Insurers have determined 50/50 liability when other driver was clearly at fault

[Astronaughtwannabe]

Just posting to say this situation was happily resolved... despite the lack of help from the insurance company.

 

 

 

My partner was told by the insurers that as there was no evidence to suggest the other motorist was in the wrong she would have to settle for a 50/50.

 

 

 

My partner found out who the police officer was who was at the scene after the accident and contacted him. He wrote a letter detailing that the CCTV evidence from the bus travelling in the lane next to that my partner clearly shows the other motorist jumping a red light, the officer detailed how my partner was not liable in any way.

 

 

 

I thought the reason we paid insurance companies was so they could carry out these investigations? It's also sickening that the other motorist told an outright lie to cover herself and put my partner through a very tough time.

 

 

 

 

It's very common but glad it was resolved in your favour.

[Jaye05]

Insurance companies have surrogated rights read the policy terms. They base liability on if the case was to proceed to court, what evidence there is and how the judge would rule. Court costs are ridiculously high and if they do not feel that a great decision than 50/50 is attainable then hey will not defend a case.

 

At the end of the day it's a business and if every case was to proceed to court and they were liable for costs then it's the policyholders that would suffer in the long run.

 

Not ideal but they way it is