Had a prang, advice needed...

[Ootohere]

If they 'Record on File', then they will have regardless of making a claim or no claim, now that you made them aware of an incident.

 

http://www.esurance.com/insurance-resources/car-insurance-rates-claims-myth

 

george

[silver1011]

Yes I have legal cover, they are calling me tomorrow although I'm not sure what it is I should expect from them?

 

When I rang the claim line they made me aware of loads of things I needed to know before proceeding. The most important thing I'd like to have known was that the minute I commenced with the call the accident would be recorded on the system whether I chose to continue or not.

[spitzie]

Hope it all gets sorted soon. I have 2 no fault accidents, rear ended while stationary both times. I have not had any loss of no claims or noticably increased premium as a result.

[jlo]

Good luck. I hope the other driver is found 100% at fault. You could make a claim directly to lorry drivers insurance to avoid the excess or uses the new Ensurance accident Managment service from Skoda to fight your case. https://www.insurewithskoda.co.uk/Products/Ensurance/

[Gaz]

Yeah, that's my concern. I have no witnesses.

 

I wonder if it's worth paying for the repair myself rather than going through my insurance, which will no doubt increase future premiums.

 

I had an 'at fault' accident in my last car.  Nobody else involved, just unfortunate experience with a blizzard, ice, adverse camber and a kerb.  The car was written off and the settlement was £2,200.

 

I debated repairing it myself as the damage was broken suspension, but the driveshaft was ripped out of the gearbox so I decided to call it a day.

 

So far it's affected my insurance on both my cars, and my wife's insurance as I'm a named driver on hers.  18 months down the road I'm not sure, but we appear to be about £400 worse off.  And there's another three years to go before I haven't had an accident in the last five.   That's on 9+ years protected.

 

If it's clear you were not at fault then it's a no brainer, but if there's going to be any doubt about shared responsibility I'd certainly get a couple of quotes first before deciding whether to make an insurance claim or not.  Hope that helps and that you get it sorted painlessly.

 

Gaz

[vindaloo]

Depends entirely what the lorry driver states on his report. Best you can hope for is he waffles about you being in the wrong by being in your lane - in which case he'd be wrong. Or if he invents a fiction so far from reality that it's obvious he's talking balls.

 

I think though, that he'll either fold and accept responsibility or suggest you were also to blame. One question? Was his lorry a big firm's vehicle? Lots are now running dash cams to prevent "invent a bump" false claims".

 

J.

[loskie]

of course whether or not you claim is irrelevant. Your contract with your and any future insurer will require you to declare ANY accidents,claims or convictions regardless. To fail to do so could invalidate your insurance and could be seen as fraud.

[booke23]

Sorry to hear of your prang......I suppose if there is a positive it's that he didn't trash the new LED tail lights.

 

I had an 'at fault' accident by rear ending a car at a roundabout 5 years ago. It was a very low speed impact and there was no damage to either car. But of course the occupants made personal injury claims and my insurer (Admiral as it happens) was very keen to settle....which they did for £2400.

 

I had 5 years no claims at the time which went down to 3 after the accident. My premiums went up slightly, but as I was in my 30's by then I don't recall the increase being huge, and after a year or two they had come back down to pre accident levels again. 

 

I agree that it is 100% the lorrys fault. Is there any CCTV at the roundabout that could be looked at? 

[silver1011]

Depends entirely what the lorry driver states on his report. Best you can hope for is he waffles about you being in the wrong by being in your lane - in which case he'd be wrong. Or if he invents a fiction so far from reality that it's obvious he's talking balls.

 

I think though, that he'll either fold and accept responsibility or suggest you were also to blame. One question? Was his lorry a big firm's vehicle? Lots are now running dash cams to prevent "invent a bump" false claims".

 

J.

 

You can just see the lorry parked up behind me in the pictures in the opening post. It was only a small lorry, often referred to a seven and a half tonner?

 

No obvious sign of a dash cam but if there was one fitted it'll only prove the lorry driver was at fault!

 

I rang up my insurance company today for an update, they are still awaiting the other drivers version of accounts.

 

One thing they did say was that if it was to end up being 50:50 I'd only pay half of my excess, so £155.

[silver1011]

Sorry to hear of your prang......I suppose if there is a positive it's that he didn't trash the new LED tail lights.

 

I had an 'at fault' accident by rear ending a car at a roundabout 5 years ago. It was a very low speed impact and there was no damage to either car. But of course the occupants made personal injury claims and my insurer (Admiral as it happens) was very keen to settle....which they did for £2400.

 

I had 5 years no claims at the time which went down to 3 after the accident. My premiums went up slightly, but as I was in my 30's by then I don't recall the increase being huge, and after a year or two they had come back down to pre accident levels again. 

 

I agree that it is 100% the lorrys fault. Is there any CCTV at the roundabout that could be looked at? 

 

Yeah, there is a positive to every negative.

 

If the car needs paint I might get myself a little lip spoiler and get them to paint and fit it whilst its in for repair

 

Good question on the CCTV. There is a BP station, McDonalds and pub all surrunding the roundabout, although they are all on the other side. Worth a check though!

[Chappers.]

How can the insurance company say that if it is a 50/50 claim you will only have to pay half your excess? It sounds to me like they are trying to get you to settle for accepting part responsibility to make their job a lot easier (especially since they are already trying to discount your colleague as a witness).

 

I would argue that with the damage, the photo's of the roundabout taken immediately after the collision & the witness being just behind you that you have a very good chance of claiming successfully from the other drivers insurance - don't let your insurance company try and fob you off.

[silver1011]

To be fair to Admiral they have said that they will likely fight this one as the evidence is pretty daming, however they will have to look at the costs involved in taking legal action versus being able to successfully prove I wasn't at fault.

 

The guy said he had to prepare me for the worse case scenario, which in this case could possibly be a 50:50 claim purely down to the fact that roundabout claims are particularly hard when it comes to attributing blame.

 

He also said that they are holding their cards close to their chest until they hear back from the third party insurers. Depending on whether they admit liability or dispute my version of events will depend on what action my insurers take.

 

To be honest if it were me I'd be showing my cards now, the photo's, damage, positioning of the vehicles, the witnesses and the willingness of those witnesses to stand up in court might persuade the other insurance company to admit liability out of the gate. If they deny it and then we show them what evidence we have then wouldn't they be less likely to back down?

[AJ7788]

Good luck with it all, know what a pain it can be. I had an accident at a roundabout in July where the other party was in the wrong lane and just cut in front of me hitting my drivers side wing, bumper and wheel. The guy made a comment of, good luck as this is going to cost me on the road side..

 

Anyway two days later I received a letter from the other party's solicitors with a statement. Funny thing was the other party turned the whole situation around, he said that his car was where mine was and mine where his was so alleged I caused the accident (this after he told me to go learn my highway code). The next day I sent my video footage along with pictures from Google street view showing various points that the accident could have been avoided by the other party to my insurers along with the letter from the other party's solicitors.

 

Previous to this, the person I spoke to at my insurance company when telling them of the accident advised my that best case scenario would be 50:50 but most likely they will just accept liability as I have no witnesses.

 

I spoke to my insurers a week or so later to confirm they received the video evidence and then had a call back later on saying they have seen the evidence and it contradicts everything the other party has claimed. It was sent to the other party's insurers and it took them a month to get a PC to be able to view the video evidence but once they viewed it they accepted full liability and from the sounds of things the other party got in a little trouble because of their statement 

 

Now just in the process of claiming back my excess and other fees but on this occasion my camera saved me my excess of £350 as well as losing my no claims - well worth it!

[AJ7788]

Good luck with it all, know what a pain it can be. I had an accident at a roundabout in July where the other party was in the wrong lane and just cut in front of me hitting my drivers side wing, bumper and wheel. The guy made a comment of, good luck as this is going to cost me on the road side..

 

Anyway two days later I received a letter from the other party's solicitors with a statement. Funny thing was the other party turned the whole situation around, he said that his car was where mine was and mine where his was so alleged I caused the accident (this after he told me to go learn my highway code). The next day I sent my video footage along with pictures from Google street view showing various points that the accident could have been avoided by the other party to my insurers along with the letter from the other party's solicitors.

 

Previous to this, the person I spoke to at my insurance company when telling them of the accident advised my that best case scenario would be 50:50 but most likely they will just accept liability as I have no witnesses.

 

I spoke to my insurers a week or so later to confirm they received the video evidence and then had a call back later on saying they have seen the evidence and it contradicts everything the other party has claimed. It was sent to the other party's insurers and it took them a month to get a PC to be able to view the video evidence but once they viewed it they accepted full liability and from the sounds of things the other party got in a little trouble because of their statement 

 

Now just in the process of claiming back my excess and other fees but on this occasion my camera saved me my excess of £350 as well as losing my no claims - well worth it!

[sparks03]

Shame the wagon driver is being such a clown as it could have been relatively cheaply sorted without insurance companies. It wouldn't have taken much to sort your repair out, given the layout of the road and the location of the damage i'm pretty sure you've not much to worry about.

Good luck with the claim though, hope its sorted quickly 

[silver1011]

Thanks for the comments guys.

 

I actually rang the truck company so see what their thoughts were. They said they hadn't yet got their drivers version of events but that it didn't matter as it all has to go through their insurance anyway.

 

I sent the photo's to my nearest Skoda bodyshop and they reckon it's a new door so £1000+ so it will have to be an insurance job, regardless of fault.

 

I just have to wait now and see what the third party decide to say!

[silver1011]

Good news, Admiral rang me today to say that the third party had admitted liabilty and to go ahead and get the car fixed!

[preston334]

Good result then. Wonder what made the 3rd party change their story

[silver1011]

I think spending some time on my 'version of events' and some luck with the camera at the scene helped to create a compelling argument.

 

Interestingly when I rang the company that owned the truck shortly after the incident they sympathised but said it all had to go through their insurance company.

 

When my isurance company rang me today they told me the truck company had said that they would settle directly without involving their insurance company. They even sugested that they deal with me direct. I declined and requested that my insurance company deals with it for me.

 

I suspect that they have underestimated the cost of the repair. The damage looks minor but my local Skoda bodyshop after looking at the pictures suggested a new door might be needed, in excess of £1,000. I wonder if this will change their mind!

[Phil-E]

Phew!

 

Bit of a relief I bet!?

 

Hope they sort it asap and give you a suitable hire car while it's being repaired.

 

Is it just the door that's damaged? So just a new door required and that's it?

 

Phil

[silver1011]

Cheers Phil, yeah very relieved!

 

I was lucky, just the rear door, missed the sill by centimeters!

[kerrbryan]

Lucky, similar thing happened to my brother and the other driver claimed he swerved over to his lane, it was on a dual carriage way and ended up 50:50, it was cheaper to repair the cars themselves and cancel the claim. The other guy was a 'reputable' school teacher who lied his a**e off to the insurers.

[silver1011]

Yep, seems to be a case of 'survival of the fittest' these days and to hell with anyone else.