Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Car Accident / help

26 replies

Hollydolly123 · 23/09/2021 23:14

Hi I am not sure where to post this forum will try my luck here …

I was recently in a car accident and was looking for some advice if anyone has got into something similar or just oppions please , I was driving at about 30 mph when I have rear ended the car infront there was safe stopping distance but the car stopped abruptly when pulling over to swap details the police have came , we informed the police we did not need assistance as no one was injured the police said they were calling the sergeant out because they believed the accident was there fault .. a passerby had flagged the police down and they had stopped abruptly cause the behind collision , the lady said she didn’t need them and had just been putting her hand up to sheild her eyes from the headlights !! I know 😳 the sergeant came out did a full report and said he was liable she said to pass on the reference number to my insurers and the damage to my car would be covered by there liability insurance it has been a week and my insurance company is dragging there feet and keep telling me that sounds highly unlikely but still making no efforts to chase up the reference number, I have been in contact with the police collision unit who once again confirmed it was all there in writing they accepted liability .. how best do I go about chasing my claim up because my insurance is just treating me like I’m stupid , I am a single mum on third party cover with a messed up car any help and advice would be greatly appreciated

Thank you

OP posts:
thecatneuterer · 23/09/2021 23:27

I am struggling to follow this. However fault, I believe, always lies with the person who goes into the back of a car. It doesn't matter if the car in front does an emergency stop, the car following needs to leave enough distance to stop without hitting them.

I imagine the other drivers' insurers will have told them they aren't liable, whatever they may have said at the time.

And I don't understand what you said the Police said, but I find it hard to believe that the Police would ever say an accident is the fault of the drivers of a car that has been rear-ended.

WeAreTheHeroes · 23/09/2021 23:29

If I've understood correctly, the police think the person you rear-ended was at fault and have documented this? Keep on at your insurance company and check they've been in touch with the police. Make sure you pass on the reference number of the report in writing - by email will be fine.

Original poster
Hollydolly123 · 23/09/2021 23:30

@thecatneuterer no the police did not pass fault to the car I went into , they took fault for the collision happening in the first place they called it phantom third party because there car was not involved in the collision but they acted negligent to other road users by stopping without paying attention to surroundings

OP posts:
Original poster
Hollydolly123 · 23/09/2021 23:31

@WeAreTheHeroes no not the other party’s fault , but them the police they called it a phantom third party , meaning they (the police) believe they was responsible for incident for stopping negligently

OP posts:
WeAreTheHeroes · 23/09/2021 23:35

Okay - so unless this phantom third party can be found, you will be liable as you drove into the back of the other driver.

Original poster
Hollydolly123 · 23/09/2021 23:37

@WeAreTheHeroes sorry I may not have explained myself the best 🤦🏽‍♀️ The phantom driver is the police officer who was driving who breaked hard to none emergency … he came forward and took responsibility, I hope that makes more sense now

OP posts:
notapizzaeater · 23/09/2021 23:42

Right so I've reread it - you drove into the back of a police car that stopped suddenly thinking a member of the public was flagging them down ?

Original poster
Hollydolly123 · 23/09/2021 23:45

@notapizzaeater no , I’ve drove into another car that was behind the police car / the police car was untouched not involved in collision … but still said they felt it was there fault for emergency breaking when it was not necessary, saying they acted negligently to other road users .. sergeant came out ruled it was the officers fault for being distracted whilst driving and he was only one on scene breathalysed

OP posts:
Lockdownbear · 23/09/2021 23:48

Op the police officer probably got his backside smacked for saying it was his fault. The chances of the insurance company pinning it on the police is nil.

I've been rear ended twice, the last time was similar to what your describing.
I stopped to avoid a collision with A and got rear ended by C. C tried to blame A but as I hadn't hit A the court ruled the it was Cs fault.

IsDaveThere · 24/09/2021 00:06

You are still at fault for rear ending the car in front of you, the police car was irrelevant really, you didn't stop when the car in front made an emergent stop so you clearly didn't leave enough stopping distance.

Lou98 · 24/09/2021 00:08

I think I follow what you're saying OP - the police car did an emergency stop which caused the car in front of you to emergency stop, you've then went in to the back of that car. The police officer felt it was their fault for emergency stopping and their sergeant agrees?

I used to work in motor claims for a big insurance company. The thing is, it isn't up to the police officer or their sergeant to accept fault, it's for the insurance companies to decide. If the police insurance company has said they're not accepting fault then it doesn't matter that the police officer feels they're liable, it isn't their decision to make.
It doesn't matter that there was no need to emergency stop, the point is that you should always have enough of a stopping distance that should the car in front of you do a sudden emergency stop, you should be able to stop on time. There's no definition of what is an acceptable emergency - someone could stop suddenly for any number of reasons, from thinking they see an animal run across the road or someone in their car needing assistance, it really doesn't matter - you need to leave enough of a gap.
You say you did leave enough stopping distance but if you didn't stop in time before rear ending them then you never left enough of a gap for your reaction time.

Unfortunately, if their insurance company and yours decide you're at fault, which it's highly likely they will, then you will need to accept that

desperatehousewife21 · 24/09/2021 06:34

I work in car insurance taking claims calls, I take calls like yours all day long. We would place the liability with you as you drive into the rear of the third party. You can state the cause was because the police car emergency stopped, however you should maintain a safe enough braking distance to still avoid a collision should such a thing happen, and you have not.

desperatehousewife21 · 24/09/2021 06:34

Drove*

Mariell · 24/09/2021 07:04

It doesn’t matter if 1,2,3,4 cars ages of you suddenly stopped - you are responsible for being able to stop safely in any kind of emergency and not hit the car in front.

bloodywhitecat · 24/09/2021 07:08

You didn't leave enough room between you and the car in front as you couldn't stop in time. You are at fault for hitting the car in front.

MrsBungle · 24/09/2021 07:16

It sounds like the police car emergency stopped. The car (car 2) behind the police car then emergency stopped and, having left an appropriate gap/responded quickly, didn’t hit the police car. You didn’t leave enough stopping distance and went in to the back of car 2. If that’s what happened I can’t understand why you feel you’re not at fault.

TheIrritableGoldfish · 24/09/2021 07:19

@desperatehousewife21

I work in car insurance taking claims calls, I take calls like yours all day long. We would place the liability with you as you drive into the rear of the third party. You can state the cause was because the police car emergency stopped, however you should maintain a safe enough braking distance to still avoid a collision should such a thing happen, and you have not.
Maybe you do but you are not correct.

Gussman v Gratton-Storey found that the Defendant was liable for the accident when she suddenly stopped due to the presence of a pheasant in the road. In the crash for cash accidents, if there is evidence that the driver did an emergency stop for no reason that driver is responsible.
If the police have accepted liability (which taking at face value could be the case. The police will have cameras on the cars, they should not emergency brake unless it is an emergency, and being the Police you'd hope they didn't shirk their responsibility)

Op, have you got a copy of the liability? Keep ringing

choosername1234 · 24/09/2021 07:19

I have rear ended the car infront there was safe stopping distance but the car stopped abruptly

Well there clearly wasn't safe stopping distance if you could t stop safely. Sorry, sounds like your fault based on what you've said here

Stormyequine · 24/09/2021 07:20

I can see why your insurance company are struggling to understand what has happened. Your OP is not very clear, so if you've sent them something similar they probably don't realise the police vehicle was actually involved. You might need to explain that to them to clarify things. They may consider you at fault regardless but at least they will have the full facts to decide on.

auditamanda · 24/09/2021 07:21

Police can take liability and be charged if they 'caused' an accident. Sounds like they believe they caused the accident and are prepared to pay. I was involved in an entirely different but similar situation.

Whilst I don't agree- as rear ending is always the behind persons fault- if the police are genuinely prepared to pay then absolutely push it. Complain in all the usual way to insurance company- ask for managers, ask for complaints policy...

Angrymum22 · 24/09/2021 07:30

If you rear end someone even if they stop abruptly, by definition you have not left sufficient stopping distance. The sole reason safe stopping distance is required is for abrupt or emergency stops.
If a child had run out in front of the car you were following they would have stopped just as abruptly and you would still have hit them and you would still be at fault. Just because the police are taking the blame does not mean you were driving safely.
If nothing else you have learnt that your estimation of safe stopping distance is wrong.

NerrSnerr · 24/09/2021 07:31

If there was safe stopping distance then why didn't you stop? The whole point of leaving a safe stopping distance behind someone is that you have time to stop if they slam the breaks on.

You were either too close or not paying attention.

IveGotASongThatllGetOnYNerves · 24/09/2021 07:34

You said you left a safe stopping distance but you did not.

A safe stopping distance is one that allows for an emergency stop. You did not leave sufficient distance. If you had then you would not have rear ended that car. It's highly unlikely that this will be determined to be a third party's fault.

icedcoffees · 24/09/2021 07:49

If the police at the scene admitted liability then definitely push that with your insurers.

It is possible that the car in front is responsible - if they were found to have stopped irresponsibly or unnecessarily, for example.

Tiggles · 24/09/2021 07:53

Whilst I think you are partially at fault as if you were driving a safe distance behind you wouldn't hit a car emergency stopping, I was in an accident where someone drove out a side junction straight into the side of my car. Clearly their fault. Happened in April, insurance finally paid up in August. Its a slow process. Regularly felt I wasn't getting anywhere on phone to insurance company and they weren't happy to place liability on other driver for a long long time - in fact they didn't even contact the other insurer until after they had made an offer for my car in August.