the light was green seems a little fast assuming it's a 90 degree junction

[TwigtheWonderkid]

jrallye said:

The cyclist won't be insured so would she be claiming money directly from the cyclist and not through insurance can't see that working or it even being possible

Forgetting about this particular case and just talking about the principle of a non fault claim where you are injured/suffered damage from a cyclist, if the kid's parents have household insurance, he will be insured under the occupiers' liability section. Even if there is no insurance, it's perfectly possible to make a claim against an individual or their parents for damage/injury caused.

[jrallye]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Forgetting about this particular case and just talking about the principle of a non fault claim where you are injured/suffered damage from a cyclist, if the kid's parents have household insurance, he will be insured under the occupiers' liability section. Even if there is no insurance, it's perfectly possible to make a claim against an individual or their parents for damage/injury caused.

Didn't realise this was a thing

Not suggesting it but the OP's friend could pretend to be injured in such a way that the cyclists parents home insurance would have to pay up?

[Derek Smith]

I had my wing mirror taken off in a failing to stop accident in Kent. I reported it to the police online and asked for a reference number to inform my insurance; not to claim as the damage was just a few £tens, but just to conform to the requirements. I was given the reference number and informed that they had already told my insurance company.

I don't know if this is normal practice nowadays.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

jrallye said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Forgetting about this particular case and just talking about the principle of a non fault claim where you are injured/suffered damage from a cyclist, if the kid's parents have household insurance, he will be insured under the occupiers' liability section. Even if there is no insurance, it's perfectly possible to make a claim against an individual or their parents for damage/injury caused.

Didn't realise this was a thing

Not suggesting it but the OP's friend could pretend to be injured in such a way that the cyclists parents home insurance would have to pay up?

Well she would have to produce some kind of medical evidence, from the hospital or her GP, but in principle, people who aren't insured don't just get a free pass to cause injury or damage without being held accountable, and pedestrians, cyclists, skateboarders etc., who most people assume don't have any insurance, often do under a house contents/buildings policy.

[Seight_Returns]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

pedestrians, cyclists, skateboarders etc., who most people assume don't have any insurance, often do under a house contents/buildings policy.

My household insurance 3rd party liability cover explicitly excludes claims relating to motoring or cycling incidents. I believe most if not all polices do likewise.

I found the cheapest way to get 3rd party liability cover as a cyclist was to join the Cyclists' Touring Club who offer this cover as a benefit of membership.

[singlecoil]

I wouldn't be surprised if the friend turned out not to have valid insurance.

[Rude-boy]

singlecoil said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the friend turned out not to have valid insurance.

Willing to be corrected but i doubt Police would have said NFA before they had checked that out to their satisfaction at the time.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Seight_Returns said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

pedestrians, cyclists, skateboarders etc., who most people assume don't have any insurance, often do under a house contents/buildings policy.

My household insurance 3rd party liability cover explicitly excludes claims relating to motoring or cycling incidents. I believe most if not all polices do likewise.

My policy excludes motorised vehicles, that's all.

[Taylor James]

Whitester said:

A friend of my Mrs hit a cyclist last week. Her story is that she was turning right at lights on green, when a cyclist rode in front of her. She was going 25mph and the cyclist ended up on the window, causing her screen to crack quite significantly. Thankfully, there were no serious injuries and the young lad on the bike was okay despite not wearing a helmet!

The Police arrived on the scene and took information from witnesses, and said that there’d be no further action taken against any party. Unfortunately my friend’s English is limited and she didn’t take a Police reference number or the details of witnesses and the cyclist.

Her windscreen is pretty badly damaged and my advice to her was to pop it on the drive and get Autoglass out to fix it, as it’s an old Golf. This is what I’d do, personally as I think it’s the most hassle-free course. I’ve told her that it’s unlikely anything will come through from the cyclist as he was a young lad without a helmet, he’s probably had the fright of his life and a bking from his folks!

However, she wants to:

A) Claim on insurance that she woke up in the morning and the windscreen was damaged like that. I told her that this is Insurance fraud and you should never lie to your insurers! If she is going to claim, she needs to be truthful. I advised her against claiming full stop as I am concerned they may write the car off!

B) Go to the hospital pretending to be injured and try to sue the lad. I think this is outrageous, personally. Young lad has been through enough and it is again fraudulent in my eyes.

Some advice from here may go some way in backing up my thoughts or providing some other options. It’s a piece of st Golf and she’s still pottering around in it even with the damage. Truthfully if she wishes to pursue either of those paths I hope she gets done!

Thoughts? Cheers

I'd have thought she could legitimately claim for the windscreen damage. Most policies have cover. She'll just have to stump up £50-£75. II can't see any way it'll lead to a write off.

Other thoughts? She's a nasty piece of work.

[codenamecueball]

Turning right at the lights on green meaning green arrow filter and the cyclist proceeded through a red, or turning right and they've gone across a pedestrian crossing in the road they're entering, or turning right having not given way to the cyclist carrying on straight ahead?

Either way she sounds like a piece of work. I suggest you let her attempt insurance fraud and get prosecuted.

[hutchst]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Forgetting about this particular case and just talking about the principle of a non fault claim where you are injured/suffered damage from a cyclist, if the kid's parents have household insurance, he will be insured under the occupiers' liability section. Even if there is no insurance, it's perfectly possible to make a claim against an individual or their parents for damage/injury caused.

Can you explain a bit more about how Occupier's Liability covers negligence not on, near or connected with the property that's insured. And also suing people for damage caused by their children.