Car crash advice

Beverley Macca

Sunday evening my wife was going around a bend in her car when she collided with a car coming from the other direction. My wife hit the back of the other persons car, as the lady's car had turned full circle in a skid in the black ice. She told my wife she was in a hurry as she was late for work in a Old Folks home.

The lady kept saying 'sorry, sorry' etc. My wife phoned me and I said to call the guards. The other lady called her husband. My wife suggested calling the guards to her but after the other lady spoke to her husband, she said 'no no', went to her car and gave my wife her contact and insurance details. My wife assumed that she had accepted liability.

Called the insurance company the next day to discover she wasn't accepting liability. So if it can't be sorted I have to claim from my insurer and must pay the excess. We haven't a spare cent at the moment.

My wife noticed her car was taxed to Nov 2010 so technically she had no tax. However I've discovered this morning, she is only a provisional driver and she was travelling alone.

Obviously very annoyed and have learned a lesson to call the guards in future.

Have we any recourse?

yosser hughes

Get back on to your insurer and tell them you are no accepting liability either and also give them the further information you have learned.Insurance companies want as little hassle as possible but at the end of the day you need to be forceful with them.You should not have to cliam off your own insurance if it wasn't your wife's fault.Added to that,the other driver should not have been even driving.
Good luck with it anyway.

stevenmu

I think it's likely that your wife will have to accept some incident of liability in the incident. While the other lady clearly should not have been stopped on the road by a bend, and therefore has some liability, your wife also has some liability for hitting a stationary object.

(I'm assuming that the other car was already stopped by the the time your wife came around the bend, if the other car spun directly into your wifes path not allowing her reasonable time to stop then I'd put liability completely on the other car.)

BronsonTB

Always call the gaurds...even for small things....They are viewed as independants from an Insurance/Courts point of view....

And still report it now to the gaurds even after....
Sounds like they should be looking at the roadworthness of that other car...tyre condition etc

whippet

As I am reading this:

The OP's wife crashed in to the back of a car that was stationary in their lane.

Obviously the OP's wife was not travelling at a speed that allowed her to stop in time for any potential hazzards that may appear.

Giving that the other party skidded on ice, it would mean that the OP's wife should have been travelling at a speed suitable for the conditions at the time, allowing for unusual hazzards.

The Nursing home story, Tax expiry date, L driver status, apparant admission of liability at the time are all meaningless.

If the guards were not called therefore it will be up to the insurance companies to decide. Judging by the limited facts at our disposal it seems the OP's wife crashed in to a stationary car, and will face liability.

wyndham

Was the other car stationary?

The tax is neither here nor there so not sure why you are mentioning it Sunday was December 12 and it's taxed up to end November so was hardly even out. Even if it was 2 years out it's irrelevant.

OldmanMondeo

My readin is the Other Lady was traveling towards the OP OH, skidded on ice and ended up facing beack the direction she came from on the other side of the road. If this is the case, then I would expect the Other Lady to be responsible as she lost control of her car causing an accident.

As pointed out the Tax and Licence have no bearing on the accident or liability.

Antomus Prime

From what you have said it sound like when the other woman rang her husband he may have told her to leave cause she had no tax and only a provisional license. The fact that she left the scene of the accident mite play in your wife's favour a bit but on the other hand the insurance companies mit just look at it from the point of view that you wife hit into the back of the other woman and could be liable.

I've never personally been in a crash but what ive learned over the years is that you NEVER straight out admit liability, even if it was your fault. You let the insurance company decide.

Best of luck with it though and I hope it works out for you

Cuddlesworth

Your wife should have followed your advice and rang the cops. As it stands at the moment, your wife hit a stationary object from behind. I wouldn't be surprised if they put 100% liability on your wife now.

Gumbo

BronsonTB wrote: »

Always call the gaurds...even for small things....They are viewed as independants from an Insurance/Courts point of view....

And still report it now to the gaurds even after....
Sounds like they should be looking at the roadworthness of that other car...tyre condition etc

they are only there to insure both parties have a licence and insurance and there is no DUI involved or injury.

they are not independants at all as they DID NOT witness the accident.

dellas1979

Isnt it the law that if you hit the behind of anyones car, you are liable.

When I read the post, I was like "why did the other woman admit liability".

Its not fair, under the circumstance of how it happened, but thats the law.

I know someone who crashed into the back of a car - the car was being driven by a learner who cut out on the road and car stopped. He was fully liable in the eyes of the law.

PS: I know it sucks having a damaged car/having to claim from insurance - I crashed mine over a week ago skidding in the ice and did a fair but of damage.