Jump to content


car accident- not my fault, but losing my no claims


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4561 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I was in an accident last week which wasn't my fault, but my insurance company have rung to say that they want to settle 50-50 with the TP's. I was driving along and wanted to park in parking space on right side of road. I indicated, slowed right down, and then started to turn. As I turned a 4x4 overtook me so I was turning into her. As soon as I realised what was happening, I turned my wheel back. My car wasn't damaged, but she had a dent in the side, although not so bad that she couldn't open and shut doors easily. She told me that I wasn't indicating. I was. Now she is saying that I pulled away from a stationary position without indicating which is an outright lie. There are no witnesses. It makes no sense that I would have been parked on the left. It is a narrow road and there are double yellow lines on the left and parking spaces on the right. Is there any way I can fight this, so I don't lose my no claims bonus? I am so cross.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and Welcome, milly.

 

I'll move this thread to the appropriate Forum.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in an accident last week which wasn't my fault, but my insurance company have rung to say that they want to settle 50-50 with the TP's. I was driving along and wanted to park in parking space on right side of road. I indicated, slowed right down, and then started to turn. As I turned a 4x4 overtook me so I was turning into her. As soon as I realised what was happening, I turned my wheel back. My car wasn't damaged, but she had a dent in the side, although not so bad that she couldn't open and shut doors easily. She told me that I wasn't indicating. I was. Now she is saying that I pulled away from a stationary position without indicating which is an outright lie. There are no witnesses. It makes no sense that I would have been parked on the left. It is a narrow road and there are double yellow lines on the left and parking spaces on the right. Is there any way I can fight this, so I don't lose my no claims bonus? I am so cross.

 

Sorry to hear about your problems, im not gonna beat around the bush but it does sound very tricky and people like the lady in your case will lie to protect there own shes probally been told what to say by her insurance company !

 

Theres also a chance that the lady is covered by the same or underwritten by the same insurance company as you, in simpler terms they will say 50 /50, the company doesnt lose out but the customer does in a way.

 

I would challenge it and exaust the companies complaint procedure, also try to get a witness ;) this will help you a great deal, with a witness one of the many Accident Assistant Companies would take this on for you and also provide you with a like for like car, whilst yours is repaired or the claim settled, i would reccommend Enterprise Rent a Car.

 

Also if your no claims bonus is protected you will not lose your no claims bonus !

 

Hope you get things sorted soon.

The retailers worst nightmare !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it is a no-claims bonus, not a no-fault bonus. Therefore even if the accident is deemed to be 100% not your fault (which obviously it is not deemed to be in your case), you will still lose out if you make a claim. It's an absolutely disgusting practice but unfortunately almost all insurers do this as they try and convince you using meaningless statistics that you are more likely to cause an accident in future if you have been the victim of a non-fault accident.

 

You may be interested in this thread talking about a petition urging the govt. to force insurers to stop this practice of increasing the premiums of innocent accident victims. I think the petition has now closed (not sure though) but it's an interesting debate anyhow.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/141040-stop-car-insurance-companies.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

In relation to liability, it is a matter of proof. If there is not enough evidence to secure a win, then an insurer will go for partial liability.

 

The NCD aspect is as Tom said. Most people think it is a no blame discount, and I am sure that the problem lies in sales staff being too general and stating that if the accident is not your fault, you won't lose your discount. That's true so long as the insurer makes a full recovery. But as the victim of any "hit whilst parked" by unknown TP will attest, you will lose NCD.

 

When I worked at Direct Line, I put a proposal through which recommended the inclusion of a leaflet with all policy books explaining how insurance works in terms of excess, liability, NCD - probably the three most common areas of complaint. I was told it was a definite no because people would believe it would put people off buying insurance from them and they would go elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is case law to state that the driver of a vehicle overtaking a vehicle turning right is 100% to blame. Challoner v Williams as I recall. Sorry I don't have the full citation to hand.

********************************************

Nothing in this post constitutes "advice" which I may not, in any event, be qualified to provide.

The only interpretation permitted on this post (or any others I may have made) is that this is what I would personally consider doing in the circumstances discussed. Each and every reader of this post or any other I may have made must take responsibility for forming their own view and making their own decision.

I receive an unwieldy number of private messages. I am happy to respond to messages posted on open forum but am unable to respond to private messages, seeking advice, when the substance of that message should properly be on the open forum.

Many thanks for your assistance and understanding on this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you make a claim, and 100% of the cost is covered by a third party then it is a no fault claim, as opposed to a fault claim. Almost all insurance products will not penalise you in the case of your first no-fault claim (it is in their interest to assess your risk correctly, as if they overstate your risk they will lose the business to someone else). It is common practice to ignore any rate loadings for up to 2 no fault claims. After that and the judgement is that there is something about the way you drive that makes other people hit you ;)

 

 

So there is a very strong chance that you will not be penalised in your NCD if you can get the blame removed from you. Sadly it is common practice (in order to speed up claims to reduce expenses, and to lower legal expenses) for many insurers to have agreements with each other that over the course of a year they will have equal number of claims against each other, so let's just call everything 50/50. Terrible practice imo, and I hope it gets banned soon.

 

 

Definitely put up a fight to start with. If it comes to court then think carefully - even with judicial precedence blame allocation can be a lottery in the courts. But exhaust the complaints procedure / FOS routes first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It won't get banned. Otherwise the courts will be chocca again with claims that people have no reasonable chance of winning.

 

It's a simple matter. If there is no reasonable chance of success then an insurer will settle. The courts also expect it as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 50/50 is very fair. You turned without ensuring that it was safe to doi so. It doesn't matter whether she should or shouldn't have overtaken you there, it matters that you see her. A child is worng to lay down on the motorway, you are more wrong to drive over them!

 

Sorry, I don't think you have any case at all and I am a not surprised by the 50/50 as I think you were both at fault. Her for not seeing your indication, you for not seeing her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no evidence that the OP turned when it was not safe to do so. We do not have enough facts to make that assumption. That is why the issue of 50/50 has been raised in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to Britain's worst driver: I do not think that what you have said is right, if I have slowed down and indicated and positioned myself to turn and nothing is coming towards me from the other direction, it is not my responsibility to check that no one is overtaking me before turning. I have right of way on that side of the road. If I am wrong please let me know.

 

If a child was lying in the motorway and I was driving I would obviously try to avoid that child but I do not think that a court would feel that it was my responsibility, because a child should not be lying on the motorway in the first place, and reasonably, a person cannot be expected to be looking out for such hazrds in the normal course of events! I would say that the parents would be more at fault for not ensuring the child's safety! It is of course hypothetical, but my point is that one cannot predict other people's dangerous behavior.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you turn right without bothering to look, then obviously it is your fault.

If you follow correct procedures and manouvers, made sure it was clear etc, and the TP cam zooming up behind you trying to overtake knowing you were turning right, then it is the TPs fault.

 

Its just not terribly easy to prove what happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...