Motor insurance company, change of 'policy'

Capri

I was involved in a rear ender, a result of 'agressive' driving rather than outright road rage. I had indicated that I wanted to move to the right lane to avoid a cyclist and then turn right on a one way street . The driver in the other lane moved to try to close the gap and started flashing agressively, I watched carefully as I braked for the turn as I didn't want a rear ender but it seems he either lost his grip on the brake pedal or deliberately rammed me (unlikely as he wouldn't want to be blamed for it ) .
1) In the heel of the hunt the insurance determined I was to blame for stopping too quickly - that case continues , but
2) when I rear ended someone who slammed on going through a green light ( he had decided he 'wanted to turn right', without signalling ) I was deemed to be to blame for driving too close -

?? WHICH 'LAW' IS RIGHT ??

Someone told me the particular insurance company I'm with uses some computer programme to decide blame, doesn't want lawyers becoming involved, and is actually blaming innocent motorists for 'causing' the accident .

99.9% of rear enders used to be the fault of the following vehicle ( unless it was found that certain people had an abnormal number of rear enders, in which case the insurance would know it was a scam ) - is there now a change of policy in place

Toyotafanboi

this is mostly my own "bar stool" knowledge, but as far as i was aware it was always the person behinds fault for driving too close to the car in front/ not leaving themselves enough time.

are the insurance company trying to say that you changed lanes too late and crossed his path and he didn't have room to take action to avoid you so it's your fault?

bear1

That's a very strange one for an insurance company to come up with it.
Any chance the driver behind had a dashcam and the insurance co. is relying on this?
I think you may be in for a long wait until the claim is over.

CiniO

Well rear ends are fault of person rear ending but only when he was driving behind car he rear ended before it hapened.
in case like described by OP, it looks like one vehicle moved to other lane without giving way to vehicle already on that lane. In that case other driver can't really be blamed for rear ending if he didn't have enough space to slow dow n.

Capri

I indicated in time, he accelerated and got aggressive for no reason, but was I hit the cyclist that he could see me moving to avoid ?

db

Capri wrote: »

I indicated in time, he accelerated and got aggressive for no reason, but was I hit the cyclist that he could see me moving to avoid ?

This makes it sound to me like you were changing lane when the collision occurred rather than having already changed lane earlier, you were now slowing to make the right turn.

Did you cancel the indicator after changing lane and before indicating again for the right turn? Although he is still in the wrong if you were already in the lane in front, if he can get the insurance company to believe that you were changing lane he will win.

I know this because I was in your position 20 years ago and lost.