A driver who smashed into me has lied to insurance and said I caused the accident. What now?

[GunpowderGelatine]

A few months ago on the roundabout near my house, a car went into the side of my car. I was in the right lane going right on the roundabout (exiting at 3 o'clock point) and they were going to the 1st exit (11 o clock point). They did what LOADS of drivers on that same roundabout do - rather than sticking to the lanes they travel to the exit in a straight line, which means they end up in the right lane for a few seconds. This happens about 3 times a week to me on the roundabout, they aren't looking to see if someone is slightly behind them in the right lane so cut across. Because turning the steering wheel for 2 seconds is clearly too much like hard work. Anyway, I have near misses all the time, and this time the back right side of their car crashed into the front left side of mine.

I got their insurance details (though they were cagey about giving a name and we're very indignant about the whole thing) and I put in a claim which has rattled on a bit, paid £150 excess for car repair.

Anyway my insurance have come back and said that I was the one who swerved into their lane and crashed into them!!! fucking lying bastards. I'm furious. Insurance want me to claim 50/50 liability. Which means I only get 50% excess back and my no claims is reduced by 3 years!! I have said no way, it wasn't my fault and they are committing insurance fraud by lying.

I explained that the damage to the areas of the car show they obviously didn't see me (because they weren't looking when they served into my lane) and their back crashed into my front. If it had been me going into them then surely I'd have crashed on purpose as I'd have seen them clear as day?! Also why would I be travelling home in the correct lane and randomly swerve into the wrong lane?!

Anyway insurance have said because there's no CCTV, witnesses or dashcam footage (I have one but my charge point was broken 😫) it's my word against there's and an independent judge would automatically rule 50/50 liability

I'm raging. I also think that's bullshit about the judge. Surely every case without CCTV before dash cams wasn't settled 50/50?!

Any advice on what I can do now? Insurance pressuring me to settle 50/50 but honestly I think they're trying to avoid work for themselves. I refuse to admit it was half my fault and can live without the excess for now. I have heir number and feel like calling them to ask why they're lying bastards (I won't). Why would someone not just do the right thing?!

[dottiedodah]

I cannot see how the Insurance Company can come up with 50 /50 when you are clearly not at fault here! I think it is a tactic employed by them to cut down on costs by the sounds of it .I used to work in Insurance and a protected No Claims Bonus is generally more expensive to buy.

[Hingeandbracket]

I cannot see how the Insurance Company can come up with 50 /50 when you are clearly not at fault here
Google the caselaw then.

[TooSweetToBeSour]

Drives like LB give me the rage. If you’ve got the patience and the perseverance and can accept the consequences should the decision go against you eventually, I would 100% be digging my heels in on this. Let it go to court!

[ALemonyPea]

This happened to me a few years ago.the woman who crashed into me admitted liability to the police, but then claimed it was my fault to insurers, and as police didn't take any written statements, it was long drawn out.

I did a screen shot of the roundabout from google earth, drew where the cars were, where she should have been, etc. It went in my favour and her insurance paid out. You could try that?

[Thefaceofboe]

100% not your fault op how frustrating for you. I don’t have any advice to offer but hope you get it sorted. And your diagram made me laugh

[alig99]

Stand your ground and say you will go to the insurance ombudsman as you are dissatisfied of their handling of this claim. In addition remind them that you are their client and pay for their service and you expect them to fight your corner with the other insurers, insurers are so lazy these days.

[WhatWouldTheDoctorDo]

I was really bullied by an insurance company to take 50/50 in an accident that was absolutely not my fault. Told me they would not pay court costs etc. and that I'd be left with thousands of pounds of bills if I did not agree to it by the end of the day (this was in the afternoon). It had been going on for 2 years. I caved, they completely broke me down. I found out later that they had ballsed up the claim and some paperwork with the underwriters hence the pressure for me to settle. The only saving grace was that they managed to issue me paperwork in error that had maintained my no claims bonus, which was helpful when I promptly changed insurers! Speaking directly to the solicitor dealing with it rather than the call centre people was really helpful, despite me ultimately folding!

[JenniferM1989]

I think I know what you mean about what happened. You were alongside each other basically on the round about in different lanes, you slightly behind them, then they merged into your lane in a split second and the back/side of their car hit the front/side of your car?



If we were looking at this type of thing on a normal straight road like a dual carriageway, the other driver would instantly be at fault for not staying in their own lane and swerving into you. It's just a pity that you were slightly behind as if you were slightly a head, they would have hit the back of you and wouldn't be able to say it wasn't their fault

[GunpowderGelatine]

Ok so for those (really helpful thank you) people who know the law better than I do, if I go to court and the judge accepts 50/50 will I have costs??

I do have legal cover so will phone a solicitor on my day off but I like to be prepared

[Spartak]

I had a lying bastard claim I'd reversed into him while waiting at a roundabout, held by traffic lights, because obviously one tends to reverse for no reason at all.

He nudged my bumper. There wasn't a mark on his car or mine. I took photos and exchanged details. Almost a year later, he put in a claim to my insurer. I had to fill in statements, send the photos and got my friend who was in the car to write a statement.

A year later again, so two after the accident, I'm notified that his insurer is taking me to court. In the end, the solicitor for my insurer settled for 50/50 on a no liability basis, as their claim was just over £2k and it would cost more than that in legal fees. The solicitor didn't bother to check with me, they just settled, which wiped three years off my no claims.

So even if you know he's a lying twat, you might find it's out of your control anyway.

[Walkingdeadfangirl]

That's when they swerved into the lane. She clearly hadn't bothered checking her mirrors
Or maybe you were in her blindspot. It does sound like you think you were in the right but in court it only matters what you can prove.

Is your NCB protected? How much will a 50:50 result actually cost you? Court is a lot more stress and hassle, is it worth it?

Lastly you mention that they swerved in front of you. But you also say,
they travelled to the exit in a straight line. It cant be both.

[Christmaschocolatecookie]

50/50 on a roundabout these days and judge will always rule 50/50 when a challenge in events happens. Without cctv dashcam or witnesses there is nothing a judge can rule on so will go 50/50

Previously worked in insurance and this 50/50 rule on roundabouts has been in for a few years; ridiculous really...

Also be aware if you do go to court and tell the judge the roundabout is a nightmare you experience it all the time; he/she will just say that you should then anticipate it and should reduce your speed and give extra room on the roundabout; not my words or thoughts just no from experience this will probably be the closing argument.

[PettyContractor]

Im guessing the TP says you swerved into their lane. Damage areas consistent with both versions of events. Why should the judge assumed youre telling the truth and hes lying?

Because she has no reason to be turning into his lane, but there is a reason why he would be cutting through hers. Because the (side of) the front of her car colliding with the (side of) the back of his meant she could see him much more easily than he could see her, making it far more likely that he was the one performing a lane change while oblivious to the other car. In fact the last sentence alone is why on balance of probability I would conclude he was in the wrong, if I were the judge.

[GunpowderGelatine]

A 50/50 result means I could only claim back £75 off my £150 excess

[GunpowderGelatine]

I honestly thought I'd protected my NCB but checking my policy I haven't oh well that's a lesson learned!

[SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius]

The other driver had reached a point on the roundabout where they should have steered in a curve to stay in their own lane, but by going straight on, they entered the OP’s lane and hit her. So I guess she is using the word ‘swerved’ to mean it expectedly left their lane and came into mine’.

[Velveteenfruitbowl]

This happened to my husband. He obviously didn’t accept liability. It went court and the woman who smashed into him obviously lost. I still miss that car

[PettyContractor]

^Lastly you mention that they swerved in front of you. But you also say,
they travelled to the exit in a straight line. It cant be both.^

It can be both if the lanes are curving, as they tend to do on a roundabout.

[MissConductUS]

The other driver made an improper land change. That's what caused the collision.

[underneaththeash]

I had an incident a few years ago where I'd turned into my road and then had to stop quickly - the other person went into the back of my car. After initially admitting liability, they back tracked and claimed I've reversed into them!

Similar to you insurance company suggested 50/50 which I rejected. Just before the court date (which I didn't want to do) they suggested a 99/1 split, which I accepted.

[Walkingdeadfangirl]

I honestly thought I'd protected my NCB but checking my policy I haven't Oh dear, that will be expensive then. Bad luck.

[ScrambledSmegs]

If you do stick to your guns and end up in court there's no guarantee that it will be ruled 50/50 liability, I ended up in court after a crash. I assumed that even though I'd done all the legwork - taken photos, detailed drawings and full clear written description of the event, that it would be at best 50/50. The judge decided 100% in my favour which was a welcome surprise, especially as the other party had not only lied but had got their passenger to lie too (inconsistently, which probably helped me more than them!).

My insurance company wasn't too supportive either but I'm quite glad I did it. I was young and really stubborn though. These days I'd probably just settle and be really fucked off about it.

[Bowerbird5]

We had this. Police at seen called by someone else and ambulance crew considering fire engine as they might have to cut me out. He lied to police about his speed but we let that go because we couldn't say he was going faster or that he wasn't paying attention. He later lied to the insurance and told them we were overtaking and some other bullshit. We were stationary because a tractor was coming and there was a car parked on a narrow road. he came around a bit of bend but then two car lengths straight road approx before hitting us and we heard no breaks. Tractor unfortunately buggered off and it must have been contractor as not a local one. I know all the local ones. The drawing shown to us later was laughable. He never enquired after my health yet I had to be dragged across driver's seat door on a board. The crew were amazing to get me out the way they did and meant our car wasn't written off. The police wouldn't let us move it to get me out of my door because he was taking details. There was a ridge of grass so they couldn't open the door.

Keep fighting your case we did and eventually got believed. We can't believe the garbage he made up because we were stationary with the hand brake on for about 2minutes before he hit us.Good luck and the main thing is you are still here to tell the tail.

[Bowerbird5]

oops tale

[zarek]

Post accident changes of 'perception 'and story are common. Without witness evidence the insurance company is just throwing good money after bad and it is cheaper to go 50:00. If the value of the claim is sufficiently low you might be able to do a small claims court claim yourself. I did this years back for a carpark bump and won. The threshold of proof there is 'balance of probabilities' so the adjudicator seems to mainly weight up the credibility of the parties. All my sketches and interpretation of the damage where rubbished by the adjudicator with a 'you're not a professional accident investigator so I'm not going to look at these' but fortunately the other party tied themselves in knots with inconsistencies and a judgement was made in my favour.