Car Accident 50/50?

dawn run

Hi All, I am seeking opinions in relation to a recent car accident I was involved in. The other drivers Insurance company is claiming its 50/50. All responses would be appreciated. As I am Insurance illiterate as far as 50/50 car accidents are involved.

The accident happened as follows.

Both cars where heading in the oposite direction.

Due to cars parked on both sides of the road. Both cars where travelling in the center of the road.

The car that struck my car was travelling at speed and tried to stop.However hit a parked car and then hit my car.

My car was stopped at time of collision and the handbreak put on. As I had no where to turn the veichel, as cars where parked on both sides.

The other driver could have pulled into a disabled spot on his side of traffic. However due to his excessive speed. He was not able to do this.

I am out of pocket , having paid for the full repairs to my car.Because I have 3rd party insurance and his Insurance company is stating 50/50.
All advice appreciated.

NoQuarter

Go see a solicitor.


Why on earth was your handbrake on!?

dawn run

NoQuarter wrote: »

Go see a solicitor.


Why on earth was your handbrake on!?

my handbreak was put on . Because I seen him coming towards me at speed and due to cars parked on both sides of the road I had no where to go. My first instinct was to pull my handbreak and prepare for the other car hitting myself.

Procrastastudy

I can see the logic - you didnt want to go hitting anything else - I'm not sure it was the best plan...

Sounds pretty 50/50 to me in all honesty - but that's not a legal opinion of any sort. See a solicitor or visit your local FLAC.

NoQuarter

Id go into reverse before I'd put my handbrake on!

dawn run

NoQuarter wrote: »

Id go into reverse before I'd put my handbrake on!

by the time i checked my mirrors and put car into reverse. Hed have hit me and id have hit a parked car.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

I don't understand how they can attribute 50/50 blame if you're stationary and the impact to your vehicle results from the other vehicle colliding with another vehicle, which then causes it to collide with your vehicle.

Is it the other persons insurance company who is trying to apportion 50/50 blame?

dawn run

Maci Acidic Ballerina wrote: »

I don't understand how they can attribute 50/50 blame if you're stationary and the impact to your vehicle results from the other vehicle colliding with another vehicle, which then causes it to collide with your vehicle.

Is it the other persons insurance company who is trying to apportion 50/50 blame?

yes its the the other persons insurance claiming 50/50.

Just to clear up the issue. He could not stop and breaked in the distance, both cars where travelling in the center of the road. His car swerved and hit a parked car and then hit mine.

d9oiu2wk07blr5

I'd get the opinion of a solicitor. FLAC also run free legal advice evenings. Good luck.

dawn run

Maci Acidic Ballerina wrote: »

I'd get the opinion of a solicitor. FLAC also run free legal advice evenings. Good luck.

I had to go to a solicitor as I was not getting any satisfaction. He agrees with my side. (however Im employing him. So he probably would agree with myself.)
However still no admission of liability from the other insurance provider. I really would like to know. How long it takes to make a decision. Or is it it just a case of his provider stalling and hope i go away.

I could agree 50/50 and settle. However The fact that he hit a parked car first and could not stop. Tells me he was out of control at the time of the collision.Where as I was able to stop and prevent my car from moving on collision.

Victor

dawn run wrote: »

Or is it it just a case of his provider stalling and hope i go away.

Quite likely.

What have the gardaí said?

davo10

Would this be more clear cut if you were completely on the correct side of the white line and is it 50:50 based on the fact that neither of you were in the correct road lane?

dawn run

davo10 wrote: »

Would this be more clear cut if you were completely on the correct side of the white line and is it 50:50 based on the fact that neither of you were in the correct road lane?

yes. But both sides of the road have parked cars. leaving only the center of the road. At the time of collision . Only one space was available to pull in and that was on his side. But due to his speed. He could not pull in.

dawn run

Victor wrote: »

Quite likely.

What have the gardaí said?

Both vehicles travelling in the opposite direction in center of the road. My car stoppped before impact. Other car hit stationary car first trying to avoid impact and than hit my car.

seamus

Rough rule of thumb in these scenarios (where the road narrows and there's only room for one to pass) - whoever got there first has right-of-way. So if you had started overtaking the parked cars before he did, then he's 100% in the wrong.

If you both come upon eachother (i.e. it's a long road with parked vehicles all the way along), then it's less clear-cut, but it would seem obvious that the moving vehicle is at fault for not stopping.

Reloc8

I would say the fact that he had a space available on his side to pull in and was travelling at speed coupled with you being stationary makes this a very weak assertion of 50/50.

You need a solicitor - I would have thought your own insurance company should be involved here. I know you only had 3rd party but does that mean that although his insurance company is claiming 50/50 he hasn't sought to claim on your insurance ? That would heighten the suspicion that they're trying it on a bit here.

You'll need a solicitor in any event - go to FLAC if you can't pay for one.

How much are you out of pocket as a matter of interest ?

Victor wrote: »

Quite likely.

What have the gardaí said?

Indeed - were they called ? Did you get photos of where the cars ended up and showing the parked cars both sides with the gap on his ?

Kosseegan

A driver is supposed to be travelling at such a speed that he can stop within the distance he can see to be clear. O/p was, the other driver wasn't. If both had stopped which should have happened, they could have sorted out priority between them.
My bet is that the o/p is not insured through a broker and that is why this messing is going on.

dawn run

Reloc8 wrote: »

You need a solicitor - I would have thought your own insurance company should be involved here. I know you only had 3rd party but does that mean that although his insurance company is claiming 50/50 he hasn't sought to claim on your insurance ? That would heighten the suspicion that they're trying it on a bit here.

You'll need a solicitor in any event - go to FLAC if you can't pay for one.

How much are you out of pocket as a matter of interest ?



Indeed - were they called ? Did you get photos of where the cars ended up and showing the parked cars both sides with the gap on his ?

I have a solicitor. He states if they dont admit liabilty will end up in court. Hes has not submitted a claim.
im out of pocket just over 3k.
yes i called guards. They state two cars travelling in the center of road in oposite direction. The other vehicle hit a parked car and then mine.
I took photos they show approx 6 meters of skid marks from his tyres. None from mine and shows the spot he could have pulled into.Including the cars parked on both sides.

dawn run

Kosseegan wrote: »

A driver is supposed to be travelling at such a speed that he can stop within the distance he can see to be clear. O/p was, the other driver wasn't. If both had stopped which should have happened, they could have sorted out priority between them.
My bet is that the o/p is not insured through a broker and that is why this messing is going on.

Im with an online broker. I dont understand , what you mean.
They told me . He did not put in a claim. Im 3rd party. I am claiming of the other insurance company. they dont get involved unless a claim was put against me.

Reloc8

dawn run wrote: »

Im with an online broker. I dont understand , what you mean.
They told me . He did not put in a claim. Im 3rd party. I am claiming of the other insurance company. they dont get involved unless a claim was put against me.

Ah here. They're taking the complete piss. They want you to take 50/50
for their driver has enough cop on not to be claiming against you ?

Anyway, you actually have a solicitor, so I don't understand why you'd have any need to be taking advice from a shower of randomers on the internet.

7Tdriver

What could been done was you flashing his lights at him etc. and trying to attempt to reverse but this is a question for a another day but in your case it should be the drivers fault who was moving a vehicle as you have to avoid vehicles that are stationery even if they are illegal parked.

dawn run

7Tdriver wrote: »

What could been done was you flashing his lights at him etc. and trying to attempt to reverse but this is a question for a another day but in your case it should be the drivers fault who was moving a vehicle as you have to avoid vehicles that are stationery even if they are illegal parked.

The only lights at the time I could think was going to be flashing. Was abulance lights.
It was during the day in good road conditional and plenty of natural light.

I would have needed to reverse approx 30 meters at the same speed he was travelling to avoid him hitting me.
By the time i checked mirrors put car in reverse and built up speed. I dont think its possible.

However I appreciate your opinion. As I like to take all points of view into account.