Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you 😊  Just wanted to prepare myself mentally incase they pull out some rabbit out of a hat with these bodyshops as they will most likely be places they've used regularly in the past and over 150miles away from where I am.
    • I see the Brexit-ish are again delaying  implementing their 'grate deal' 'protecting the UKs borders' that they pressed through with the wholehearted support of MPs like smugg - who is now one of the main moaners saying this inflation raising and business destroying 'great deal'  shouldn't be implemented. Of course 3 of the benefits of NOT implementing the Brexitish grate deal as the Brexitish negotiated are:   1. Less UK businesses will collapse 2. UK inflation NOT increased by 0.6% (hence fiddling the figures to us scraping NOT being in a Brexit generated recession) 3. The problems will be dumped in labours lap after the GE   "Analysis by specialist credit insurance firm Allianz Trade said the removal of tariffs on the goods would reduce inflation by 0.6 percentage points, and cut import costs by close to 7 billion pounds ($8.8 billion) in nominal terms."   reuters.com WWW.REUTERS.COM     https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-economy-grows-by-01-february-2024-04-12/   Rees-Mogg warns post-Brexit border charges could be inflationary WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM According to reports, Britain faces a £2 billion post-Brexit bill on European food imports from the end of the month.  
    • Thank you . Please stand by for a reply later on  
    • Sorry just get worried that they will make my life harder than they already have lol   Bought the car around 12th Sept 2022 for £78,000 from clinkard cars.   Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars in Romsey, Hampshire | Clinkard Performance Cars WWW.CLINKARDCARS.CO.UK Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars Dealers in Romsey, Hampshire Was a 2019 Range Rover with 25k miles, £20k deposit at £750pm pcp over a 4 year period.   Finance company are alphera (bmw finance) spoke to them in October 2023 about the damage my bodyshop advised me of but they told me to deal with the dealership. Paid for the repair myself as I was told the extended warranty I paid for (recommended through dealer) wouldn't cover it as it was an existing fault and not mechanical breakdown. When I got the £40k offer from the dealership they still didn't want to get involved unless I got an independent inspection done. Used Elite Forensic inspections as they seem highly rated online (more comprehensive than your average AA inspection). I just looked online for thr best inspections for customers eho hsbe alre purchased the car. Their report was super comprehensive over like 50 pages of text and photos. Comparisons to the advert photos against what the inspector saw made in clear that the damage was before I purchase it. Got the report back 10th Jan 2024 and couldn't believe that they'd picked up the level of accident the car had been in and raised an official complaint through Alphera, they couldn't come to a decision with 8 weeks so raised with FOS. Around the 7th March 2024. Small issues started within the first week of purchasing like ambient light not working on the side the car was hit and car randomly switching off completely when I'd stop at traffic lights/junctions. Dealers eventually got this sorted which I appreciate, but doesn't change the fact that they didn't check the car as well as I'd been told it had been checked and they'd sold me an accident repaired car and initially tried to say all cars have had paint due to stone chips etc. Also turns out the car had only had 1 service before I serviced the car in mid 2023 (when the service light came on the car).   So far Clinkard have had my car for nearly a month (so my wife and I hsve had yo share cars since), they've said we've taken the far to 2x garages so far to inspect it and got 1 more garage to take it to. Currently refusing to tell me what those 2 garages have said so far with the attitude of because you've gone through FOS we have to follow the correct channels and respond to the complaint through them which is quite annoying.
    • This has been playing on my mind a little so been reading. Am I right in saying that if the original debt was regulated under the CCA and below 25k they can't use HCEO? 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.


      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

70/30 split offered but it wasn't my fault! Please help!

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4046 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


Start your own new thread

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



Recommended Posts

Sorry for the longish post, and thanks for reading!

These are the facts:


I was involved in a collision whilst travelling along a residential 30mph road.

I was driving behind a HGV (short-well base delivery type) when I noticed the driver indicating left, slowing right down, started mounting the kerb and parking onto the pavement.


I’m forced to slow down, although I did not stop completely. Next I signal and engaged in overtaking the HGV, yet as I was passing over the HGV driver decided to steer back into the road and crashed into my passengers’ side denting both doors.


After the incident the driver told me that he noticed a traffic sign on the side of the road and considered that it might prevent him from parking securely. He was going to deliver something at one of the addresses on that road.

There were no witnesses.


The HGV had some damage to the bumper and lights whilst my car looks like it needs 2 new doors, maybe more.


70/30 is on the cards, yet I feel mugged of my 6 years no claim bonus and utterly cheated.


Has the Highway Code changed recently because I cannot see what more could I have done to avoid this incident! Can it be my fault? Or the insurers are just trying it out?


Please advice if you can!

Edited by citizenB
Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't sound clear-cut to me, and it sounds like the insurers can't find the lorry driver fully at fault either. He probably should have checked more thoroughly before pulling out again, and it is questionable whether vehicles should park on the pavement at all. However, if you'd come to a full stop behind the lorry (reasonable in a 30mph zone) or given the lorry a wider berth, he probably wouldn't have hit you. On the basis of what you've said, I don't think you would get a full admission of liability and you might want to think about cutting your losses. 70/30 is still in your favour, after all.


If you want to press your case further then I'd suggest you write a letter to both insurers, with a full explanation of the circumstances, using diagrams for the principle events.


If you think the Highway Code comes into it then you need to quote it and explain why the sections apply to the situation in hand. If the lorry clearly breached a section but you did not (and it's a while since I read it myself), then that will make your case much stronger. You can view the current HC online for free.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your advice mamaris30. Do you think it would make any difference that the HGV driver admitted liability to me and was very apologetic about the incident? I only have photos of the after crash to send to the insurers, would they be of any use?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your own insurers haven't seen the photos then they probably should, but whether you send them depends on what they show or could be used to argue. That is entirely your call.


An admission of liability at the scene is unusual, because almost insurers tell their policyholders not to do so under any circumstances, but you should tell your insurers about it. Whether you can prove the admission is another matter, given the lack of witnesses, but hopefully it won't come to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi silviu,


Most insurers are only too happy to share liability. You have to fight hard if you feel you are in the right, and I'm sure I would have done the same as you as the driver was indicating, slowed down, and started to park on the pavement.


Send in the evidence, emphasise that the driver admitted liability, and tell your insurers that they have a duty to fight your corner for you.


Bear in mind it's not just the excess, any liability on your part will affect your future premiums. If the delivery lorry is part of a large group, like Ocado for example, they'll have fleet insurance which won't be affected too badly by one driver's accident, so it's hardly fair that you lose out financially.


I had two bumps last year (first in 20+ years :sad:) and the insurance company would have settled them both on 50/50 if I had allowed them to do so. The first one admitted liability when my insurance company threatened court - total liar. The other one has not even provided a statement or diagram in over a year and the insurers (pushed by me) have issued proceedings. It won't affect that driver, again it's a fleet.


You pay your insurance premiums for them to look after you, not to do a knock-for-knock, so be firm, say it wasn't your fault and they must claim 100% from the other insurers.



Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you about the admission of liability at the scene being unusual, but the driver didn't seem to worry about it. After all, he was driving a company lorry and not his own car, he won't have to pay for any of this, and its probably because of this that his "superiors" are trying to cut their losses by pressing the 70/30 split when (my guess here) the driver itself feels fully responsible for the incident.

You're probably right about "if you'd come to a full stop behind the lorry (reasonable in a 30mph zone) or given the lorry a wider berth, he probably wouldn't have hit you" or any other action I might have taken to prevent this incident. But, the fact remains that he clearly crashed into me. I know overtaking any vehicle isn't without its risks and perhaps I should have waited a few more seconds 'just to make sure', but I didn't because I was convinced by his actions (signal, brake,slow down, mount the kerb and getting onto the pavement) that he was going to park. For my peace of mind, I took all the precaution one can take to safely pass the HGV and engaged in doing so. He didn't assured himself that the maneuver he was about to make was safe when he pulled back out into the road and hit me as I was passing him. These are the undisputed facts. I don't know how the insurers can't see this! and I shall post a letter to both of them as you suggested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you worrying about something that may not happen,

let your insurers handle it.

just tell them exactly what happened with diagrams and photos etc. and put the blame fairly on the lorry; ( he obviously did not check mirrors when he changed his mind and pullued out onto the carriageway again)

good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...