OH involved in a collision... Not a parody thread!

NoNameNoNumber · 26 May 2016 at 18:40

So I've just had a phone call of my girlfriend, she was called into work. En route, someone has pulled out in front of her on what she describes as a Y junction... Her right of way and doing around 55mph in a 60. The guy says he saw her coming but she must have been speeding to have still hit him.
She saw him pull out and braked but could do nothing...

What's the outcome likely to be? Yeah she hit the back of him but had no option... I'll try and get a Google map view of where she was...

Bear in mind this isn't GD

Cheers fellas

Rroff · 26 May 2016 at 18:43

Most likely go 50/50 unless ones party admits blame/has dash cam footage (and a bit of luck).

NoNameNoNumber · 26 May 2016 at 18:44

Hmm wasn't aware 50/50 was even a thing! To Google

NoNameNoNumber · 26 May 2016 at 18:46

OK I get that, but that implies she is to blame to some degree... Driving along minding her own business and someone pulls out if front of her... Can you apportion any blame to her? Seems poor if that's the case.

tummelv · 26 May 2016 at 18:46

Well if she had right of way then surely 100% the other driver's fault? :confused:

Having said that, in the real world not always so simple. My dad had similar about 30 years ago and it went to court and was declared 50/50.

Gaygle · 26 May 2016 at 18:52

If all is how you/your girlfriend says it is, and the other driver says the same thing but blames your girlfriend for speeding (yeah, I know, original :rolleyes:

), then it should be a non fault (hopefully!).

However, just wait for the other party to say something like he was stationary in traffic when your girlfriend hit him from behind. Then watch it go the other way and your girlfriend to be found at fault.

Most importantly - did she get the details of any witnesses?

NoNameNoNumber · 26 May 2016 at 18:52

We'll see!

The__Malteser · 26 May 2016 at 18:57

NoNameNoNumber said:
OK I get that, but that implies she is to blame to some degree... Driving along minding her own business and someone pulls out if front of her... Can you apportion any blame to her? Seems poor if that's the case.

Apparently if you hit the back of a car (rear door pr back bumper) it's the fault of the person behind even if he/she had the right of way. The reasoning behind it is that you had enough time to brake (hypothetically you start braking as soon as you see the front bumper) and the fact that you hit the rear part of the car means you were either distracted (and braked late) or you were going too fast.

Not sure if it is a rule in the UK, but I'm quite sure it is a rule in my country. I don't agree with the rule but I can see the idea behind it.

NoNameNoNumber · 26 May 2016 at 18:58

Gaygle said:
If all is how you/your girlfriend says it is, and the other driver says the same thing but blames your girlfriend for speeding (yeah, I know, original ), then it should be a non fault (hopefully!).

However, just wait for the other party to say something like he was stationary in traffic when your girlfriend hit him from behind. Then watch it go the other way and your girlfriend to be found at fault.

Most importantly - did she get the details of any witnesses?

I haven't quite got the full story yet, she's at work again so I'll get the lowdown tonight.

acemastr · 26 May 2016 at 19:09

Witnesses are the only way she'll win this unless the other guy caves and decides to not lie.

Not a nice situation

realscot · 26 May 2016 at 19:16

Whether she was speeding or not he clearly didn't judge her closing distance correctly, not that hard to give it a few seconds to see if you will make it ok or not, clearly this numpty had a glance, thought I can make it. No way i'd settle for 50/50. Sadly as already said the courts don't see it that way, infact sometimes they are just idiots. My mother was on a narrow country lane and saw another car coming so she pulled into the side of the road beside a bend so the other car could pass. Instead the other driver wasn't paying propper attention, must have overreacted and locked up their brakes (was in the 1990's) and went right into my mothers o/s/f corner pushing her half into the ditch at the side of the road. Police attended, said it was 50/50, it went to court, court agreed.

NoNameNoNumber · 27 May 2016 at 18:40

Ok so after seeing pictures she had taken at the scene... her front o/s bumper has hit his rear n/s bumper. More damage to his than her focus... He pulled out of a t junction from the right into her right of way...

Obviously I'm biased but that seems pretty clear cut.

[TW]Fox · 27 May 2016 at 19:59

Rroff said:
Most likely go 50/50 unless ones party admits blame/has dash cam footage (and a bit of luck).

On what basis do you claim this is 'most likely '?

It doesn't sound likely at all and there is no need for dash cam footage, pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut.

Arthur Hucksake · 27 May 2016 at 20:14

What gets me about these situations is how fast some insurance companies are to settle. Like they just cave because it's easier. Either that or they are in cahoots to split the cost and screw over the motorist. Who knows.

NoNameNoNumber · 27 May 2016 at 20:34

[TW]Fox;29551319 said:
On what basis do you claim this is 'most likely '?

It doesn't sound likely at all and there is no need for dash cam footage, pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut.

So what might your verdict be?

Her insurance Co believe she isn't to blame and have taken her car in for assessment. Shes only 3rd party.

HangTime · 27 May 2016 at 22:51

Arthur Hucksake said:
What gets me about these situations is how fast some insurance companies are to settle. Like they just cave because it's easier. Either that or they are in cahoots to split the cost and screw over the motorist. Who knows.

It is more efficient to settle claims quickly.
Insurance companies are 'in cahoots' in the sense that some have bilateral agreements.
They are not doing so to 'screw over the motorist' as on the balance of averages it should make no difference. They do so for cost savings.

matthab · 27 May 2016 at 23:28

[TW]Fox;29551319 said:
On what basis do you claim this is 'most likely '?

It doesn't sound likely at all and there is no need for dash cam footage, pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut.

Completely agree, this claim should be fairly easy to resolve as its obviously the guy who pulled out at fault.

kefkef · 28 May 2016 at 00:19

Agree with Fox, don't let you insurance company do anything else. Remember, they work for you, you don't beg and borrow for them!!

NoNameNoNumber · 8 Jun 2016 at 17:50

Well they've written the car off, offered £1095. 07 plate focus estate 140k. Seems a replacement will be much nearer £2k though, is that enough evidence to haggle a better price?? They're saying based on Glasses guide that is all it is worth but to me, she needs more than that to buy a replacement going off what is available on Autotrader.

Other side still haven't admitted liability.

Any advice?

[TW]Fox · 8 Jun 2016 at 17:53

That is the Glass's trade value for the car.

Remind your insurer you are not a motor trader and do not buy cars at trade price. Tell them you'll happily accept Glass's Retail for the car, which is just over £2k.