Third party insurer won't admit liability despite the obvious - Is small claims an option?

[paulcornwall]

Hi, I'm posting on behalf of my sister. A few weeks ago she was parked in a supermarket carpark and was just about to open the door to exit. She had the door already ajar, while she gathered her handbag etc, before opening the door any further she looked over her shoulder and a car swung in wide into her space (at speed) and caught the side of her door (see picture attached). The chap at first admitted liability and apologised. Luckily my sister had the common sense to look otherwise she could of easily had her leg crushed.

What we thought would be a open and shut case has now been going on for 3 months. My sisters insurance company are next to useless and keep saying she should claim on her policy and claim back later. My sister refused to do this. She said she wanted to claim direct from the third parties insurance.

Today she receives an email stating the other party will not admit liability and she is liable for the full repair. We have supplied a number of pictures which clearly shows the point of impact, however the third party are now saying she swung her door open.

I believe the pictures shows this is not the case as the damage would be on the inside of the door.

We are now thinking about claiming via the small claims, would this be a route to follow?, perhaps this would persuade the other party to admit liability? She has legal cover, this hasn't been any use what so ever so far. Can anyone help with suggestions?

[Conniff]

If you are sure you can prove your case, then send them a letter before action and tell them they have 14 days and if they don't take action by the end of that time, action will be taken without any further notice. See how they reply.

[Bazooka Boo]

Have you thought about requesting the cctv footage in the car park if there is any?

[paulcornwall]

there is no cctv footage, which is a great shame. So the small claims route is possible then? Can you see what i mean in regards to the place of impact, if clearly shows the door wasnt swung open? and the pics shows the offending vehicle going over into her parking space (thats another pic)

[JoeyJoeC]

Well it is obvious from the picture that the door was hardly open when the other car hit, otherwise the damage would have been with the car door hinges being damaged.

 

Chances are they know this, but are hoping you give up.

 

Do you have contact details for the other party to confirm that he is admitting liability?

[Astronaughtwannabe]

The pic doesn't prove the case either way; it just shows that the door was open before the collision. You can't prove how long the door was open from that picture.

 

You either need better proof (CCTV as suggested) or the third party to concede, or a witness. If you can't get other corroborative proof then this will either be settled at 50/50 or on the credibility of both parties at small claims.

[SuperVillain]

Where was the damage on the other car? Front nearside corner?

 

And who was the email from, why is your sister liable for her own repairs? Did the repairs carried out through a credit hire company? Or are they not done yet?

[paulcornwall]

The point I'm trying to make is in the picture - the collision was face on with the door latch side of the door. This surely proves to a degree the door wasn't wide open. The door was still within the boundaries of the parking space. He therefore must of overshot the parking space entering my sister space.

He had no damage at all on his car which i find amazing tbh. The insurance cover has not even tried fighting this and has just taken his word for the events of that evening. Zurich hasn't even tried defending her, its disgusting. What is legal cover for, will this be any use?...probably not!

[Astronaughtwannabe]

Would it be negligent to encroach on a neighbouring parking space when entering? Obviously not if it's done carefully (accepting 'carefully' is the point under dispute).

 

Replace the word 'carefully' with 'negligently' and that's the rub. There's no 'forensic' value in the damage or the position(s) of the car(s) whatsoever. You say the third party was, they say they weren't.

 

Legal expenses insurance is usually subject to the caveat of "a greater than 50% chance of winning" or similar. Now go back to the beginning and tell me what odds you'd give a stranger?

[Conniff]

He had no damage at all on his car which i find amazing tbh

 

 

Looking at that pic, he had damage, you just couldn't see it.

[Slimm]

Not a great case if that's definitely all the evidence she has. There's nothing to say she didn't open the door as he was already entering his space and nothing to say she wasn't encroaching on 'his' space.

 

 

She could certainly run to trial but there is a risk the Judge would go 50:50 or even prefer the other drivers version of events if they present their version of events well. The worst case scenario is she issues, he presents a counter claim for personal injury and wins, leaving your sister thousands of pounds of legal fees.

[Bazooka Boo]

The worst case scenario is she issues, he presents a counter claim for personal injury and wins, leaving your sister thousands of pounds of legal fees.

 

That made me chuckle, never going to happen unless he admits he actually did drive into the vehicle, hey presto case closed.

 

The fact remains, the vehicle was damaged by the third party hitting it, it would be up to the judge at the time to decide

on the balance of probabilities who is to blame, as a driver you are told to always expect the unexpected, and steaming into a parking spot

alongside another vehicle with the driver sat at the wheel of the parked vehicle, tends to leave me to feel the third party either wasn't paying attention

or genuinely hit the other vehicle without malice.

 

Have you got his Insurance details?

IMO I would go ahead and get three quotes for the repairs, then send them to his Ins Coy, advising them that you will go ahead with one of them, or one of their choice, and will then seek a claim against their driver for the damages/repairs to your vehicle.

[Astronaughtwannabe]

That made me chuckle, never going to happen unless he admits he actually did drive into the vehicle, hey presto case closed.

 

The fact remains, the vehicle was damaged by the third party hitting it, it would be up to the judge at the time to decide

on the balance of probabilities who is to blame, as a driver you are told to always expect the unexpected, and steaming into a parking spot

alongside another vehicle with the driver sat at the wheel of the parked vehicle, tends to leave me to feel the third party either wasn't paying attention

or genuinely hit the other vehicle without malice.

 

Have you got his Insurance details?

IMO I would go ahead and get three quotes for the repairs, then send them to his Ins Coy, advising them that you will go ahead with one of them, or one of their choice, and will then seek a claim against their driver for the damages/repairs to your vehicle.

 

But that works both ways...

 

The other driver might say that as he was just pulling into the space, the other driver flung their door open just in front of his car.

 

There's no amount of forensic, legal or voodoo analysis to solve this dichotomy. It's either that it will be settled 50/50 by the insurers or that one side issues a small claim and risks either a successful counterclaim or even no judgment made at all.

[Bazooka Boo]

Yep quite agree,, if the OP is prepared to stump up 50% of the repair bill and can get the 3rd party Ins Coy to stump up the other 50% then it might be a more satisfactory outcome.

 

(P.S. How's the space training coming along?)

[Astronaughtwannabe]

Yep quite agree,, if the OP is prepared to stump up 50% of the repair bill and can get the 3rd party Ins Coy to stump up the other 50% then it might be a more satisfactory outcome.

 

(P.S. How's the space training coming along?)

 

Been working on it all my life mate and still no nearer ;-)

[Bazooka Boo]