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?!

Post accident, your base premium rises because you’re now statistically a higher risk to your insurers. They add 50% to your base premium (£750)

I think that poster was meaning that the premium shouldn’t be going up in the first place, if it’s a no fault claim. But they do. An accident where someone else is totally at fault and you drove 100% correctly and with full care, should NOT mean that your premium increases. It should just not.

In fact anyone would think that it’s nothing to do with being “an increased risk to your insurers”, but rather a way to recoup some of the costs of processing the claim.

All too often these insurance companies will try to settle on a knock for knock basis. One time I had a car cutting onto the roundabout behind me in a similar way to your accident but from behind and he did a side swipe of my towbar on a roundabout from behind, causing no end of damage to his car (towbar took out his front end including radiator, wings both side got buckled as did bonnet - he was speeding IMO) with not a mark on mine as it was all in the angle of impact, luckily witnessed by a police motorcyclist but even so the insurances wanted to settle 50/50, and I had constant phone calls (up to 3 or 4 a day at one point, voicing their concern I had not put a claim through my insurance and why not, surely there was some damage to my vehicle?) from his insurance demanding to know why I had not submitted a claim for my damages (none to vehicle and I CBA to claim for whiplash even though it was pretty severe). Obviously they couldn't settle 50:50 with my insurance, so in the end they gave up. I firmly told my insurance why there was no claim and that I wouldn't accept it was my fault at all . Car was old workhorse of a car built like an indestructible tank, and not worth the excess so any claim would have written it off.

I think that poster was meaning that the premium shouldn’t be going up in the first place, if it’s a no fault claim. But they do. An accident where someone else is totally at fault and you drove 100% correctly and with full care, should NOT mean that your premium increases. It should just not.

Statistics show you’re much more likely to make a fault claim if you’ve made a non-fault claim. Insurance is based on risk, so that’s never going to happen.

Hi OP

DH had the exact same thing happen to him, with the insurance company encouraging him to go 50/50, but being the bloody minded strong-willed person he is, he insisted on going to court. He won because he argued his case coherently and submitted a detailed diagram, whereas the other party submitted a diagram on the back of a fag packet and their story made no sense. DH's solicitor (paid for by the insurance company) said that roundabout disputes can often go 50/50 so insurance companies are reluctant to take them to court, but you absolutely have the right to do so, and you have a very good chance of winning, particularly with the other party changing their story. They probably googled after admitting liability, or their mate said they would probably get 50/50 so they thought they'd try their luck You may not end up going to court anyway as they might well back down before it reaches that point. Good luck!

My ex-DH was in a similar accident about 12 years ago. He refused to settle, it went to court and the other driver caved and admitted liability once presented with diagrams and photos.

@Ariela you should at least have had your towbar checked as they can move.
I was rear ended and the visible damage to my car was a scratch on the bumper but when it was checked the towbar had moved and needed replaced. It wouldn't have been safe to tow on

@FairfaxAikman We did have it checked, honestly the car was built like a tank, and nothing had moved at all. As the car behind had side swiped the towbar, it pulled his front grill taking out the radiator, & pushed up the bonnet (which took out the other wing) and then the towbar hooked out the headlight and offside wing. We were almost stationary, but he didn't contact the bumper. His car was a cheaper sort of less well made car which just crumpled and bent.

Statistics show you’re much more likely to make a fault claim if you’ve made a non-fault claim.
Fucking mysterious "statistics" which are kept behind closed doors at insurance companies - that is just the bollocks excuse they give. I used to work in Insurance and I can categorically state it's a racket.

I did too. And i can categorically state that it isn’t. (Given most don’t profit from insurance sales.)

Statistics show you’re much more likely to make a fault claim if you’ve made a non-fault claim

Well, perhaps these “statistics” are skewed by the amount of cases like the OP’s where she is being pressured by her insurance company to accept a 50/50.

@lampygirl completely not what happened in my case and the truck was small and didn’t have a trailer. Are you supposed to never pass a truck on the inside lane in case they decide to swerve and hit you? Hmm..

@MonicaGellerHyphenBing You shouldn't go up the inside of a lorry on a roundabout no, just wait for it to go and follow it. On an artic the back wheels do not track behind the front wheels directly so even if the cab might stay in the correct lane the truck bit will cut the inside. You can avoid not being hit here by not putting yourself in that space. I'm sure the few seconds it would take to navigate a roundabout behind the lorry are unlikely to be life or death to you, but cutting up the inside might be.