Other driver now not admitting liability for crash

hadepsx

Hi I was involved in a car crash over the weekend. Guy crashed head on into my car. Causing extensive damage. Luckily I walked away. Driver admitted full responsibility to Garda and other people at scene. I called his insurance company today to find out that he has now reverted his view on the crash, even though he was on wrong side of road. What do I do next. Both insurance companies know about crash. Is he or his insurance company trying to pull a fast one and not have to pay out. Garda gave me an incident report number too. Also I ask his insurance company about a courtesy car, they said because it's being disputed they can't issue me a car. They said to contact my insurance company for a car and if I'm successful they will reimburse my insurance company. But what if, in some crazy decision by an assessor, that I'm unsuccessful, how much would a courtesy car cost me financially.

Thanks for any help

trixiebust

Sorry to hear that OP, no expert but, if he's admitted fault to the guards, then surely there's no comeback.

Was in an accident years ago, where I was at fault & admitted liability & the guard took note of such. Other driver probably chancing him arm

hadepsx

Thanks for the reply. Yeah he's definitely chancing it but I was so disheartened to hear it today. I'm still shook from the crash to be honest and to hear that from his insurance company was very annoying. Stressed to the limit over all of this.

kirk.

Don't mind anything the other driver says after an accident

Let insurance sort it out

Stripeyman

If he was driving on the wrong side of the road there may be grounds for prosecution for Careless or Dangerous Driving. You could tell the Garda that you want to make a statement about the incident.

The Garda would then invite him to make a statement as well. If he was to make a statement at odds with his initial account of events (Garda could give evidence of this) his credibility would be shot to bits.

You'd have to be prepared to go to court if necessary, and it wouldn't be a quick solution, but it could be worth your while.

Jim_Hodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120323121#Comment_120323121

Overkill and does nothing for the insurance claim.

OP, just leave it to your insurance company to sort it.

Hellrazer

Ive seen this happen a hundred times over the years and hes not chancing his arm - hes been advised to retract the admission of liability more than likely by his insurance company.

Drivers usually pull their admission of liability after a discussion with their insurance company which is standard practice.

Every insurance company tells their customers to never admit liability even if they are 100% responsible and it is usually part of the terms and conditions of a policy to never admit liability as it can render a policy invalid.

Admitting it to a Garda doesnt help the issue as all the other driver has to say is that they were shook up and didnt know what they were saying and retract the statement which they are legally entitled to do.

So what will happen in the OPs case is that it will be investigated by both insurance companies and liability will be established. If theres any doubt about liability then what more than likely will happen is that you`ll claim for your damage off the other drivers insurance and they will claim for their damage off yours or you could both be asked to claim off your own policies.

Its a **** situation especially in a front end crash. And Ive dealt with a fair few over the years where the outcome isnt as black and white as people think. Its very hard to prove he was on the wrong side of the road (dash cam footage or pictures of where his car ended up would help) which is why its usually investigated by both companies.

Have you any pictures of the incident? That could prove liability.

Any witnesses that took pictures? Or would give a statement to your insurance company?

Take @kirk. advice here and let the insurance companies sort it out between them.

hadepsx

Thanks all for your replies. Is it possible for me to transfer my insurance back to another car I had on the policy initially, while a claim is processed?

Hellrazer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120323252#Comment_120323252

Should be ok. Tell your insurance company you got a loan of a car while the claim is being sorted. The other car will probably have to be insured by someone else, taxed and NCT`d before they`ll let you put it on your policy.

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120323288#Comment_120323288

The requirement that there is already a policy in place for a car you borrow sometimes applies if you're relying on your 'driving other cars' cover. In this case, the OP is proposing to get his policy transferred onto that car so that requirement would not apply. For the duration, that car would be his primary vehicle and he'd be fully covered, regardless of any other policy that may or may not be in place for that car.

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120323189#Comment_120323189

It's not overkill if the OP can persuade the Garda to prosecute the other guy for careless or dangerous driving. A conviction of one of the motorists involved in an accident seals the issue of civil liability so it's well worth the OP's time pursuing it.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325006#Comment_120325006

After an accident surely you don't need to be persuading gardai to do anything

Just gather all the info , incident report number ,photos, video etc and leave it to your insurance to do their job for you

Hellrazer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324994#Comment_120324994

If memory serves me right it all depends on whether the car is in his name or not.

If it then what you are saying is true and he can just transfer it to his policy and away he goes (obviously it still needs tax and nct and the premium could change depending on the car) - if its not in his name then the requirements for having being insured by the owner apply as far as Im aware.

Kimbot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120323121#Comment_120323121

As the guards were called to the scene the guards will establish if there is grounds for charges or not so the OP doesnt have to push for them.

OP if he admitted liability the guards will sort all that out.

Jim_Hodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325006#Comment_120325006

You don't persuade Gardaí to prosecute. Get real.

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325159#Comment_120325159

I don't believe that is the case. If you transfer your policy to a car, it makes no difference who owns it or whether there is already a policy in place for it.

Lots of garages will rent you a 'replacement car' when your own car is being repaired. It costs a lot less than a regular rental from the likes of Hertz because you provide the insurance cover by temporarily transferring you policy to it. You obviously don't own the car but you're fully covered. I've done it several times.

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325230#Comment_120325230

By 'persuade', I mean the OP contacts the Garda, says the other guy is now playing silly games and denying responsibility.

If nobody is injured in an accident, the Gardai will often let it go without a prosecution if the guy who's fault it was accepts responsibility and his insurance pays out. If he starts acting the pr1ck in the face of clear evidence that it was his fault, the Garda will often take the view that he should be prosecuted.

Hellrazer

Of course it matters who the registered owner is - the first thing you are asked when seeking insurance is "are you the registered owner of the car"

Not just for insurance but for Parking fines, toll charges , if you were in a collision and decided to leave the scene of the accident.

A garage replacement car is always covered under a garages policy - covering the rule that it must be insured by the owner.

Even rental companies cars have their own coverage on them.

As well as that a lot of the "driving other cars" policy only cover 3rd party.

Theres also a limit of how long you can temporarily transfer insurance for - usually 30 days per year.

The OP needs to clarify if the car is in his name or not - it makes a huge difference.

Kimbot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325294#Comment_120325294

But the fact the other driver is acting the maggot now is not a criminal matter, I am only a few weeks after a crash and had all this explained to me by the crash investigator who is an ex guard. As the guards were at the scene and the other driver admitted liability at the scene this will be noted and the guards will furnish a report to the insurance company to that effect. he can argue all he wants but if the guards report states the other driver front ended the other car on the wrong side of the road then he has no leg to stand on.

zg3409

Some people claim "shock" as a reason they claimed liability and only later understood the exact circumstances of the crash.

It's usually cheaper to provide a car yourself than hire a car as it can be hard to claim cost back and usually it's limited to a very short period in weeks.

I would agree with contacting gardai as it may help get issue sorted quicker.

Beware neither insurer are really in your side. They are both looking to limit their costs and move on.

You need to do what you can to get on the road again and try get issue closed sooner rather than later. Gardai may be able to provide a statement so ask your insurer have they got a Garda statement, is it now clear cut etc.

Hellrazer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325325#Comment_120325325

Garda usually only send a report to insurance companies in cases of personal injury. They dont usually send one for vehicle damage only. Which is why in a minor collision you dont need to call the garda.

Also the garda cant make a statement saying that the other lad is at fault because "the other driver front ended the other car on the wrong side of the road " unless they actually 100% see it themselves. Otherwise I could report every driver that overtakes on a solid white line, drives over the speed limit to teh garda and expect them to give fines without them witnessing it.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325325#Comment_120325325

What the crack with this " admitting liability"

I remember an insurance investigator telling me never to admit liability

Hellrazer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325407#Comment_120325407

And you`ll also find it in the T&Cs of your policy booklet. Never ever admit liability even if you are 100% in the wrong.

Quin_Dub

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325407#Comment_120325407

In the insurers view, by "admitting liability" you are closing off potential pathways for them to limit their risk exposure to costs - It's all a game.

If you say "It was all my fault" , the insurer will then have a harder time trying to claim that the other party did something to contribute to the incident or that the road surface was at fault etc. etc. etc. etc.

They just want the leeway to try every stroke available to limit their potential costs.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325478#Comment_120325478

That was my thinking , but after an accident you could say anything in shock

So would they have grounds to cancel a policy or would that be insurance co. BS

coylemj

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325478#Comment_120325478

As plenty of people have pointed out, admitting liability at the scene carries no weight whatsoever. You've just been involved in a smash, you were confused and in shock. It has very little, if any, value to the other side.

Stripeyman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325203#Comment_120325203

Unless Gardaí witnessed the collision they'd need a statement from somebody who did in order to decide on a prosecution.

Assuming that in this case they didn't, it would take a statement from the OP or another witness alleging an offence for a prosecution to be brought. Gardaí can't prosecute based on hearsay.

Calahonda52

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325006#Comment_120325006

I agree.

Did this and on foot of the prosecution, successfully sued the driver for the uptick in my insurance until I got my full NCB back, plus all my legal costs.

It amounted to 5,000 pounds back in 1983, which was equal to my after tax annual income.

As for kirk. contribution, the usual gruff

hadepsx

Well lots of food for thought there guys. I appreciate the help and thoughts. Regarding the other car that I can transfer my insurance too, yes it's my old car that I had at the start of my insurance. It's in my name, I was in the process of selling it on but not now. I then switched my insurance to the newer car around the end of February, so I've only had it on the road a few weeks 😭. Before it was destroyed.

Should I hold off switching insurance back to my old car, will this hurry the other drivers insurance company along in their decision.

I don't want my switching insurance back to set back by claim, in that incase they see I could have another car on road so we'll drag this out longer than usual.

coylemj

Should I hold off switching insurance back to my old car, will this hurry the other drivers insurance company along in their decision.

I don't want my switching insurance back to set back by claim, in that incase they see I could have another car on road so we'll drag this out longer than usual.

The other crowd will have no notion of what you're doing regarding alternative transport.

Your implicit suggestion that they would speed up settling if they discovered that you now had to walk or cycle in the rain to work is, to put it mildly, a bit far fetched.

hadepsx

I was just wandering as it was mentioned to me by someone else.

Eggs For Dinner

Firstly OP, any party admitting liability at the scene carries no weight. As mentioned before, each party is deemed to be in shock and neither is considered to be expert enough on establishing likability.

If you have comprehensive cover, let your insurer repair your vehicle and provide you with a courtesy vehicle. They will then try to recover their outlay from the 3rd party. Upon success, the claim is removed from your record. Liability will be decided on the proofs available e.g.Dashcam, locus of vehicles, witness statements, impact zones, Garda extract.

Leave your insurers to it. If they have sufficient proofs to secure recovery, they will not let it drop. Without these, they may make a decision to cut their losses. In short, the truth and what you can prove are often 2 different things

kirk.

I was thinking the same

Surely a policy can't be invalidated if you make an admission as you can be in shock at the time

An investigator rightly pointed out to me that you may incorrectly assume you were in the wrong

Eggs For Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120328620#Comment_120328620

No policy has ever been invalidated for admitting liability at the scene. Subsequent admission of liability without consent of your insurers will not be appreciated.

NUTLEY BOY

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120332325#Comment_120332325

To invoke that condition an insurer would probably need to establish that the policyholder's admission has prejudiced their position e.g. it has inhibited their ability to plead contributory negligence or to claim contribution from another party.

Mind you, somewhere back in the mists of time, I remember reading a decision from Gannon J [Irish HC] in which he ruled that conditions in insurance policies may be interpreted on a strict constructionalist approach.

NUTLEY BOY

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325006#Comment_120325006

Agreed.

Irrespective of complaints it is actually the decision of the Gardai to prosecute or not and, if so, on what charge.

Marcusm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120325794#Comment_120325794

The first-hand evidence provided by the person with whom he collided is not hearsay. Likewise, the existence of skid marks and/or evidence of their own eyes from where the cars end up if they have not been moved.

A lack of willingness to prosecute is all too common as “it’s too much hassle”.