Hello guys I'm after a little advice.

About 4 months ago I was over taking a truck when it turned right into my path. The pick up truck was turning right into a pub. I crashed straight into the side of the truck. The truck had come out of a junction on the right before the pub and was heading in the same direction as myself. The truck was moving very slowly and there were no solid white lines. I came up behind the truck, mirror signaled and went to over take when the driver turned right into my path. The 3rd party did not indicate to show their intentions.

My insurance company hadn't had any information from the 3rd party until the lady driving the truck put a personal injury claim in. The legal company around this time forwarded me a letter from the 3rd party insurance company of the truck saying there was an issue around the insurance of the 3rd party on the truck, but that was all the information that was given. I forwarded the details onto my insurance company.

The police came round to see me last night and said that the 3rd party driver was not insured and neither did she have a valid license as it have been revoked by the DVLA. I assumed this would go in my favor towards the depute claim.

The insurance company claims handler called me this afternoon to say that it was looking at 70/30 liability but would not doubt just settle 100% my fault as it was cheaper for them not to have to go through the courts. I assumed they would have known the driver, who was putting a personal injury claim in, didn't have a license nor was insured.. appeared they didn't until I told them. The claims handler didn't think this made a difference and said they were dealing with a civil matter and the fact that the 3rd driver was being prosecuted by the police had no bearing on it.

I called the legal company that has been dealing with my case to recover my costs, they said that its completely wrong that they would be paying out a personal injury claim for a driver who shouldn't have even been on the road. The legal rep put me on hold and confirmed this with their manager. They said no pay out should be made until 3rd party had been to court.

The legal rep advised me to ask to speak to the claim handlers manager when he calls me tomorrow morning but to also seek legal advice regarding the situation. I asked them were they not my legal representatives and they advised that they were just involved in recovering the costs of the car. I was only insured 3rd party. The costs I'm mainly concerned about are the three years of premiums that are in the thousands.

Does anyone know where I stand on this because it seems like I'm banging my head against the wall. I hate to think that the truck will be fully repaired from the cost of my insurance company and a non licensed not insured driver will end up getting a massive pay out for personal injury.

Thank you for taking the time to read

Hi plat

Welcome to CAG

The guys will be happy to advise as soon as they are available.

Thread moved.

Thanks for doing that

Look forward to hearing from them

J

100% awarded

I agree with your Insurers claims handler that it appears the accident was mainly your fault. This is often the case when you crash into something ahead of you on the road. The argument is always that you should have been driving in a way that anticipated any hazards or action of drivers ahead of you, with the opportunity to brake to avoid any collision. The fact that the other driver was not Insured or did not have a licence, does not really affect liability for the accident. The only way you would counteract this, is if you had independent witnesses or CCTV/ road traffic camera which were helpful to you.

I think the outcome is that the claim will be decided 100% your fault, so you will not recover anything and the third party driver will recover their various costs from your Insurers. It is up to your Insurers to fight this, if they think they can and your legal people to fight for a recovery for your cars costs if they think they have a case. I remain to be convinced that either your Insurers or legal people will fight this in any way.

if you hit a car from behind 100%your fault ,

but if you are overtaking a car that as not signaled

that they are turning right then i would say not your

fault if you are behind a car you should keep a safe distance

so that if they stop you can stop, but overtaking a car

and the car suddenly turns right i dont think anyone could stop

before hitting the car

not only should they have signalled but they should have checked their mirrors in plenty of time before signalling the manouvre.

yuo are noy a mind reader; it would have been different if it was road junction then you should not have been overtaking.

If you are only insured TP then you have to make a claim against the the vehicle owners insurers which will cover your lossess; it will be to the tp insureres to get any monies back from the TP or driver.

Your insurers are right here, case law goes against you, and it's cheaper to pay than fight, even for the 30%.

Whilst the other party was uninsured, they have the right to claim if not at fault.

I don't believe the other party's innocence, if they were enough of a F***wit to drive uninsured, they probably couldn't care less about the way they drove.

I'll regret saying this and probably delete it shortly, but I hope you hit them hard. (sorry mods).