ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Non Fault and Fault Motor Claims

Updated on June 19, 2013

Non Fault Accidents.

So long as your insurer is able to make a full recovery for all of all the costs involved in a claim then it will be classed as a Non-Fault Claim. Classic examples of non-fault claims are:

You are hit by a third party vehicle while stationary

You are hit by a third party vehicle in rear.

You are hit by a third party vehicle exiting a side street.

You are hit by a reversing third party vehicle.

You are hit by a third party vehicle that is turning across your path.

Fault Accidents.

You will be at fault if you carried out a manoeuvre that directly contributed to the accident happening. Typical examples of circumstances where you would be held at fault are:

You hit a stationary/parked third party vehicle

You hit another third party vehicle in the rear

You hit a third party vehicle on the main road as you exited a side street

You hit a third party vehicle while reversing

You hit a third party vehicle if you turn across its path.

Sometimes people will put forward mitigating circumstances to try to persuade their insurance company that they are not really at fault. By says such things as:

“But the other driver was going too fast.”

An argument often put forward especially in an accident involving one car exiting a side road and hitting a vehicle on the main road. But it is an argument that clearly points to you being at fault. If you could see that the other car was travelling at speed then you should have let them to pass and waited until the way ahead was clear.

In any case, It doesn't matter how fast the other person was driving the deciding factor is that you carried out an manoeuvre that was directly responsible for the collision. The car on the main road always has the right of way even if they were driving too fast which cannot be proved by your insurer in any case. Nor does it matter if the driver of the other car was drunk with his feet on the dashboard a mobile phone in one hand and a sandwich in the other; they still have the right of way and if you hit them you are at fault.

“I couldn’t see him because my view was obstructed."

You are edging out of a side street but your view is obstructed by parked cars for instance, or by hedges along the side of the road, or perhaps you didn't see the other car because they were coming round a bend in the road. And as a result you hit the car on the main road. It’s your fault. You might not have done anything wrong because you might have taken every precaution to guard against the possibility of something like this happening. But if it does, it will be your fault. Again because the vehicle on the main road always has the right of way and it was by your actions the accident happened. When you are in your car you drive at your own risk.

“He shouldn’t have been parked there/He was parked illegally."

That doesn' t matter. He was there to be seen and it is your responsibility to make sure that the way is clear before you carried out your manoeuvre.

“But he was indicating to turn left.”

You are at a junction waiting to join the main road. You look to your right and see a car on the main road coming towards you indicating left. You assume that he will be turning down into your side street. You exit onto the main road but instead of turning left the car on the main road continues straight on and there is a crash. You are at fault. You shouldn't t have assumed he was turning left. You should not have moved away onto the main road until you were sure that indeed he was turning left.

“He stopped very suddenly and for no reason.”

It is your responsibility to keep a safe braking distance between you and the car in front. The fact that you hit him proves you were too close .

“He should have seen me reversing."

No. You should have checked to make sure that the way was clear for you to reverse. Likewise, if you check before you start reversing to make sure the way is clear but a car suddenly appears behind you while you are reversing and you hit it you will still be held at fault. Reversing is an inherently risky and it is therefore your responsibility to make sure you carry out this manoeuvre safely .

“There was a car stationary on the main road. He flashed his lights to say it was okay for me to move into the line of traffic in front of him when he suddenly started to move forward and hit me."

You are at fault as he had the right of way. Likewise if a driver on a main road flashes his lights to indicate that it is okay for you to exit the side street and you do but you then hit another third party vehicle on the main road you will be held at fault. Because it is your responsibility to check that the way is clear.

A Brief Summery.

You are at fault if you did something that directly contributed to the accident. Even if you couldn’t help it, even if you did everything humanly possible under the circumstances to make sure that an accident didn’t happen you will be held at fault.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • profile image

      Robert Fraser 6 weeks ago

      If I am trying to turn at a dead end which clearly states no parking emergency turning area, but both sides have cars parked at both ends of the emergency turning point, you find yourself inching back and forward and you accidentally bump one, could you please tell me who is at fault. Thank you.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 10 months ago

      Thanks!

    • Denny Xie profile image

      Denny Xie 10 months ago from Sydney

      Hi John - Great piece on the different types of claims

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 14 months ago

      Hi,

      I'm not sure what happened from your description. What do you mean by..." I yield and I turned to the right. I was a couple minutes down the road, and I was hit." If you were on the main road when you were hit in the rear then it's not your fault. But, if you entered a main road from a side street and crashed with another car then you would be at fault.

    • profile image

      R.B.M 15 months ago

      I was at a turn, to turn on the main highway. The highway that I was merging on had the right of way. It was also a 45 mph highway. The cars were going pretty slow, so, I yield and I turned to the right. I was a couple minutes down the road, and I was hit. The person that was driving couldn't have been looking in front of them, and surely was driving to fast. The car was going full speed. But, I was told it was my fault. Because, that lane had the right of way. Is this right?

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 16 months ago

      Hi John,

      Wow! they've taken 4 ncb & increased your premium by 120%. Never heard that before. Is there just one claim going on here? Because in my experience until a claim is settled both sides involved loose 2ncb until liability is confirmed. Once the claim is settled (and I would expect it to be settled in your favour) your ncb will be re-instated and your premium recalculated to reflect that. You will also get back any excess you might have paid.

    • profile image

      John 16 months ago

      Hi Reinhard , they actually have taken 4 years NCB & a 120% increase. Will I get the £550 Excess ,plus the extra £260 back & my 4 years NCB back ?

      Is she liable as she crossed into my lane to turn right when she was in a ahead only marked lane ?

      Many thanks Reinhard

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 16 months ago

      Hi John,

      The reason why she hasn't reported the accident to her insurance company is that there was no damage to her car (that's the usual reason why people don't report an accident). Until the claim is settled your insurer will assume the worst & thats why they have increased your premium and taken 2 yrs ncb from you. You'll get it all back if the ladies insurer accept full liability.

    • profile image

      John 16 months ago

      I was sat at the traffic lights in Clarence road ,next to a Peugeot dealership, Robins & Day , Clarence road , Bristol BS1 6PR. In my car , I was in the left hand lane , the road traffic markings indicate that this lane is for traffic going straight ahead or who want to turn left into Temple gate. The lane next to me is the right hand lane, the traffic markings for this lane indicate that this lane is for traffic going ahead only, in this lane was a Black Range Rover Evoque . The lights changed to red-Amber, then green so I pulled away, I had travelled approx. 12’ & was now level with the corner of Temple gate , At this point the Black Range rover Evoque which was in the Right hand straight ahead only lane turned left into the side of my car. The large front wheels of the Range rover smashed the offside front wing of my Car & slid along into the front wheel of my car. The lady wound down her window & said “ Your lane is for turning left only” , it is clearly not!

      It was a very windy & rainy day & very high volume of traffic so we moved the cars into Temple gate to exchange details etc.The lady was very surprised that there was no damage to her car & yet mine was caved in , it was because the she had turned the wheel so much that only her front wheel Tyre was touching & pushing my car out of the way, my car was bobbing up & down as she accelerated around the corner towards Temple gate whilst in the right hand lane that is marked ahead only ! I asked for her Insurance details & she gave me a business card, I said this was not enough & she then gave me her name address & a policy number with name of Insurance company. It turned out that this was no longer her Insuarnce company ,but they did give me her current Insurance companys details.

      It has been nearly 90 days Now & she ahs not reported it to her Insurance company, my Insurance company said @ 90 days they will discuss whether to take her Insurance company to court. Since then her Insurance company have demanded she attends a meeting with them for her side of the event.

      Now my Isuarnce is up for renewal & my Insuarnce company have Increased the premium from £190 to £415 & have taken yrs NCB from me is this fair, as they ahve alway maintained they are holding her wholly responsible ?

    • profile image

      alan 18 months ago

      i reversed into an opening to turn my car and continue my journey in opposite direction ,as i changed from reverse to first gear and moved forward i saw a van reversing out of an opening in front of me onto the main road i was on,do aviod collision i immediatly braked and stopped the van which was then about six feet from me clearly wasnt stopping so i sounded my horn loudly but it continued till it colloided with the front of my car ,,the driver then stepped out and said he did not see me but it was my fault as id driven into him ,i sated id stopped dead and sounded my horn which he addmited he heard ,but still said it was my fault as i hadnt been there when he climbed into his van ,who is at fault please .

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 19 months ago from LEEDS

      Hi again James,

      That doesn't change anything though as far as liability (in my view) is concerned. He could say (and no doubt will say it to his insurer) that he was already reversing when you started to move your car directly into his path and he couldn't help but hit you. I still think it will end up as a split liabilty. Though I still think that the majority of the blame lies with him - because he was reversing.

    • profile image

      James banner 19 months ago

      Hi, yes i was moving, but the thing is I was 3 quarters of the way in as the damage happened to my rear driver door.

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 19 months ago from LEEDS

      Hi James,

      You say "as I went to turn my car around..." does that mean you were stationary? If you were then the other driver would be at fault (but I think you'll have a problem proving that because he can easily say you moved into his path). And so if you were moving then it will be a split liability in my view for 2 reasons a) it will be argued you should have checked to sure that all was clear & b) the other driver shd have done the same before moving from his parking place. The majority of this blame would still lie with the other driver as he was reversing.

    • profile image

      James banner 19 months ago

      Hi, i was wondering if anyone would have some advise for me.

      At the bottom of my road we have an area were you could turn you car around. As I went to turn my car around a parked car on my right had reversed into my rear quarter driver side. He is trying to say I should have seen and made sure before i had pulled in to turn my car around. But my argument is that I was in there first before he had reversed also this would be suggested as the damage was to the rear and not the front. Any advice on whos fault it could be as there are no other threads on the internet with similar matters. Im based in the UK.

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 22 months ago

      hi Ben,

      Yes you are. If you hit someone in rear it's always your fault.

    • profile image

      Ben 22 months ago

      Hi Reinhart Beck

      I was stationary behind a vehicle in side road. Both of us were turning to the left. The vehicle in front of me pulled forward to turn left and it was in an angle of about 45 degree. I moved forward and moved my head to check for oncoming vehicles from the right hand side. There was a vehicle coming from that way at distance of about 200m (max distance visibility as there is a top of a small hill...). I decided to pull out too. But the car i front of me has stalled or stopped suddenly in that couple of seconds when i was checking to the right. I did not even get the chance to see something. I drove straight in the care stopped in front of me from 0 to whatever speed you can get in around 4-5 meters. I've got a lot of damage to my car because of the towbar fitted on the other car. The lady driver gone mad (yelling, swearing, slamming my car doors) then she refused to give me her name, than she gave me a different name. I phoned the police because two blokes showed up and they seized my car keys from ignition....

      My question is am i entirely at fault? I don't feel like that. I do not comment about lady's way of driving but only it seemed weird.

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 23 months ago

      hi Lancelotte,

      If you have comprehensive insurance you'll be covered. In any case the "truck" is at fault here anyway. Just because your wife parked the car badly is a good reason to hit it. The driver will have seen it and should have taken measures to avoid it.

    • profile image

      Lancelotte 23 months ago

      Hi Reinhard Beck

      My wife parked badly in the road, leaving the road narrower than it should have been.(about 18-24 inches from the curb. She came into the house and asked me to park the car better. I went out to to do this but in the time she came to tell me and me going back to the car, a large truck style ambulance (not going to an emergency) came down the road and scratched the car. The driver apologised but said he would have to report the scratching in case there was damage to the ambulance. If there was damage it would be very slight, but I am concerned that my insurance would not cover the damage to the ambulance if there was any due to my wifes parking. What do you think?

    • profile image

      Hi Reinhard Beck 23 months ago

      I was stationary behind a vehicle in side road. Both of us were turning to the left. The vehicle in front of me pulled forward to turn left and it was in an angle of about 45 degree. I moved forward and moved my head to check for oncoming vehicles from the right hand side. There was a vehicle coming from that way at distance of about 200m (max distance visibility as there is a top of a small hill...). I decided to pull out too. But the car i front of me has stalled or stopped suddenly in that couple of seconds when i was checking to the right. I did not even get the chance to see something. I drove straight in the care stopped in front of me from 0 to whatever speed you can get in around 4-5 meters. I've got a lot of damage to my car because of the towbar fitted on the other car. The lady driver gone mad (yelling, swearing, slamming my car doors) then she refused to give me her name, than she gave me a different name. I phoned the police because two blokes showed up and they seized my car keys from ignition....

      My question is am i entirely at fault? I don't feel like that. I do not comment about lady's way of driving but only it seemed weird.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 23 months ago

      Hi Joyce,

      I can't see what the arguement here is. You were on the main rd and therefore you had the right of way. The other side cannot hold you responsible for something they thought you might (but didn't) do. What looks what happened (from 3rd party pov) is that they saw you indicate and they assumed you were going to turn into the next side str and so pulled out and because you didn't turn left but went straight on you got hit.

      There is a test case that might help you here but unfortunately I can't remember what it's called. The law used to be that if you were on a main rd and indicated left (but didn't) but went straight on and were hit by a car exiting a side street you were at fault. (As happened here).

      But it went to appeal in 1962 and it was decided that actuallyy it was up to the car in the side street to wait and see if in fact you did make a left turn or not...and then exit the side street. Your insurer should know all this and also they should know that accident management companies are an expensive plague. Don't listen to them saying it's 50-50 it's what the insurance companies think that counts since they will be the ones paying the costs of this.

    • profile image

      Joyce Gilding 23 months ago

      Hi Reinhardbeck,

      I was driving on the Main Street, indicating left thinking that I have it was on the entrance for Currys. I then changed my mind and went straight and a car from the side street pulled out and hit me on the side of my car. I even tried to avoid her and move to the next lane but she still hit me. The damage was so bad that the car is a write off. Their insurer do not want to accept full responsibility. Now my insurer says that I must have slowed down before I have approached the left turn because there was a row of green fence on the left blocking my view, at which point did I find out that it was not Currys. I said as there was a sign outside which I could spot from a distance, I knew it wasn't the right place. Third party is now claiming that I have made the manoeuvre to turn left then turned out again, which made them have the right of way. I denied this claim because I definitely didn't turn left and turn out again,it would not be physically possible.

      Please help ! It feels that the insurance company is not making any effort to contact witness or do anything, it was the accident management company who told me all this, and they say it looks like a 50-50. What do you think?

      Thanks and regards

      Joyce

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 24 months ago

      Hi Carol,

      If you are exiting a car park and you are hit by a car on the road - you will be at fault. They have right of way. If you want to join the stream of traffic on the road it is your responsibility to do that safely. Andd even if you take all possible care and an accident still happens - it's still your fault.

    • profile image

      carol 24 months ago

      if its a two way street and lots of traffic both ways and your comming out of a parking lot with cars obstructing the veiw that are parked along the road your making a left hand turn which there is a bend in the road and traffic that comes around a corner to the left you have to be aware of so when you get that wating clear path which is clear on your left and about to be come clear as you look to the right to you which is the direction of traval you will also be heading you have creeped out because the left is clear and are in a stationary position and around the bend to your left comes a car and hits you on the drivers side doesent even brake or slow down basically doesent even see you as you are about to continue your turn who isat fault or is it considered a both fault

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 24 months ago

      eatalot,

      I'm at a loss to be honest as to what the TP insurer are up to. The TP vehicle was (in other words) crossing your path from right to left and as far as I'm concerned they don't have a leg to stand on (hence the request for an extension perhaps). They perhaps have some additional information that they perhaps will help their case. But if that is so why be so coy? I don't get it. Perhaps they think they have a witness. But what if that witness confirms your story, where does that leave them?

      Perhaps you did something to "cause" the accident but it was the actions by the TPV which caused the accident. I am betting that the reason they want an extension is because they are difficulty getting their PH to co-operate. If that is the case there is a time limit (not sure how long) but after a period of time the TP must accept liability on behalf of their policyholder.

    • profile image

      eatalot 24 months ago

      Thanks for responding, apologies, it is quite hard to explain, for simplicity, maybe we should picture the layout as a crossroad, they came into my view from a side street on my right looking to exit their continuation on my left, I was on the main dual carriageway and that they were only permitted to turn to their left, not proceed across my path.

      My insurers are currently waiting for TP defence statement, as the TP insurers did not respond to any correspondence after the accident, TP insurers had asked for extension and also only advised they will be looking to counter-sue (with hired solicitors). My insurers have no additional information, but I am interested on which grounds they will likely build a case around.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello eatalot,

      I'm a bit confused. Your 1st para suggests that a car on your right turned in front of you as it made to enter a side str to your left. But in 2nd para you say they exited a side street. (to hit his passanger side they would have to be exiting a side str from your right wdn't they?) But in meantime, if you are on a main road & if you are driving straight ahead you are not at fault. Whether were trying to enter a side str on your left or exiting a side street to your right the fact is they crossed into your path. You need to find out from your insurer why TP are hiring a solicitor. People do this because they think a) you'll be intimidated (oh mt gawd!...he's got Rumpole of the Old Bailey!) and b) because they think a sols has more clout. But in my experience they very often have no clue about motor claims or how an insurance company operates. Facts are facts and wont change just because you've got a "brief" writing snotty letters.

    • profile image

      eatalot 2 years ago

      Hi, If you can help clarify whether the case is as clear cut as I presume. Travelling on the left lane of a duel carriageway with many side streets joining, I came past a set of lights on green, so I proceeded on, on my right came a car cutting across the carriageway to side street on the left.

      Due to seeing them late, I went into their passenger side and front wheel. Upon reflection and visiting the area afterwards, the street they exited from also has a set of lights, but were only permitted to join the carriageway by turning left (not cut across the carriageway). Following your previous notes, they were entering the main road and did not observe the highway code and hopefully you will agree that they are at fault.

      Insurers have just notified me that TP have employed private solicitors to prepare a counter claim. Is there anything I should be aware of and maybe prepare for, as I cannot think what they might be able to defend and claim on?

    • profile image

      reinhard Beck 2 years ago

      Hello again Chris,

      I think your insurance company is wrong here. The driver exiting the side street needs to check that it is safe for him to enter the main rd. it wasn't...as the accident proved. He hit you on the rear wheel. To me that shows you were well into your maneouvre when he hit you. This accident scenario can never be 50/50. You have right of way. He hit you because he moved off into the main rd to early.

    • profile image

      Chris 2 years ago

      Hello again currently my insurance company says that because we were both performing a maneuver the liability will be 50/50 split becuase we both have a duty of care to watch out for each other, I now have a witness who can verify the accident and that I had begun turning when about halfway through the turn the other driver comes out of the side road and hits me surely then this would put it at his liability like you said for pulling out when he clearly shouldn't have

    • profile image

      Reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Chris,

      He's at fault. He was exiting a side street when he shouldn't have done.

    • profile image

      chris 2 years ago

      Hello from the uk

      I was driving along a major road and indicated to turn into a side road I saw the road ahead was clear and safe to turn in about halfway across a driver from the sideroad pulled out and hit my rear quarter panel and wheel surely they are at fault because I have right of way and have done everything possible to ensure a safe manoveur

    • profile image

      amelamustafic 2 years ago

      Thank you for your help and time, I really do hope that I did have right of way and the other driver is wrong in this situation.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello again, amelamustafic,

      looks like you both were on a minor road. So who had right of way?

      You would if only because you were travelling straight on and the other driver was attempting to access that road (and should make sure the road is clear for him to do that). It can be tricky establishing liability that happen on side streets because there are no rules about who has priority but I don't think this applies here

    • profile image

      amelamustafic 2 years ago

      Thank you. I will have to write a letter to his insurance now and explain how it happened. If you can try again for address it is 1 Jacob Drive Labrador or 148 Brisbane Road because this is crucial part I turned left from Brisbane Road into Jacob drive and he was coming from the street on my left side I just hope this is side street because there are a lot of shops there even this street doesn't have a name and ends there where he hit me .I hope because I was coming from his right side he need to give way for me. Thank you

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi amelamustafic,

      First of all don't be intimidated by the other driver getting witnesses. Because...so what. If he is at fault the witnesses will simply confirm that when they describe what they saw. Now are you at fault? To cut a long story short if you were on a main road, if he was exiting a street where he was required to give way then he is at fault. If that is how it turns out the fact that you don't have comp policy wont matter as his insurance will pay for the repairs to your car. (in an accident that is your fault TPF&T wont cover the repairs to your car but your insurer will pay for his). By the way I couldn't find Jacobs Dr on G/maps.

    • profile image

      amelamustafic 2 years ago

      Hi, from Australia, I was travelling on the main road and I went to turn left into the smaller two way road and also there is a small road on the left as soon as you turn left.I slowed as I was turning and I checked if it was safe and accelerated driving straight and just as I was about to completely pass the small road on my left, a car hit directly into my left front wheel damaging my left side bumper and my headlight popped out slightly ,my bumper bar has his red paint all over and his damage was on his right front bumper bar. He was telling me it was my fault because I didn't stop but I think he needed to give way to me as I was driving on the road. He was the one who didn't stop at all or slow down yet he wanted to exit the road as it was ending. I am also not sure if the small road on the left is side street I can give you address and you can see on Google map if possible. Thank you in advance. The address is Brisbane Road 148 Gold Coast and I turned in Jacobs drive and he was coming from the street on the left side (no name street).Also I don't have comprehensive insurance only third part. Can you please tell me who is at fault here.He was going around to potential witnesses and trying to convince them that it was my fault. Thanks for your consideration.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Riki,

      I'm not sure what you mean when you say..."the driver on the left land drove up fast". It sounds like you had passed him and for some reason put his foot on the gas. The area of damage on your cars suggests you were still on the r/h/lane & he still in his l/h/lane. If that is the case he would be at fault for running into the back of you. However, there is nothing to stop him saying you drifted into his lane or than when you overtook him you drived in front of him (or tried to) in his lane cutting out his braking distance; hence the accident. I reckon you might have to bit your lip and accept a split liability outcome. You'll only get a 100% decision in your favour if the circs are 100% clear. And I don't think they are.

    • profile image

      Riki- 2 years ago

      Hi, I was on the right land and overtook a driver on the left lane... I indicated and checked my mirrors. When it was safe to do so I overtook, unfortunately when doing this manoeuvre the driver on the left land drove up fast and collided with the rear left side of my vehicle. The front drivers side of his car bore superficial scratches. Who is at fault

    • profile image

      Roxanna79 2 years ago

      That isn't nice for people to scream at you, I think they have lost the plot if they do that but I do understand the frustration when their vehicle has been hit and they are classed as being at fault. Daughter wasn't hurt and that is the main thing, thanks againfor clarifying

    • profile image

      reinhard Beck 2 years ago

      Hi Roxanna79,

      Don't forget all (as far is I know) of these rules have been tested in court over many years. Also bear in mind your policy protects you from any one making a claim against you whether it's because you damaged their property or caused them injury...you will be covered. But when you take the car off the driveway onto the street you do so at your own risk. Which means your insurer does not judge you or even take your side (wh a policyholder always expects) and as a claims advisor people just couldn't understand when I told them they were at fault for exiting a side street and hitting some one on a main rd. They always wanted me (the insurance company) to fight & take the matter to court because that was my job. But it wasnt. My job was to call a spade a spade. At which point people started screaming at me.

    • profile image

      Roxanna79 2 years ago

      Thanks for taking the time to reply, I had always been under the impression that if someone hit you then they were at fault and in answer to your question re what rules you should apply my response would be to look at the positioning damage on any car as evidence. Live and learn. It is actually a scary thought though that whenever you pull onto a main road if you get hit, it's your fault regardless.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi lisee

      I could be wrong here, but I think it will a split claim 20-80% in your favour. You did pull out to overtake & should have made sure it was ok for you to do so. The car is more at fault though because he was behind you and he shd have been more aware of what was going on ahead of him. If you over take you do so at your own risk and if it doesn't pay off...it's your fault.

    • profile image

      lisee 2 years ago

      Overtaking a cyclist in a hgv and a car pulls out behind me. scraped all down the side of his car and lost his mirror against my mudflaps. He's saying I pulled out when he was over taking me, but i indicated and pulled out overtaking the cyclist and he must have be close to see, and didn't realise that my cab pulls out before my trailor, hence him hitting my mudflaps. Who's fault is it actually

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Roxanna79

      Yes I know! How many times have I had these (endless) conversations with policyholders who feel that they obeyed the Highway Code to the letter and drove carefully and responsibly and yet...!!!

      But let's consider this problem in the abstract. Two cars crash what rules do you apply as an insurer to reach a decision? (If you leave it up to the drivers to make that decision no decision would ever be reached. So the decision has t be taken out of your hands. Rules are drawn up which say...if you exit a car park or a side street onto a main road and there is an accident you are at fault because the car on the main rd has priority. That is the rule. And there are no exceptions. If there were every claim would be contested lawyers would get involved it would take years and years and cost an absolute fortune. So I do understand how you feel but your insurer (and the other drivers insurer as well don't forget) will insist the rules are obeyed. Sorry

    • profile image

      Roxanna79 2 years ago

      Hi,

      I think you will agree with the insurer here but still going to ask anyway.

      Daughter was exiting a car park turning right onto a main road across two oncoming lanes(no left turn). There was a yellow hatched box and her exit was clear, the car in the first oncoming lane had stopped to let her out and the second oncoming lane was clear, she edged out. A car then appeared on the second oncoming lane, my daughter stopped and the oncoming car hit her driver side corner. Insurer's saying that it is her fault.

      I understand that the car on the main road always has right of way, but equally she had the right to enter the hatched box and stopped appropriately when she saw the oncoming vehicle. Surely even on a main road a driver has to drive with care and attention. If a child had run out onto the road there, then the oncoming car would have been liable. It appears ridiculous that a yellow hatched box is there to assist drivers exiting car park yet when she used it correctly she is at fault.

      Feeling frustrated!!

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Confused (and sorry for the delay)

      Your insurer is right and yes you are worrying needlessly.

    • profile image

      Confused 2 years ago

      I have an unusual one. I had to turn right at a set of lights onto a two lane road. I turned, and finding my way blocked in one lane, moved to the other. This lane was also obstructed a little further on so I stopped, indicated that I was going to go to back to the other lane (which was now clear) and waited.

      Presumably thinking that I was going to come out in front of him, a driver in the other lane slowed to a stop, and the van behind him failed to stop and went in to the back of him . Nobody had hit my car, which had not had contact with any vehicle.

      Hearing the bang, and realising there had been an accident, I pulled over and got out of my car to make sure nobody was hurt. To my shock, the van driver who had run into the car in front suggested that the accident was my fault due to my road positioning, and the guy he had hit seemed to agree with him. The car driver said I was moving towards him (which I'm pretty sure I wasn't when trying to piece together events) which is why he stopped , causing the van driver to go into the back of him .Neither of them are claiming that my car made contact with any other vehicle. The fact that I had stopped means that they took my registration details.

      In light of this surprising conversation, I contacted my insurer, who said that I could not be held responsible for the accident as it was a straightforward case of the van driver not leaving sufficient braking distance to stop. They also said that as I was not "involved" in the accident in the context of hitting or being hit by another vehicle, there was no need for me to make a formal report.

      The whole experience has left me a bit shocked and shaken. Is there anything else I need to do here / be concerned about, or am I worrying needlessly ?

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago from LEEDS

      hi emma,

      That's a question I haven't anticipated! Still, motor legal protection I don't think is really necessary these days. What used to be the case (in the olden days) is that if you were involved in an accident you needed to claim back your "uninsured losses" such as your excess you might have paid, use of a hire car, loss of earnings and personal injury. But these days (to save time and money) an insurer will deal inhouse with all of these. ie; if your accident is clearly non fault your excess will be waived automatically and the 3rd party insurer will arrange a hire car for you and if you are injured they will deal with that for you too and compensate you for loss of earnings and so on. In the old days all these "uninsured losses" had to be claimed back through a solicitor- a lengthy and costly prosesses. So it's only any use to you if you are involved in an accident where you need to claim back money not covered by your policy.

    • profile image

      Emma 2 years ago

      Hi just a general query. Do you recommend motor legal Protection. It is £30

      Regards

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago from LEEDS

      Hi Stephen,

      Well, if you were still completely in your lane then she will be at fault...if it can be proven that she strayed into your lane (even by a fraction). But can anyone prove anything here? I can see this being settled as a disputed claim by your respective insurance companies. My advice would be for both of you to not bother claiming. the damage is very minor (I'm assuming) and the cost of claiming would be far higher due to loss of NB and increased premiums at renewal than the cost of any repairs.

    • profile image

      Stephen Heffernan 2 years ago

      Hi, I was driving on a road with two lanes - left lane for left turn and going straight and right lane for right turn. I was driving in the right hand lane past cars and clipped the wing mirror of a car stopped in the left hand lane as she was too far over into my lane and I couldn't move out any further as there was oncoming traffic.

      Am I at fault or is she?

    • profile image

      JoyKirkbride 2 years ago

      Perfect reply =) Knew there's no way he could be right. My insurance say same. Just worry seen as my car is a lot more expensive than his & he was so aggressive ! Caused around £1500 to mine... Thanks for you help.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Joy,

      You're right. It is straight forward. If he was parked at the side of the rd and moved off into the road & hit you then he is at fault. And makes no difference what you were doing. (even if you were "speeding" why then didn't he wait for you to "speed" past before moving into traffic?) Useful rule of thumb one: if you are on a main road & some one hits you they are at fault. rule of thumb two: if you are trying to carry out a manoeuvre (eg a turn) & hit someone it's you fault.

    • profile image

      Joy Kirkbride 2 years ago

      Hi,

      seems a straight forward answer to me, but I'd just like some advice.

      I was travelling down a 30mph street, cars parked either side making it only 1 lane. I got so far down the street & got along side a large 4x4 and the man parked behind yanked his car out, no indicators, or slowly, straight out. I emergency stopped my car but it was too late. He didn't seem to brake at all & hit me. He admitted he couldn't see what was coming due to the large 4x4 & the fact that the drivers side of his car was next to the pavement. He got out very aggressively, shouting I was speeding, I wasn't. And my passenger can vouch for all this too.

      He said it is my fault as I was apparently speeding, yet admitted he could not see! I'm expecting my insurance will never accept 50/50 or anything other than he is at fault?

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago from LEEDS

      Hello Leanne,

      The other guy have to prove that your mum hit his car. The witness doesn't count because he's not independent. Your insurance company shd send an engineer round to check on the damage and confirm; if there is damage, whether you caused it (eg is the area of damage consistant with what he says your mum did and is the damage fresh?) and how much will it cost to fix. But admit nothing. If he is going to make a mountain out of a mole hill then let him do all the spade work.

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago from LEEDS

      Hi Truthfaith,

      Your insurance company should be dealing with this...not you. If the other side admitted liability they are responsible for all the costs so what they shd have done is A) settle as quick as possible and B) provide you with a hire car. The only way they can dispute the cost of the hire car is if you "splashed out" on a car of higher spec than your own. In other words if you normally drive a 1.6 ( lets say) and you hire a 2.o litre car. It sounds to me like they might have admitted liability and then changed their mind. The only other possibility is that repairs to your car took longer than they think it should have and are not prepared to pay for any delays. Again your insurer shd tell you what is going on. And what your insurer should have done is sorted out a hire car for you. Why didn't they? But the bottom line is...if the lorry drivers insurance have admitted liability to your insurer then they are liable for the cost of that hire. So you need to find out; was the settlement of you total loss claim "dragged out" and if so who by and why? What the TP cd and shd have done is say (for example) ok we know we cd be at fault here but it might take time to sort out but we'll accept "liability w.o prejudice" and agree to pay for hire for X days and then we'll see. Or at the very least your insurer cd have negotiated something like that for you. Insurance companies have "arrangements" to agree certain precedures to keep costs down...esp the cost of hire (they have commerical arrangements with hire companies that mean they get much lower rates than you will get them for. So find out if your claim was delayed, who by and why.

    • profile image

      Truthfaith 2 years ago

      So in my case mentioned above I was not found at fault and my insurance company took care of all the damage to my vehicle but I was stuck getting a rental which in the end was $2000. I was told that the other drivers insurance would reimburse me for the costs seeing that his negligent driving caused me to have no vehicle. The insurance companies dragged out the total loss process and I was without a vehicle for a long time. Which is why the rental costs is so high. Now his his insurance company has denied my claim for reimbursement saying that I failed to meet the burden of proof. I Am at my wits end with this. It was def 100% the other drivers fault. I was sitting stationary for over 5 mins when the truck tried to pass me on my left when the road was not big enough and he hit me. He misjudged his size and space and had ok patience if he would have waited along with me and the other 100s of cars trying to get off the exit this never would have Happened. I cannot understand how they can deny me reimbursement. I'm not sure what to so but I cannot allow this injustice to happen. Do I get a lawyer and take them to court?

    • profile image

      Leanne 2 years ago

      Thank you for the reply. We called the police on 101 for some advice and they said to go through the insurance and to not hesitate to call 999 if she felt threatened by him again. He visited her home and my Grandad went round to witness it. He showed my grandad the damage but would not allow my grandad to take a photograph. Nor would he line his car up with my mums to see what part would have hit... as my Grandad said the damage he pointed out was 2 tiny dots of paint missing just under the cars registration plate. No damage could be seen on the bumper or anywhere else on the back of the car. My mum told him she would not pay him any cash and after some raised voices and the police being called he abandoned the scene. The police later came and took a statement from my mum and said they would visit the man to tell him to go through the insurnace and not bother her again. So far there has been no more contact from him ☺yey. He has however put in a claim against her. Do you think she will be found to be at fault? As she was reversing i can only see that they would find it to be either 1) a full fault claim against her or 2) a fraudulent claim made by him. He had a friend come out to look at the car with at the time of the incident. And the friend had said he saw no damage (until he washed it) but the friend was not there when my mum was shown the damage later in the day. I am aware that the witness could easily change this fact to side with his friend.

      Thank you

    • reinhardBeck profile image
      Author

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago from LEEDS

      Hello Leanne,

      Well, my first thought was...she should call the police. My next thought was she should tell in no uncertain terms to ****! (but I understand if she doesn't) but I would still call the police. An accident is a civil matter so the police don't get involved but demanding money with menacies is. Other than that she should report the incident to her insurer (for information purposes only) just in case he contacts them and starts making all sort of allegations. She is under no obligation to pay him anything and if he threatens her with the police then call his bluff. All they will do is say "let your insurance sort it out". (Or she could tell him he caused some damage to her car and she wants £500 from him!). It just might shut him up

    • profile image

      Leanne 2 years ago

      Hi there, my mum was parking in a space which was tight because of a car parked illegally on double yellow lines. She doesn't believe she hit the car but a man appeared up against her window demanding £90 for damage to his car. He blocked her door not allowing her to get out and view the said damage. She felt very intimidated (she has bi-polar and although it is now medicated she struggles with confidence issues). She managed to get out of the car and they both found there to be no damage. The man insisted that he go and clean the car as it was very dirty and that any damage could not be seen (surely any damage would be visible as a collision would have taken the dirt off right!?) My mum allowed him to leave and come back. Surprise surprise he came back with a small scratched area. Again demanding £90 my mum said she would like a second opinion from her usual garage and he said he had his own garage that would confirm it. She gave him her name, number and address (as she felt intimidated into surrendering this information). The man has since called her and turned up at her house demanding money. She now feels afraid in her own home. Any advice please.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello Lee,

      Good Luck.

    • profile image

      Lee 2 years ago

      Thankyou so much for your reply that is what I think to i will let you know the outcome of it I can't see my insurance not fighting my case to be honest thanks again

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello again Lee,

      That witness should help. The fact remains it is the car exiting the side street who has the responsibility of making sure it is safe for him to do that. (just because another driver "flashes" you doesn't mean its safe. That driver can't see what's happening behind them. Would the lorry have "flashed" that other driver if he had known you were about to pass him on his left? Of-course not!) Mounting the curb doesn't prove you were guilty of anything either. Stick to your guns and simply point out that the other car exited the side street when he shouldn't have done. That's what caused the accident and not anything you might or might not have done. But your witness should end all points of dispute.

    • profile image

      Lee 2 years ago

      Hi I spoke to you a couple of weeks ago about going past the lorry and a car Was flashed out and hit me well I have had a phone all saying they are blaming me saying I mounted the kerb to get past I have a witness who says I didnt I know I didn't they have come out with this out the blue wondering what can you see happening I would appreciate if you could message me back thanks obviously I'm going to keep saying that never happened and I passed safely just wondering if this is the type of thing insurances try to do thanks

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello Colin

      I'm sorry to say you are and you already know why. There is an expression used in insurance in cases like this which is: "he was there to be seen". You could see he was there (illegally or not) you assessed the risk and made you decision. The accident happened not because he was parked illegally but because although "he was there to be seen" you took a chance that didn't come off. Give you another example that I've come across many times...you reverse out of a parking space and hit a vehicle parked illegally on the other side of the rd. You are at fault. Again because "he was there to be seen". If you leave your parking space at the road side & hit a car coming down the wrong way in a one way street you are at fault. again "because he was there to be seen".

    • profile image

      Colin 2 years ago

      Hello there Reinhard. Thank you for such a useful page.

      I had a very minor accident the other day and needed some advice. I was driving down the road at a slow steady speed, it was a residential road with cars parked on both sides. As I drove on I noticed a car parked in the middle of the road in front of me. It was facing me on my side of the road, therefore on the wrong side in front of incoming traffic. The car's lights were off too although the occupants were inside. I gestured to the driver to move so I could go past. He simply waved me on and told me to go around him through the gap on the opposite side of the road. As I tried to squeeze through the gap between his illegally parked car and the legally parked car on my right, I ended up scratching the passenger side of his car. I was in a hurry and as we live nearby each other, we just exchanged phone numbers with the promise that we would sort it out later privately.

      Who would you say is at fault for the scratch? I realise it was a stationary vehicle and I should have judged the gap more accurately but people who park illegally like that infuriate me and unfortunately this happens all too often on the road we were on. Sometimes people even park like this and leave there vehicle there unattended for hours.

      Thank you in advance

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Kevg,

      Remember an insurance company can only decide liability on what it can prove (so whatever it might say in the H/W/Code an insurance company might not be able to prove a driver broke the rules) Also bear in mind insurance is not concerned (ultimately) with who is right and wrong. Your insurance covers you (regardless of who is at fault) if your car is damaged in an accident or vandalism etc. In this case the best case scenario is 20/80 split liabilty against you. (As I understand it you were hit by a vehicle overtaking another vehicle stationary to your right. If that is the case, that would be your best outcome in my view.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Louise,

      I have no idea what's happened to your post. But you were in the middle of doing a 3 point turn I think when you had this accident.

      I know that the other driver haven't reached a decision on liability but from my own experience you would be held to be at fault. Because if you are doing a 3 point turn then you are potentially manouevring your vehicle into the path of oncoming vehicles (whether or not they are on the "wrong side" of the rd). But having said all that if you have a decent indep witness you can prove that it wasn't your fault then that's great (and lucky) for you.

    • profile image

      Lee 2 years ago

      Thanks for your reply that is what a lot of people have said to me and that for two reasons it's her fault for coming on my road from a minor and then coming out on a flash but can you clarify that I'm well with in my rights to pass any vehicle who is turning right as long as there is room to do so by going past him on the left I've seen police vehicles do it since but I supose it's just peace of mind to hear it from someone who has knowlage about these things like yourself thank you again for your last reply

    • profile image

      louise 2 years ago

      Were has my post gone ?

    • profile image

      louise 2 years ago

      Hi thanks for getting back to me dosnt it matter that he was on the wrong side of the road and i have a independent witness to back that up and i am only tpft i have gone through his insurance and they have give me a courtesy car on a without prejudice basis and sent a enginer to see my car and declared it a right off now there telling my solicitors to give them 30 days to investigate and they can't get in contact with there policy holder do you have any advice what i should do from here would be appreciated thank

    • profile image

      Kevg 2 years ago

      Hi thanks for the response, I had to stop due to oncoming traffic in the other direction, if I had pulled out without checking that first then I agree I would have been 100% at fault. I have a witness that confirms my version of events, he was being hasty and jumping stationary traffic not parked vehicles, knowing full well there was a hazard up ahead. The Highway Code states DO NOT overtake at a junction, what's the point of having a code if in the eyes of the law it means nothing?

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello Kevg

      Sorry Kevg but if you had rung me with this scenario I'd be putting you at fault too. Simple reason, you were exiting a side street. You thought it was ok but it wasn't. In other words if you'd stayed where you were until you were 100% sure it was ok (because you had a clear view of what was going on ahead of you) then this accident wouldn't have happened. I know what you mean about the other driver but the accident happened because you pulled out (& then stopped!) and not because of what he was doing.

    • profile image

      Kevg 2 years ago

      Hi I was involved in an RTA where a van driver decided to overtake stationary traffic to jump to an upcoming lane that filtered at traffic lights. I was pulling out of a minor road as traffic had come to a standstill, and stopped halfway to ensure no traffic was coming in the direction I wanted to go (right) traffic was clear but as I edged out the van appeared and hit the front of my car mainly taking off the number plate and scraping the bumper, his insurance company is blaming me, but he was on the wrong side of the road and admitted he drove that journey every day so knew there was a junction. Surely the Highway Code which says must not overtake near a junction puts him 100% at fault here??

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Louise,

      Usually in these cases you would be. simply because you were turning across lanes and (potentially) against oncoming traffic and it is not their responisbility to avoid you. It is up to you to make sure you avoid them. The only exception might be if yu can demonstrate that you were stationary and were "parked" but its a very slim chance because as you were in the car & behind the wheel you would be considered as therefore "driving" and in control of he vehicle. All the other driver has to do is say they were driving along normally when you hit them as you carried out your manouvre and drove into them.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Lee,

      He is at fault. His arguement is that he didn't see you...he should have thought of that before exiting his road. Suppose you'd been a cyclist what would he say then? Just because someone "flashes" you it doesn't mean you can/shd act on it. It's not a rule of the road that you will see in The Highway Code.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hi Lee,

      He is at fault. His arguement is that he didn't see you...he should have thought of that before exiting his road. Suppose you'd been a cyclist what would he say then? Just because someone "flashes" you it doesn't mean you can/shd act on it. It's not a rule of the road that you will see in The Highway Code.

    • profile image

      Lee 2 years ago

      Hi I was driving down a road when a lorry in front was turning right there was room for me to pass safely on the left unaware to me he flashed someone out of the junction who hit me when I passed the lorry they were coming straight over the road out wondering if you think it's there fault they are saying cos they couldn't see me it's not there fault

    • profile image

      louise 2 years ago

      Hi i was in the middle of a 3 point turn ther was no cars on ether side of the road and a taxi driver come down on the right hand side of the road and hit the drivers side of my car who's at fault

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      hello again numberonebarber,

      If he moved out into the rd (for whatever reason) and you hit hit he is at fault regardless of what you were doing. You had the right of way remember. Whether or not you were overtaking a lorry is a mute point. Even if it can be established that you were overtaking it as he pulled out the bulk of the fault would still lie with him.

      I don't understand why this is going to court. Either your insurer backs your version or accepts the other driver version.

    • profile image

      numberonebarber 2 years ago

      it wasnt the lorry he created that flashed him it was a car coming the other way. he admits he was on the road admits a car on his left flashed him (therefore clearly looing left) but says i was filtering into head on traffic and hit him stationary whilst he was across the front of the lorry despite that meaning he would be visible to me

      what i say happened was he was flashed and pulled out hitting me causing side damage. i would hope a judge would see common sense and find him at fault but you never know

    • profile image

      numberonebarber 2 years ago

      thanks. I presume there is damage to the front of his bumper. he admits he was half across the Rd but is saying I somehow hit him. he has no details of a lorry he says I overtook I have no front end damage so would have had to swerve in to hit him. the front of his as I passed. he didn't give a statement to the police he left straight after giving me his details about two minutes after the crash. thank you for replying it was appreciated

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello numberonebarber,

      If I've understood you right the car that hit you was coming out of a side street. If that is the case then he is at fault. It doesn't matter if you were going too fast etc etc...you have right of way. If it can be proven that you were overtaking a vehicle ahead of you and that therefore he hit you because "you came out of nowhere" so to speak then yes, you would be partially to blame but the split would be more like 20/80 in your favour. (But this lorry flashed him out. And the driver that hit you acted on that without checking that it was safe for him to do so - that puts him at fault).There is no damage to the side of this car that allegedly you ran into but there must be damage to the front of his vehicle. An insurance company can only act on what they are told. He is telling his insurer one story and are telling yours another. However the main issue is: can it be established that he hit you as he exited the side street? Your insurer should ask to see the statement given to the police.

    • numberonebarber profile image

      numberonebarber 2 years ago from London, United Kingdom

      hi thanks for the great article.

      i ride a motorbike and was aproaching a road on my left and there was a van slightly out in the bus lane wanting to turn right. As i got nearer i looked at driver and he was looking to his left and then as i was passing a car flashed him out and he hit me in the side and tipped me over. he gave details and left quick i then told the police who arrived after and my insurance what had happened and took a photo of a puddle of coolant where he hit me trailing to where i pushed the bike.

      3 months later he says im to blame for these created reasons.

      in his world there was a lorry in my lane that let him out halfway.

      i overtook said lorry and hit him whilst he was staionary

      i was going too fast

      i made no attmept to brake

      i was not looking where i was going

      he has no details of any lorry. he has no damage to the side of his van where i would have hit going in his eyes about 30mph with total weight of about 30stone. my bike was broke on the left where he hit and on the right where i met the ground with grace.

      What impresses me most is a lorry would take up my side fully i would have to filter on the wrong side of the road into oncoming traffic whilst not looking where i was going and managing to not see the front of a white van ahead of said lorry.

      i have been told it could go 50/50 seriously???

      if it does go to court will my defence raise the question how i could filter into oncoming traffic and not see a stationary van.

      also the picture shows i landed where i was hit so was going 10-15mph

      he was stationary

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello Bernie,

      If he reversed into you then he is at fault.

    • profile image

      Bernie 2 years ago

      Hi Reinhard,

      I was driving forward and to the left out of my parking lot after which a waiting stationary car at the right of the lot tried to reverse into the parking lot and hit my rear with his side. His reverse turning was totally off and speedy, otherwise he could have entered the lot after I exited to the left. I did have a video cam of what happened showing I left first while he was stationary as well as the reversing collision. Was he totally at fault since reversing has no right of way?

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 2 years ago

      Hi Truthfaith,

      The area of the damage to your car in this case ought to prove your point. I live and work in the UK so I don't know how car insurance works in the USA but I assume it's similar. The only way he could show that you were at fault is if the area of damage to your and his vehicle supports his version of events. If you moved into his L/H/lane and hit him then there will be scrapes and scratches to the front left of your car and to the front right of his. I'm not surprised the unsurance comapny are being so cagey...people like the driver behind you are always tempted to massage the truth. But the best he can hope for his a 50-50 split claim (wh wont help him much if he is worried about his job).

    • profile image

      Truthfaith 2 years ago

      Email legal advise:

      Tuesday 9/16/2014 @ approximately 9:45 am. Boston, MA. There was Grid lock traffic coming off exit 18 (mass pike east). I was near the end of off ramp approximately a football field and a half length away from the intersection of Cambridge St. & Soldiers way. The exit ramp was a 2 lane road ramp traveling in the same direction (one way off ramp exit) where the accident occurred. My vehicle was stopped with the rest of traffic, I was not moving when the impact happened. I was in the left lane with a line of cars in front of me and a car to my right with a line of cars in front of it. We were stopped for at least 5 minutes waiting for the light to change and traffic to move when out of no where my son and I were jolted forward in our seats & there was a horrible loud crashing / crunching sound. My son screamed, I didn't know what just happened until I looked behind us and there was a large white Bernie and Phylls truck crushed into / actually stuck into the rear drivers side of my minivan. We were butted against each other. His front passengers side butted/torn into my rear drivers side bumper and panel. I got out of they minivan to take a look at what happened. The driver of the truck got out and was apologizing and asking if there was anything we could do to resolve without getting police or insurance involved he feared loosing his job. I was shocked and worried for the safety of my son so I dialed 911. I told them where we were & they asked about injuries I said I was worried my son was just diagnosed with autoimmune diabetes and addrenaline spikes his blood sugars. They told me someone would be right there. We were in the middle of an off ramp with hundreds of cars trying to pass. After 10 minutes I knew we had to move or the likely hood of another accident was very high. About a football field away I spotted a parking lot off the ramp on the right. It said "do not enter" but it was the closest safest place for us to be. Both vehicles moved to the parking lot. That was when I realized he had 2 passengers not 1. They got out & started spraying & trying to wipe away the scraps scratches divets with what looked like glass plus & paper towels. The driver kept repeating he was going to get fired and the passengers kept saying they would put a new bumper on and fix my car for free. I checked my do a sugars (at this time he was trembling) they read HI (over 500) I called Joslin diabetes (which is where we were headed) they insisted I get him there asap to avoid keratosis episode/damage. It was now 20 or more minutes from when I dialed 911 & no siren sounds or lights anywhere. I suggested we switch Info (I took down his license plate). He gave me his name & number but didn't care for mine. I insisted he take my info and requested insurance / registration info from him. He only wrote down my name & number. At this point I really never considered that he would straight out lie & I was worried for my so I wanted to get him to the drs. I did take pics of the visible damage which was a torn up rear drivers side bumper, dents scratches scrapes & divets on the rear drivers side panel up past my rear wheel. What kills me is that I didn't get pics of our cars butted positions or witness (1) out of fear of getting rammed by the on coming traffic (2) state police were on their way (3) it was so clearly the trucks fault I wasn't moving (like the 100s of other cars in traffic with us). After seeing my sons diabetes dr I had to get right home to get my other kids off the bus. It's About a 20 min ride. Half way home I felt pulling and shaking once @ home I realized my tire was Loosing Air. My that evening completely flat. My husband didn't want me driving for fear of damage to the tire rods etc. I put a claim in w/my insurance company & once they saw the damage waived my deductible. Unfortunately due to our financial situation we didn't have rental on our insurance policy & couldn't afford a rental we have 4 children and 2 were recently diagnosed with autoimmune disorders, chronic Lyme which way misdiagnosed, & toxin mold exposure from our home (which I am currently dealing with also). Liberty advised me to put a claim in with the other drivers insurance for rental seeing that he was clearly at fault. (It took a lot of research by me to find the actual insurance company (it's a leases commercial truck with 3rd part insurance). Finally figured it was hanover & I put my claim in. They said the would investigate & get back to me. I had to borrow money to obtain a vehicle. I have children with serious medical needs. Surgery & dr apts scheduled. I called both insurance companies every day to expedite the process I couldn't afford a rental. Hanover was very rude & difficult. They couldn't get a statement from their driver. I called the number he gave me which I have Hanover (not a working #) I was furious with Hanover I called and asked what the deal was (they said we are waiting for his statement, what # r they calling the one I have them I explained that it was a fake #. They said claims take awhile & they have 30 days and absolutely will NOT authorize my rental. Borrowed more money. Called a number on the insurance card the driver gave me. They were shocked at hangovers laziness and tracked him down and got his number. 3 weeks after accident he gives a statement and LIES! I've headed a coho me different things from his insurance company (he was in left lane and I cut in front of him while we were both moving) (I went right into his lane and his him while we were both moving) & now because I showed them picks of damage & auto shop showed me damage proves damage came from behind supporting my version (true version) of what happened. So today it was the other driver wasn't mixing and I pulled right into him? I'm so angry how to make the truth prevail? I won't give up till I do.

    • profile image

      reinhard beck 2 years ago

      Hello Jade,

      Sorry but you are at fault here 100%. You were reversing and as such it's your responsibility to make sure you do it safely and don't put other road users at risk. It makes no difference what the other driver was doing or not doing it makes no difference if your line of vision was obscured if they were going "too fast" or even travelling the wrong way down a one way street...you will be held at fault because it was you that was reversing. Sorry but it's clear cut and I'm sure both your and her insurance company will agree on that

    • profile image

      jade 2 years ago

      Hi. Yesterday i was backing out of my drive which is behind house on private road. It is a 5mph road. I looked both way before gettimg in car. As it is a long path anyone going the right speed would have been seen at the end. Constantly looking behind me as its a very narrow road with drives and garages all around. Vision was obscured by fences so was going slow. Path was clear so i kept going and out of no where a car came past and i hit the rear wheel arch. As it clearly says everywhere 5mph she was obviously going at least thirty due to stopping speed amd just appearring. Only a slight dent but she blaiming me. Said she was going 5mph but if she had she would have been directly behind me as i was backing so would have seen her. Also she would have alot of time to stop after seeing me starting to reverse. And if she was and still hit she would have stopped behind me not at least 15ft down the path. So who is to fault? As im still on my drive when it happened and she going 25 over limit down a possibly private road which is very narrow full of drives and garages.

    • profile image

      Johnk315 2 years ago

      hi! , Everyone loves a persons writing quite definitely! promote many of us keep up a correspondence more info on your own document for Yahoo? I need a pro for this dwelling to unravel this dilemma. Could be that is definitely a person! Looking forward to search an individual. bgbcekgbccfe

    • profile image

      jasesaint 2 years ago

      Hi,

      Yes the parked vehicle started it's manoeuvre as I approached at full road speed.

      It is good to know that accident was not my fault, the claim assessor found vehicle to be modified and Zi stated they would not have insured me if full disclosure given. He may of wanted to inspect impact areas as fault was contested but used Zi were happy to remove their risk. I am rueful that I didn't attend court and instead took the approach of an ostrich.

      The witness was not of the accident but to the advisor stating that I should not sign disclaimer.

      It was after they voided insurance policy, they sent out an advisor to the scene and we went through what happened. For Zi to fight case they wanted me sign disclaimer, as I didn't they didn't support any further.

      I believe they then paid out to other party and pursued settlement from me through the Magistrates courts.

      Many thanks for your time and help.

    • profile image

      reinhard Beck 2 years ago

      Hello again jasesaint,

      So you have a witness. Are the indep and did they see what happened?

      From your initial description I was under the impression that you were forced to avoid the car making a u-turn wh forced you to collide with a vehicle to your right. But your addition info suggests that the car parked at the side of the rd and wh made a u-turn ahead of you as you were about to over take it was the car you hit. If it can be shown that this car crossed your path then you have a strong case for claiming the accident as "non-fault" as it is their responsibility to make sure it is safe for them to carry out their manouevre. You had right of way. Your witness could be crucial to confirm this. You need to try and show that okay your car was modified and you didn't tell them and when they found out they were w/i their rights to do what they did. BUT nevertheless a) you were not at fault and b) the mods on your car played no role in the crash (eg: the accident did not happen because your car was modified). And what's this disclaimer you were asked not to sign?

    • profile image

      jasesaint 2 years ago

      Hi,

      Thanks for your advice, I will follow it the best I can.

      Just to clarify, the crash was into the rear quarter of the vehicle that was was parked initially but then u-turned. There were only 2 vehicles around. Me and them, my insurers declined to support me further as the crash investigator/advisor they sent advised me not to sign the disclaimer 'off the record' although I have a witness.

      I did appeal as you mention in B & C but vehicle was extensively modified and wheel size and sports suspension was modified.

      This then escalated to the Magistrates Courts. So yes the letter the sent stated voided from inception although with premium withheld. Police did not get involved.

      You have been a great help! Much appreciated for your prompt response sir!

    • profile image

      reinhard brck 2 years ago

      Hello jasesaint,

      Dear Oh dear you have had a rough ride and I'm sorry to say there is nothing I can say that will ease the pain.

      1) all insurance will have a clause in the policy that they reserve the right to void your policy if any material facts come light that would affect the policy (or words to that effect). What this means (I'm sure you know it now if you didn't know it then) is that they voided your policy because you failed to tell them about the modifications which meant they weren't taking on the risk they thought they were and had they been made aware they would have declined to insure you. Also, insurance companies do not insure young drivers who have modified vehicles (especially it that modification increases the power of the car).

      Your only option in appealing is to argue that a) you weren't aware that the car was modified b) the modifications didn't alter the specifications of the car and were purely superficial and c) the modifications played no role in the accident.

      As to who was was at fault...you are because you (were forced) hit another car. Since they "caught the flak" so to speak they can't possibly be held at fault so their insurance can't be expected to pay out. However, that parked car that drove across your path is at fault (from a common sense point of view not an insurance companies defination of "fault") because their actions forced you to take evasive action that resulted in the crash. The only problem is, you can't prove that especially since there was no contact between you and them. But it has happened in very rare instances where an insurer accepts that their drivers actions led directly to an accident eventhough their driver wasn't hit themselves. But it means (in this case) the driver of the parked car comes forward and says to his insurance company "look, I did turn into the path of jasesaint." But this happened a long time ago so even getting any info out of that insurer with be very very hard.

      Last stop...try the ombudsman service and let them act as a referee.

      As a final thought, if they voided your policy did they void it "at inception" or only after the accident? If it was voided at inception (and its a bit legal here which is not my area of expertise) then you were, in effect driving uninsured and Zi wouldn't have been liable of any damage caused by the accident. The driver of the other car would have had to claim against you personally. If Zi settled the claim and then voided your policy you sould have had your premium back pro-rata and they could then claim the cost of the claim from you. But again get legal advice on that and my first stop would be to ring the Obudsman and they will look into it for you. I know I haven't been much help but I wish you luck. Just keep a clear head. be sure of your facts and stick to them.

    • profile image

      jasesaint 2 years ago

      May I begin by commending you on great advice and support given, I wish I had found this many years ago.

      My accident in question was 10 years ago but has caused great financial issues as my insurer declared my policy void from inception as I had not declared the vehicle was modified. The advisor they sent afterward advised me off the record not to sign a disclaimer and as I never attended court dates a 100 miles away and went travelling my legal settlement with insurer Zurich cost £26,000 plus and will be paid off in 4 months (£500/m installments!)

      Anyway to the crash, I was travelling along and a vehicle ahead was parked within 5-10 metres of a pedestrian crossing. The car was left hand side kerb after picking up a friend. I approached at 40mph. Car indicated to perform a u-turn but I was already indicating to overtake and committed to manoeuvre. Car parked was opposite a giveway turning and intended to use the full throat of that junction to allow space to u-turn in one manoeuvre.

      The car proceeded to turn so I tried to evade by using free carriageway to right, as car proceeded oblivious to my approach the vehicle was now across right hand lane. I couldn't stop and turned right into space of juntion to the right. I hit other car with my front left quarter into their rear drivers quarter.

      I was made to be at fault and what's worse my voided policy was not refunded as they withheld the £900 premium until matter was settled. I only made an out of court agreement in 2010 to pay installments to Zurich once they put an injunction on my house as an asset they felt entitled to.

      I appreciate your time for reading this and was I at fault for crash? Is it too late to contest a matter I did not take the time and effort to contest as a youth in court?

      Can I claim premium held after being voided after such great time?

      This nightmare has given me a deep distrust of insurers.

    • profile image

      reinhard Beck 2 years ago

      Hello Tigertes,

      What your insurance company should do (they shd have done this already) is get confirmation in writing from the other insurer that there will be no claim made against you. If the other insurer refuses then your insurer shd attempt to get in touch with their driver and get confirmation from him. If he refuses then your insurer should throw down the gauntlet and demand to inspect his car to see if there is any damage to his car and if alll else fails your insurer could simply tell you that they are going to assume no claim is pending and re-imburse you.

    • profile image

      tigertes 2 years ago

      hi

      Can anyone help me, had accident last year well if you call it that, reversing in car park not fast hit parked car spoke to the owner, he was ok about it no damage to his car or mine, but you are told to report to your insurance just in case other driver makes a claim, so told my insurance and was told by them I did the right thing and was told my premiums would increase just for now just in case the other driver makes a claim, but if other driver did not make a claim, I would be reimbursed the increase they had put on my premiums.

      There was no claim made by the other driver, I made no claim, but when I phoned Insurance because I had heard nothing from them, and I got my renewal, not only have they increased my insurance they have decreased my no claims bonus by 6 points, and then when you question them about it, you get the same old thing about how, whoever told you that was misinformed, what they really mean is they lied.

      What I would like to know is can they do this?

      You like to try be honest but it does not do you any favours doing so.

      Diane

    • profile image

      Reinhard Beck 3 years ago

      Hello Samantha

      Not sure what "rear front" means. But the crucial point for you is that if he was exiting the side street onto your road as you were turning into "his" street he is at fault. He should have seen you and stopped.

      If the damage to your car is towards the rear and his at the front this would prove it (because it shows he turns into you). If the damage to your car and his is at the front then it will all likelihood be 50-50.

    • profile image

      Samantha 3 years ago

      Hey thanks for that at time I was really shocked his car is hit from the front mine is rear front I was driving an audi a4 his was a ford focus I am to shocked as at the time he admitted liability..