Accident/ insurance opinion.

dubtom

My partner had a accident today, took a right turn and a taxi 'appeared' in the bus lane and hit her passenger rear end. Anyway, she arrived home and within 20 minutes her insurance company was on the phone, same company as the taxi man. Well this insurance guy tells her, without hearing her side, that she is liable, or in his words, your always liable when your turning right. So I am immediatly suspicious,
1.. I have never heard tell of an insurance company phoning when an accident has occured.
2 .. I understood that insurance companys 'always' maintain that you should never admit liability, no matter what the circumstances.
3.. forms and details of any accident should be submitted to the insurance company, including drawings ,
4.. has an insurance company ever phoned you after an accident and informed you you were laible, without hearing your side.

My own feelings is that the taxi man and the insurance guy are friends or something, i'm going to phone the company tomorrow and ask what the procedure is. My partner may well be in the wrong, I just find the way in which this has been handled highly suspicious.
What do yis think.

69 mustang

I'd be suspicious too that sounds odd.
Not sure but isn't their a 3/4 rule here on where your hit is based on who's to blame depending

BeardyGit

Hey Tom,

Just trying to picture the scene - How did the taxi hit her in the rear, while he was in the buslane, if she was turning right? I'm assuming she was pulling out of a side-street, across a bus lane?

If that's the case, wouldn't it be the taxi drivers responsibility to anticipate a possible move on her part and take reasonable measures to ensure he could stop without colliding? Particularly if he hit her in the rear? If would suggest she had enough time to move well out onto the road so surely he could have stopped in time?

Lots of questions! Anyway, very odd that the insurance company would call her and lay the blame firmly on her for an accident within twenty minutes - Surely they would require a statement at minimum. Don't forget the insurance ombudsman is available should they get shirty with ye.

Cheers,

Gil

dubtom

Circumstances were,she's turning right in traffic, flashed by a car to go, proceeds,checking the bus lane,empty, continues her turn, nearly completed and is hit at the left corner at the back. The taxi was either travelling at speed or entered the buslane from the traffic Q. It's not so much the who's to blame that bothers me, but the insurance man comments.I will check with the ombudsman if the company dont give me satisfaction.

BeardyGit

Having had the misfortune to have my first accident in 200k of driving last year, I can assure you that the taxi driver is entirely at fault. I managed to foolishly underestimate my clearance and clipped a car in a similar manner to the taxi driver - It was black and white - I didn't leave myself enough room to manouvre and was travelling too fast to stop before the impact.

Call and ask to speak with the claims manager at whatever insurance company she's covered with. Lodge your complaint first with him/her and insist they address their indiscretion as a matter of urgency. Advise that your wife is suffering a great deal of stress/worry as a result of that phone-call and that you'd like it cleared up before this becomes a problem.

Best of luck - Hope she's fine and wasn't driving anything old enough to qualify for cheap tax!

Gil

BrianD3

Gil Dub wrote:

Having had the misfortune to have my first accident in 200k of driving last year, I can assure you that the taxi driver is entirely at fault. I managed to foolishly underestimate my clearance and clipped a car in a similar manner to the taxi driver - It was black and white - I didn't leave myself enough room to manouvre and was travelling too fast to stop before the impact.

I'm trying to picture the scene - if the bus lane that the taxi came from was on her right before she started her right turn then yes she's at fault as she turned across a vehicle that had priority. If the lane was on her left then it's the taxi's fault as he somehow rear ended her as she was turning..

The first scenario is a very common one. A well meaning driver who has priority stops and beckons a driver coming from the opposite direction to make a right turn across in front of them. However there may be someone coming up inside in another lane that is unaware of this little arrangement and the result is a crash with the driver who made the turn at fault.

But in any case, the phone call does sound very suspicious alright.

el tel

BrianD3 wrote:

I'm trying to picture the scene - if the bus lane that the taxi came from was on her right before she started her right turn then yes she's at fault as she turned across a vehicle that had priority. If the lane was on her left then it's the taxi's fault as he somehow rear ended her as she was turning..

The first scenario is a very common one. A well meaning driver who has priority stops and beckons a driver coming from the opposite direction to make a right turn across in front of them. However there may be someone coming up inside in another lane that is unaware of this little arrangement and the result is a crash with the driver who made the turn at fault.

But in any case, the phone call does sound very suspicious alright.

^^^I would second all of the above^^^

The first situation must occur all the time (I've seen it quite a few times myself) and the onus would be on the turning vehicle to make sure the path is clear. But the almost immediate phone call from the insurance people is very peculiar.

BeardyGit

el tel wrote:

^^^I would second all of the above^^^

The first situation must occur all the time (I've seen it quite a few times myself) and the onus would be on the turning vehicle to make sure the path is clear. But the almost immediate phone call from the insurance people is very peculiar.

Indeed, you've probably got a better grasp on the scenario described by Tom and I'd have to agree!

Gil

dubtom

I phoned the company today and asked what was their procedure, I was informed that they do indeed phone the second party, I voiced my opinion that the manner in which their rep had told my partner that she was liable was not in my expiereance the norm and that I suspected that their rep was in cahoots with the taxi driver, they immediatly poopooed that idea which led me to believe that even if their rep was a friend the taxi man, they wouldn't do anything about it. So now, we are safe in the knowledge that any chance of a fair hearing with that company is out the window, so I'll contact the insurance ombudsman on monday, we have nothing to lose.
I fully agree that their is a 90% chance that my partner is in the wrong, it was up to her in insure that her path was clear, she has no witnesses to verify if the taxi man had pulled out of traffic and into the bus lane or was speeding but the sherlock holmes in me is convinced that something is afoot. I have no problem with the idea that if you Fck up you should pay the price, i just hate the idea that her insurance company use, in my mind, very dubious ways of doing their biz. Ayway, thanks for the reponces, if I get anywhere with the ombudsman I will share.

RoundyMooney

Just a very quick question, Tom. Had she had an opportunity to notify the company herself prior to their call? From your first post it would seem not, which makes the fact that they called back assigning blame almost immediately very suspect. I don't agree that she was 90% liable on foot of your description, more like 60/40, which is only my opinion, and I'm no expert thankfully.

The company have nothing to lose, in that they face a payout either way. It seems that there is a vested interest at stake here, given that the call came so quickly.

I think you are spot on in talking to the Ombudsman, that is what they are there for.