Insurance determining liability

chris445

I have a quick question that I was wondering if anyone on here could shed a bit of light on.

I had a small 'incident' today. Luckily the only amage was to the cars and nobody was hurt.

I was driving down a narrow enough two way street today. There were cars parked on the left hand side and, as i was passing one of them, the guy in it swung open his car door and completely destroyed the whole passenger side of my car. The car door only opened as I was passing it so there was no chance I could stop and I couldn't swerve as there was a flow of traffic coming the other way. From lookina th the damage on my car it look like the first impact happenedright at the front of the fromt wheel arch. This leads me to believe that the 'nose' of my car was already past the opening of his door when he did swing it open. Now as far as I'm concerned its open and shut who is at fault because I was well below the speed limit when it happened and was just driving normally down the street. The other guy admitted liability on the scene but I know that doesn't mean much.

However, I am wondering, if by some miracle the insurance companies can't decide on liability and it is settled as 50/50, do I just have to accept this or can I fight it to keep my NCB? I have witnesses too including one who was in the passenger seat when this happened.

As far as I'm concerned there is nothing I could have done to have avoided this. Like I said before it's lucky it was just the car and not a cyclist or something but I don't want to accept 50% blame for something I don't believe I am to blame for at all.

This is all a bit pessimistic and "what if" so hopefully it won't even come to this.

djimi

Youre supposed to keep enough distance when passing a car to allow for a door to open. I dont know how the insurance will see it though.

corktina

...and if the street is too narrow?

djimi

corktina wrote: »

...and if the street is too narrow?

No idea, Im just repeating something that was drummed into me when I learned to drive!

oldyouth

If you don't accept the decision of your insurer, you could be left to fund the cost of the claim yourself if it eventually goes against you

martinr5232

chris445 wrote: »

I have a quick question that I was wondering if anyone on here could shed a bit of light on.

I had a small 'incident' today. Luckily the only amage was to the cars and nobody was hurt.

I was driving down a narrow enough two way street today. There were cars parked on the left hand side and, as i was passing one of them, the guy in it swung open his car door and completely destroyed the whole passenger side of my car. The car door only opened as I was passing it so there was no chance I could stop and I couldn't swerve as there was a flow of traffic coming the other way. From lookina th the damage on my car it look like the first impact happenedright at the front of the fromt wheel arch. This leads me to believe that the 'nose' of my car was already past the opening of his door when he did swing it open. Now as far as I'm concerned its open and shut who is at fault because I was well below the speed limit when it happened and was just driving normally down the street. The other guy admitted liability on the scene but I know that doesn't mean much.

However, I am wondering, if by some miracle the insurance companies can't decide on liability and it is settled as 50/50, do I just have to accept this or can I fight it to keep my NCB? I have witnesses too including one who was in the passenger seat when this happened.

As far as I'm concerned there is nothing I could have done to have avoided this. Like I said before it's lucky it was just the car and not a cyclist or something but I don't want to accept 50% blame for something I don't believe I am to blame for at all.

This is all a bit pessimistic and "what if" so hopefully it won't even come to this.

Only just had the exact same thing my mother was driving down the road and a clown done the same thing across from a shop.
But instead of him doing the right thing and owning upto it he swore blind that he was getting back into his car which if he was my mother would have been at fault for not driving with due care and attention.

The insurance investigator went into the shop looking for cctv on the outside of the shop but nothing covered across the road.
Insurance company wanted my mother to accept 50/50 Because it was his word against hers.
I rang the shop and asked was there any footage of the other driver in the shop they wouldnt let me see it but the investigator got to view it and there was no footage of the other driver.
But still it wasnt enough to prove she was in the right and looking like she would either have to fight it in court or accept 50/50 but luckily the manager of the shop looked at the cctv from a different angle and it just showed enough of the accident location to show the other driver parking and then my mothers car coming to a sudden stop.

So op make sure you have your story clear in your head and any wittnesses or cctv that could back up your story.

SparrowHawk

My mother recently was involved in an incident, not of her doing either. Other party left the scene due to an "emergency" and then denied any wrong doing. Insurance company wanted to go 50/ 50, my mom said no way. Insurance company then came back 60/ 40 in her favour, mom said no way. Eventually it went to court - Judge ruled against the other party .

Having said that, don't know what would have happened re costs had she lost

HTH

chris445

Thanks for all the responses. I honestly couldnt have given any more space. The road is too narrow there. I don't know what he was thinking either because I was in a row of traffic when it happened so there was cars in front of me that were passing him too. I didn't get any witnesses from the cars behind but I have my front seat passenger and people who I was travelling n convoy with in the car in front heard the bang and saw in in their rear view mirror. Will it go against me that I know the witnesses?

I never even checked to see if there was CCTV but it was outside a row of shops so its quite possible. I will definitely look into that.

I called the gardai because it was an Irish person in a hired car and the only phone number he could give me was an english mobile number. Just thought better to err on the side of caution.

The damage is fairly significant though. on the passenger side of the car the only part that got no damage is the front bumper because i think it had passed that before he opened the door. Everything else, including the alloy wheels is scratched and dented.de it was 50/50

Anyway to answer the question I can refuse to accept if the insurers decide it was 50/50? I know some of you are saying it may end up costing me but to be honest I'm so sure right now that I was in the right that it's a risk I would be willing to take.

Definitely a headache I could do without

K.Flyer

Before you open you car door you must look to ensure that you do not cause an obstruction or an accident involving other road users.
O.P. put in your claim, you should have no problems.
Two examples I am very familiar with.
1st one..
I was driving on my motorbike on Gardiner Street in Dublin, the car in front was turning right and there was a car parked half on the path to the left of him with approx a 2 m gap between them.
I kept on going through the gap and at the same time the parked car drivers door was flung open.
I destroyed the car door and went down the road on my face (thank God for good helmets).
His insurance paid out without hesitation for my physical injuries and damage to the bike.
2nd one...
My brother in-law pulled up to the foot path to let his work mate out of the passenger side of the car.
He was appox 2 feet from the path, his mate open the passenger side door and sent a cyclist, who was cutting up his inside even though he admitted seeing the left indicator, flying off his bike and onto the path. Brother in laws insurance paid out for the cyclist's injuries and damages with no contest.
Both occasions the insurers said that the person opening the door and in the 2nd example, the driver as well, were responsible for ensuring that it was safe to open the door.

martinr5232

chris445 wrote: »

Thanks for all the responses. I honestly couldnt have given any more space. The road is too narrow there. I don't know what he was thinking either because I was in a row of traffic when it happened so there was cars in front of me that were passing him too. I didn't get any witnesses from the cars behind but I have my front seat passenger and people who I was travelling n convoy with in the car in front heard the bang and saw in in their rear view mirror. Will it go against me that I know the witnesses?

I never even checked to see if there was CCTV but it was outside a row of shops so its quite possible. I will definitely look into that.

I called the gardai because it was an Irish person in a hired car and the only phone number he could give me was an english mobile number. Just thought better to err on the side of caution.

The damage is fairly significant though. on the passenger side of the car the only part that got no damage is the front bumper because i think it had passed that before he opened the door. Everything else, including the alloy wheels is scratched and dented.de it was 50/50

Anyway to answer the question I can refuse to accept if the insurers decide it was 50/50? I know some of you are saying it may end up costing me but to be honest I'm so sure right now that I was in the right that it's a risk I would be willing to take.

Definitely a headache I could do without

Unless your witnesses actually see it happen they are fairly useless.
what did the other driver say to you or to guard did they admit they opened the door out into oncoming traffic ??

No Pants

martinr5232 wrote: »

But instead of him doing the right thing and owning upto it he swore blind that he was getting back into his car

I'm not sure what difference that would make. Getting back into your card doesn't give the right to damage another's car with your door.

martinr5232

No Pants wrote: »

I'm not sure what difference that would make. Getting back into your card doesn't give the right to damage another's car with your door.

Thats the law if he was getting into his car she would have been at fault because she wouldnt have seen him getting into it and so driving with undue care and attention.

But if he opens the door into oncoming traffic its him driving without undue care and attention thats just how it works.

No Pants

martinr5232 wrote: »

Thats the law if he was getting into his car she would have been at fault because she wouldnt have seen him getting into it and so driving with undue care and attention.

But if he opens the door into oncoming traffic its him driving without undue care and attention thats just how it works.

Seeing him or not does not allow him to whack your car with a door, irrespective of any road traffic violations.

martinr5232

No Pants wrote: »

Seeing him or not does not allow him to whack your car with a door, irrespective of any road traffic violations.

Why do you keep dissagreeing im telling you how it is from experiance in the last two months.

No Pants

martinr5232 wrote: »

Why do you keep dissagreeing im telling you how it is from experiance in the last two months.

Grand, okay, whatever you say.

chris445

martinr5232 wrote: »

Unless your witnesses actually see it happen they are fairly useless.
what did the other driver say to you or to guard did they admit they opened the door out into oncoming traffic ??

Well the guy in my passenger seat seen it happen and even had some glass shoot in on him from the wing mirror smashing. Luckily enough the window was down all the way.
Th other driver just came up and said he was sorry and he opened the door without thinking. He told me it was a hire car and fully insured.
This was before the garda came and then he went walking off down the road.
The garda basically just told me its not his job to determine liability and since he didnt witness it he wouldnt be commenting on it.

martinr5232

chris445 wrote: »

Well the guy in my passenger seat seen it happen and even had some glass shoot in on him from the wing mirror smashing. Luckily enough the window was down all the way.
Th other driver just came up and said he was sorry and he opened the door without thinking. He told me it was a hire car and fully insured.
This was before the garda came and then he went walking off down the road.
The garda basically just told me its not his job to determine liability and since he didnt witness it he wouldnt be commenting on it.

Hopefully he says the same thing to the insurance and everything will be straightforward.

Hope everything goes ok for you keep us posted anyway.

dr.fuzzenstein

chris445 wrote: »

Well the guy in my passenger seat seen it happen and even had some glass shoot in on him from the wing mirror smashing. Luckily enough the window was down all the way.
Th other driver just came up and said he was sorry and he opened the door without thinking. He told me it was a hire car and fully insured.
This was before the garda came and then he went walking off down the road.
The garda basically just told me its not his job to determine liability and since he didnt witness it he wouldnt be commenting on it.

Did he say he wouldn't be commenting on liability or he wouldn't be commenting on the case at all?
If the latter, he is basically refusing to do his job.
One would think he's supposed to take notes and take down statements, of course it is not his job to determine liability.
I can't see this being your fault, OP. Keep us posted.

chris445

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Did he say he wouldn't be commenting on liability or he wouldn't be commenting on the case at all?
If the latter, he is basically refusing to do his job.
One would think he's supposed to take notes and take down statements, of course it is not his job to determine liability.
I can't see this being your fault, OP. Keep us posted.

He said he wouldn't be commenting on liability. He didn't really take statements or anything. I explained the situation to him and he just took down all my details and the details from the other car. Since I didn't have my insurance cert in the car at the time he asked me to produce it within 7 days which i done last night.
I know its not his job to determine liability so I don't mind that he wouldn't comment on it. I wasn't really sure whether I should even call them or not for such a small incident but with the car being hired and the only phone number I could get was an english mobile so I thought better call to be on the safe side.