Insurance issue with Ocado driver

[user1472561038]

We recently had a minor car accident where our stationary car was scraped by an Ocado van.

It was fortunately low speed but happened on a quite narrow country lane where we were driving up a steep hill when the van came over the brow of the hill and failed to stop. We pulled to the side and stopped moving at all as the driver of the Ocado van tried to squeeze past. In the course of this he scraped our car. He stopped, admitted he'd been going too fast to stop at the top of the hill as most drivers would have, and admitted liability as his van scraped our non moving vehicle, giving us his details.

However once we reported to the insurance details on the card he gave us he's stopped telling the truth about the accident and it's been referred to a claims management firm This has led to us being told he is now lying and doesn't accept any liability and we will have to pay an insurance excess.
I'm fuming. Why should we be out of pocket due to a careless Ocado driver who has then lied. We look after our car, why should we pay for its repair when it's their drivers fault. How can we proceed here though, there were no witnesses so they want to settle 50/50. Any advice gratefully received.

[wowfudge]

Is this paying the excess in order to have the damage to your car repaired by the insurer's repair people? You may well get it back depending on how things go. Does the Ocado van not have a 'collision monitoring system' or CCTV fitted? There may be evidence of what actually happened.

[greenfolder]

Highway code rule 155.

[user1472561038]

Thanks. We should definitely quote that. Appreciate your feedback. Re paying the excess, I don't want you if he's lied, as I cannot see why he'd now tell the truth. Ocado seem happy for him to lie?

[WannaBe]

You will need to pay the excess initially until the claim has been settled

[user1472561038]

I want it to be settled if he tells the truth though? Am I being over ambitious here?! I wouldn't lie if it was our fault.

[greenfolder]

The only way you can be absolutely sure that this won't go against you is to claim from their insurance directly and bypass your own insurer. Was there damage to the ocado van? Ocado will not be happy with their driver lying in any way , but how will they or more likely their insurers know? They are passing on what they have been told. Your insurers cannot pursue this properly until they have had your cat fixed and incurred an outlay. They have nothing to sue for up to this point. In these circumstances most insurers will try to settle 50 50 because of the economics. Not because they think that you are lying or the other driver is but because it is expensive to take to court and they will have to bear the costs. On your side is the fact that most delivery drivers do not want to go to court and indeed often n longer work for the employer and therefore won't attend court. How much is the damage to your car?

[user1472561038]

Thank you. It's only scraped so perfectly driveable. So what you are suggesting is we agree to repair and pay the excess to get this done but don't agree to the 50/50 and go to court if necessary to prove this?

Appreciating Ocado may not know the employee is lying but I have communicated this to them..

Thanks.

[wowfudge]

You were stationary and he tried to squeeze past? If that was the case tell your insurer you were stationary then they will not start all the 'well it sounds as though it could be shared liability'. You do have to pay the excess in order to get the damage repaired. Ask your insurer to send you the forms to fill out to describe what happens if you haven't already. Make sure you note that the other driver admitted liability. Do you have legal cover on the policy? The legal people will recover your excess for you if the other driver is found to be at fault.

[greenfolder]

You can't have the benefit of your insurance policy (ie have the repair costs met) without handed conduct of the claim to them. Once you have claimed it is up to them to decide how or whether to get their money back. For example. The repairs to your car are £1000. You have a £250 excess. Insurers have spent £750. Other insurer has spent the same. Both parties are adamant the other is at fault. There are scrape marks on both vehicles. There is no conclusive proof. If it goes to court one of 2 things will happen. The judge will prefer one persons version of events over another. They win. Get back the cost of repairs. However because of the small amount involved they will not get back their solicitors costs. It would probably have been cheaper to do nothing. Other scenario, judge cannot find one person more truthful and finds 50/50. Same legal costs buy had only got half the money back and had to pay half of the other sides repairs. Would have been cheaper to do nothing. This is why when these sorts of accident crop up the first thing insures try to do is agree 50/50. If there was no damage to the ocado van the only way you can be certain this won't happen is not to put it in your insurers hands. But argue it yourself. I would claim through my insurers as I have protected ncd and a low excess. But I would do do in the knowledge that a split decision is likely.

[PikachuSayBoo]

Sadly without an independent witness you're unlikely to get the result you want unless he decides to start telling the truth.

Even if it goes to court if he sticks to his story it's likely to go 50/50.

Shit I know. I keep meaning to buy a dashcam!