Insurance claim

falteringstar

I was in a car accident about 2 1/2 months ago, a three car pile up and i was the car in the middle. The car infront of me jammed on her brakes, and so i managed to come to a complete stop as she did, stopping only inches away from her. Id fully admit that I very NEARLY hit her, but didnt. However the car behind me didnt brake and hit me from behind pushing me into her.

Now she originally wasnt claiming, she only had a little ding. Im claiming from the car behind as my car is a write off.

However things just got complicated and now she has decided she wants to claim, so Ive bn infromed that im only going to get about half what i was originally quoted and that she may claim off me.

Does it sound fair or right to any of you that I should loose out on half my claim. Surely the driver behind is responsible for all the damage to my car, and she should claim off him.

Except that she claims I hit her first, which s bull, she had originally verified feeling only the one impact. [Apparently she'd have felt two had i hit her and then been hit myself]

Any advice???

junkyard

I think the car that hit you from behind is responsible but you should get legal advice. If you leave it to the insurance they may just settle without even contacting you and you won't get full value for your car or lose your no claims bonus if you have one.

layke

One thing i've learned about insurance companies in my dealings (house and motor) as soon as there's an accident they try and get out of it.

That lady should claim off the guy who rear ended you, if the back of your car show impact it clearly wasn't your fault the accident occured.

Consult some legal advice on this and if neccessary do the court thing.

Someone impressionable has obviously told the lady to make a claim.

thatkindofgirl

If she only has a little ding and your car is a write-off, it's obvious you were hit from behind with sufficient impact to push your car into hers.

Who is the one informed you of all this?

ciarsd

unfortunately the person in front cannot claim off the person 2 cars behind. the argument against cars 2 & 3 is that they should have allowed suitable stopping distances, so that their respective cars came to a complete stop a safe distance from the car in front (to allow space for any sudden rear impact/bump) like car #2 experienced.

if car #1 was to claim, it would be for damages off car #2, car#2 off car#3 and so on.

why the sudden change of mind re:claiming?

"However things just got complicated and now she has decided she wants to claim"

Ann Elk

The accident, in insurance terms, is know as a 'concertina' and they can be problematic and often end up being sorted out with joint liability. The rule of thumb is that if you can prove that you were stationary when the other vehicle went into you, pushing you forward them you can escape liability.

The above post about not being able to claim from the vehicles teo cars behind is not the case. Following that logic, how much space would you need to leave at every traffic light etc. bearing in mind that a 40 tonne HGV could come round the corner at 80 miles per hour. The space you need to allow is the space to come to a complete emergency halt without hitting the car in front - which you appear to have done from your account.

The issue that causes the problem is the witness issue, in the event that no witness/forensic evidence can be produced, even if the case does go to court, the decision returned will be one of jont liability and then the insurance companies will have to pay costs. In such situations it makes more sense for them just to share liability at the outset.

Having said that, stand your ground and ask for a copy of her accident report, see if she mentioned one impact or two - insurance companies will normally take the quickest route out of an accident situation and without being pushed, this is normally to pay their share and avoid a drawn out situation with an uncertain outcome. Remember, companes are bound to act in the best interests of their shareholders, not necessarily their customers.

Good Luck

NUTLEY BOY

If you can prove the facts to be as you state then you are completely in the clear.

Call the car you hit 1, call yourself 2 and the one behind 3.

Your duty to 1 was to be able to stop in time and avoid hitting her. You did this so you are not liable to her.

However, as you hit 1 she is perfectly entitled to claim against you as the one who hit her. Your defence is that you were pushed into her by 3. If you can uphold that defence 1 will lose against you.Technically, the procedurally correct thing for 1 to do is to sue both you and 3. She would be stupid to sue you alone.

I don't know who told you that you are only going to get half of your claim ! That could only arise IF you hit 1 first and were then hit by 3. In that case you would be liable for your front damage because you caused that and 3 would be liable for your rear damage because he caused that. (Even if you were then pushed into 1 for a second time the argument would be pretty similar).

Be completely clear that if 3 hit you and pushed you in to 1 then 3 is entirely liable for all of 1's claim and all of yours.

You will not get a copy of her accident report. That is a private document between her and her insurers.

Be sure to do the following to protect yourself ;

1. Get a copy of your insurance company's assessors report on your car if they have one. This will verify the nature and extent of damage to your car. If your cover is comprehensive they should have got one.

2. Irrespective of 1 above take your own photographs to clearly show the damage to the rear and front of your car respectively. Also, take a few from the side to show the relative damage to rear and front just like the camera angle in Father Ted showing how much Ted had really smashed it up !!

3. If she (No. 1) made a statement to the Gardai that will be in the garda abstract report which your insurers should get. You can ask your insurers for a copy of the garda report if they got one. The garda report statements might clarify who said what.

4. If you are comprehensive you can claim under your own policy in which case your insurers should seek reimbursement from 3's insurers. You will still need to make a claim against 3's insurers for any uninsured losses like car hire and so on anyway so get on with that.

5. Make it perfectly clear to your insurers that you accept NO responsibility whatsoever for any of 1's claim on the basis of your account of the facts. Put this in writing as insurance companies are notoriously amnesiac about things communicated verbally. Tell them that you want them to refer the matter to you first before they consider any settlement with No. 1.

Also, ask your insurers what they are doing about getting No 3's insurers to take over the claim. If they say "nothing" tell them that is not good enough and that they had better do so or you will complain about their negligence in handling the claim !!!!! That should get their attention as they sometimes need to be told things more than once.......................

Bartonprince

falteringstar wrote:

I was in a car accident about 2 1/2 months ago, a three car pile up and i was the car in the middle. The car infront of me jammed on her brakes, and so i managed to come to a complete stop as she did, stopping only inches away from her. Id fully admit that I very NEARLY hit her, but didnt. However the car behind me didnt brake and hit me from behind pushing me into her.

Now she originally wasnt claiming, she only had a little ding. Im claiming from the car behind as my car is a write off.

However things just got complicated and now she has decided she wants to claim, so Ive bn infromed that im only going to get about half what i was originally quoted and that she may claim off me.

Does it sound fair or right to any of you that I should loose out on half my claim. Surely the driver behind is responsible for all the damage to my car, and she should claim off him.

Except that she claims I hit her first, which s bull, she had originally verified feeling only the one impact. [Apparently she'd have felt two had i hit her and then been hit myself]

Any advice???

Have her killed.

Bartonprince

or you could check for cctv cams in shops or roadways etc to see if they have the accident recorded. long time ago now though.

Having her killed would be the easiest way... thats what i did.

falteringstar

She has told her insurance that I hit her first. I remember straight after the accident she got out of her car and accused me of this. I denied it, she turned around to driver 3 and asked who he was and what he was doing there! He calmly told her that he hit me, the dumb bat wasnt even aware of there being another vechicle, so im not in the slightest bit surprised she's saying that. But it just makes things much more annoying for me.

Anyway my insurer has told me that since she told them she felt only one impact she has no claim against me, and should claim against no.3. And that since no.3's insurer originally offered me the full value of the car and originally claimed liability they can not go back on it now. She assures me she'll do all she can to keep my policy safe.

30-6shooter

What happened in the first place,,, why were ye all jamming on the brakes? Did the dozy bitch brake to avoid a cat or something.

mike65

30-6shooter wrote:

What happened in the first place,,, why were ye all jamming on the brakes? Did the dozy bitch brake to avoid a cat or something.

Well she's not a "dozy bitch" unless you can prove it. Why do some posters revert to schoolboys when a female driver is mentioned? :rolleyes:

Mike.

30-6shooter

Oh im sorry,,, shes a lovely competent driver making a false insurance claim. She is dozy, as told the guards she only felt 1 impact. Now when trying to claim (after miss dozy had to be told to claim by a friend) her story doesnt stand up.

Nah,,, shes highly intelligent! :rolleyes:

celica140bhp

Well, 6-Shooter I'm thinking she did only feel one impact - car3 hit car2 which hit "dozy bitch" so only one impact!

Anyway,
something similar happened me many moons ago. Say I was car3. Car1 on wong side of road hits car2 head on and pushes back into me (I had just about stopped). My initial reaction was that I had hit car2 - didn't even realise car1 was there until I got out of the car. Car2 tries to claim off me and car1. After about a 2years of solicitors eventually went to court but before going in car1 solicitor offered a deal which I took and car1 took full blame and I kept my NCB and got my expenses.

Whoever caused the initial crash (regardless of the chain reaction) is responsible for everything!

Seth Brundle

Just add in my €0.02.
There may not have been much/any visible damage to "dozy bitch's" car but there could have been damage behind her bumper or whatever.
I recall a friends (13 year old 318is) car getting hit from behind by a corolla. The corolla was possibly a write off despite it not being a high speed accident. The BMW visibly hadn't much wrong but behind the bumper the two shock absorbers needed replacing along with a few other bits - about 2k to repair!

Ann Elk

NUTLEY BOY wrote:

You will not get a copy of her accident report. That is a private document between her and her insurers.

It ceases to be confidential on processing of a claim - just as do the Gardai statements.

NUTLEY BOY wrote:

5. Make it perfectly clear to your insurers that you accept NO responsibility whatsoever for any of 1's claim on the basis of your account of the facts. Put this in writing as insurance companies are notoriously amnesiac about things communicated verbally. Tell them that you want them to refer the matter to you first before they consider any settlement with No. 1 .

The insurance company are not obliged to refer any matter to you before proceeding - this is generally covered in the terms of your policy booklet. The only way you can take over ownership of the claim process is to hire your own solicitor (not the one they provide under their legal service ancilliary - this will contain the same clause) an instruct him as to how you want the claim followed up - this is usually sufficient to make them get a move on.

ken90

This is known as a subordination clause.

You cannot get out of it.

NUTLEY BOY

SUBORDINATION CLAUSE ??

It is called a " SUBROGATION " condition !! Mind you, given the way that insurers carry on at times it might just as well be called a subordination condition.

For information, subrogation is the right under a contract of indemnity for one party - the indemnifier or insurer - to avail themselves of the rights and remedies available to the indemnified party.

The subrogation condition does not confer upon insurers the right to do what they like to an insured person's detriment. They are actually required to exercise competence in dealing with claims and are on explanation if they don't.

Ann Elk, I don't get that bit about the first car driver's report form ceasing to be confidential on processing of a claim. I thought that there would be privity of contract between that driver and her insurers and that anybody outside that contract does not have the right to demand sight of the report form ?

On what basis could you demand another person's insurers to give you a copy of their client's report form ? I would like to know the authority for this please because it would be a very handy thing to be able to do after an accident when everyone gets convenient amnesia !!

I understand that Garda abstract reports containing statements are always available once any prosecutions have been disposed of or if there is a decision not to prosecute.

30-6shooter makes a good point. Why did Miss Whiplash stop so suddenly ? You cannot brake suddenly in the middle of the road for no good reason unless you wanted to cause an accident deliberately. Was that an oxymoron ? Oh no, better not go there, too much conspiracy theory like....