Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

RTA, Witnesses?, Contact with insurer

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Salary Negotiator
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭Salary Negotiator


    Sono wrote: »
    This is completely incorrect information, if the insurance company feels the insured is liable then they have the right to take over any claim as they see fit, they do not need approval from the policyholder.

    That’s what I said, but I should have said the insurance company to be clearer.


  • Options
    #33
    kirving
    Registered Users Posts: 5,919 ✭✭✭kirving


    If the OP did hit the teacher and caused injuries, then surely the Gardai would charging them with an offence?


  • Options
    #34
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,334 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    paska wrote: »
    She is from Italy and i guess she was advised to make a claim to see what happens.

    That’s some assumption.

    Main consideration is what’s the amount ? How much to pay now vs how much to pay in legal fees before any pay out


  • Options
    #35
    con747
    Registered Users Posts: 5,913 ✭✭✭con747


    The OP hasn't said yet if the teacher walked away, was taken away by ambulance. Also why would school teachers allow "kids" to smoke when it is illegal both here and if they were Italian students illegal there also. So the students would have to be over 18 or the teachers were idiots allowing them to smoke. Also it's hard to have a "blind" side on the front left of a car when a person is standing up beside it.There appears to be more to this. It's possible the OP just isn't explaining the situation correctly.

    Don't expect anything from life, just be grateful to be alive.



  • Options
    #36
    paska
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭paska


    con747 wrote: »
    The OP hasn't said yet if the teacher walked away, was taken away by ambulance. Also why would school teachers allow "kids" to smoke when it is illegal both here and if they were Italian students illegal there also. So the students would have to be over 18 or the teachers were idiots allowing them to smoke. Also it's hard to have a "blind" side on the front left of a car when a person is standing up beside it.There appears to be more to this. It's possible the OP just isn't explaining the situation correctly.

    Yeah she was taken away by ambulance.The kids were 14-15years old.

    She walked beside my car from the front to the passenger side. Looking at her walking she easily had time to mount the footpath.

    I am convinced she lost her balance and fell over at a bad angle.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    BrianBoru00
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭BrianBoru00


    paska wrote: »
    They took a statment and told me no charges would be taken like driving witout due care and attention etc. I have no idea what she said. My guess is she fell back off the footpath and broke her bones.
    She is from Italy and i guess she was advised to make a claim to see what happens.


    I find it hard to believe that the guards at the scene told your there would be no charges.They would have to investigate it first, get medical reports, take statements then prepare a report for their superiors to direct on.
    Mrs OBumble wrote: »

    Statements from students would likely be unreliable, especially if they were here learning English: I'm surprised there aren't more accidents involving gaggles of shrieking kids who aren't paying attention.

    Why would they be unreliable? What difference does the fact that they were learning english ? You do realise there are translaters for these situations ?


  • Options
    #38
    paska
    Registered Users Posts: 334 ✭✭paska


    BrianBoru00 wrote: »
    I find it hard to believe that the guards at the scene told your there would be no charges.They would have to investigate it first, get medical reports, take statements then prepare a report for their superiors to direct on.



    Why would they be unreliable? What difference does the fact that they were learning english ? You do realise there are translaters for these situations ?

    The guards never told me at the scene there would be no charges. I gave a statement and later they contacted me to say that there would be no charges.


  • Options
    #39
    con747
    Registered Users Posts: 5,913 ✭✭✭con747


    paska wrote: »
    Yeah she was taken away by ambulance.The kids were 14-15years old.

    She walked beside my car from the front to the passenger side. Looking at her walking she easily had time to mount the footpath.

    I am convinced she lost her balance and fell over at a bad angle.

    Your insurance company would have been supplied all medical records so and because it's a "your word her word" situation with no witnesses they have decided to pay out. I doubt anything you do will change that, but if you think legal advice would help go see a solicitor. Most first consults are free but if they take it on I would insist on a no win no fee.

    Don't expect anything from life, just be grateful to be alive.



  • Options
    #40
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,463 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    So basically you are saying there was no RTA.

    The woman stumbled and fell against the kerb breaking her leg.

    AGS have investigated and despite the serious nature of her injuries are not charging you.

    You should consult a solicitor to explore your options.


  • Options
    #41
    Caranica
    Registered Users Posts: 10,041 ✭✭✭✭Caranica


    Don't think the kids' statements would be accepted by the insurer. When my car was damaged by a guy opening his car door as I drove past my insurance company told me my passengers' statements would not be taken as they were with me and could be biased. Similarly those kids were with that teacher.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    hierro
    Registered Users Posts: 142 ✭✭hierro


    There has to be limits to the involvement in children, im thinking under 15, in civil and criminal investigations, depending on the seriousness of the enquiry.

    For a minor injury road traffic type matter getting statements of 30 children is excessive. No fault accidents happen and there's consequences. Probably best to move on, a 30 year driving career for most people involves something minor which costs us money.


  • Options
    #43
    kirving
    Registered Users Posts: 5,919 ✭✭✭kirving


    You've really got to be explicitly clear that you didn't touch here. Even in the first post, you mention her moving out of your field of view, and then moving off which just adds complexity to the story.

    The way it looks to a passerby (and insurance company) is that she's on the ground and you're giving an unclear account of what happened. It seem to me reading your posts that you aren't quite sure.


  • Options
    #44
    BrianBoru00
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭BrianBoru00


    hierro wrote: »
    There has to be limits to the involvement in children, im thinking under 15, in civil and criminal investigations, depending on the seriousness of the enquiry.

    For a minor injury road traffic type matter getting statements of 30 children is excessive. No fault accidents happen and there's consequences. Probably best to move on, a 30 year driving career for most people involves something minor which costs us money.

    It's a serious injury traffic accident.

    What limits are you suggesting?
    They are 15 and the average 15 year old is well able to coherently answer questions and articulate what they saw.


  • Options
    #45
    Mrs OBumble
    Registered Users Posts: 25,752 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    BrianBoru00 wrote: »

    Why would they be unreliable? What difference does the fact that they were learning english ? You do realise there are translaters for these situations ?

    The teacher is in a position of power over the kids: she controls the grades they get. Of course they will say what she wants them to say.


  • Options
    #46
    BrianBoru00
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭BrianBoru00


    Mrs OBumble wrote: »
    The teacher is in a position of power over the kids: she controls the grades they get. Of course they will say what she wants them to say.

    That is one of the most ridiculous claims I've read on here.
    one is an english class. The other is a serious and legal matter.

    Are you honestly suggesting that they would commit a criminal offence to get a better grade in their summer test?


  • Options
    #47
    Eggs For Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,948 ✭✭✭Eggs For Dinner


    BrianBoru00 wrote: »
    That is one of the most ridiculous claims I've read on here.
    one is an english class. The other is a serious and legal matter.

    Are you honestly suggesting that they would commit a criminal offence to get a better grade in their summer test?

    They might love the teacher and support a story in her favour or they might loathe the teacher and exonerate you, even if they saw you cause the accident. For that reason, they would not make strong independent witnesses


  • Options
    #48
    GolfNut33
    Registered Users Posts: 352 ✭✭GolfNut33


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Fcuk me, can anyone read English anymore.


    Hint: ,

    I helped my uncle, Jack, off a horse


    I helped my uncle jack off a horse.

    Mod
    Easy there


  • Options
    #49
    Effects
    Registered Users Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭Effects


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Fcuk me, can anyone read English anymore.


    Hint: ,

    Ha, I totally can't read english!!!!!!


  • Options
    #50
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,542 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    paska wrote: »

    My question is assuming I am not telling lies would I have a case to go to a solicitor to force the insurance company to fight my corner. The insurance company has not investigated it properly and are saying its a fifty-fifty. meanwhile, I lost my no claims bonus and my insurance has doubled. I am driving 30 years without a claim.
    Will you cover their losses and additional legal fees if they do fight your corner and lose the case?


  • Options
    #51
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    BrianBoru00 wrote: »
    It's a serious injury traffic accident.

    What limits are you suggesting?
    They are 15 and the average 15 year old is well able to coherently answer questions and articulate what they saw.

    Very few 16 year olds living in a foreign county would be able to testify in an irish court, because the OP's insurance co would not pay for them to fly here to do so.
    Especially if they can just charge the OP more...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    BrianBoru00
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭BrianBoru00


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    Very few 16 year olds living in a foreign county would be able to testify in an irish court, because the OP's insurance co would not pay for them to fly here to do so.
    Especially if they can just charge the OP more...

    Are you trying to make a point?

    whether or not they were summonsed to appear does not impact on their ability to testify.

    In a serious accident like the one described it would be usual for the gardai to canvas for witnesses and arrange for statements to be taken from anyone who witnessed the collision / incident.

    The gardai make a decision as to whether any criminal charges are to be made. The insurance company has no decision to make regarding this.

    They will make there own decision as to whether to pay out or fight the claim based mainly on the outcome of the traffic investigation.


  • Options
    #53
    Carawaystick
    Registered Users Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    If all the witnesses are living abroad, that might colour the civil and criminal decision makers. Witness statements need to be backed up in court, if the witnesses aren't here, hard to see how they would be, at the age of 16, able to fund their travel here to testify. I doubt the insurance co would fund their travel, and I doubt the state would fund their travel either, especially if the crime was such that the dpp wasn't pressing charges, and a gard was.


  • Options
    #54
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,463 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    There is no criminal case in this instance.


  • Options
    #55
    BrianBoru00
    Registered Users Posts: 1,035 ✭✭✭BrianBoru00


    Carawaystick wrote: »
    If all the witnesses are living abroad, that might colour the civil and criminal decision makers. Witness statements need to be backed up in court, if the witnesses aren't here, hard to see how they would be, at the age of 16, able to fund their travel here to testify. I doubt the insurance co would fund their travel, and I doubt the state would fund their travel either, especially if the crime was such that the dpp wasn't pressing charges, and a gard was.

    Again you seem to be addressing a point that wasn't made.

    A guard doesn't press charges. They investigate and make recommendations . The DPP or superintendent (on behalf of the DPP) makes a decision to proceed or not.
    And yes like in you re example , where the public interest would not be served ( from a cost benefit analysis for example ) a decision would possibly be made not to proceed.

    But it still doesn't alter my assertion that the average 16 year old is capable of testifying and providing evidence.


Advertisement