Some git went into the side of my car yesterday and is now trying to say its my fault - advice please.

[VivaLeBeaver]

Dropping dd off at school yesterday, there's quite a few cars parked on the road along from the school as normal. There's a farm track that lots of people turn round in, and there was a 4x4 stationary on the road next to the entrance to the farm track. Its not unusual for people to be parked there and as it wasn't moving or indicating to move I went past it and turned down the farm track.

So I'M going forwards down the farm track, breaking and come to a halt. Then there'sa huge bang and the 4x4 has reversed in side of me. Loads of damage to my car, none to his.

We get out, he's saying sorry, its his fault, etc, etc. Says he never saw me as he has a big blind spot and I'm lower down in my little car. We swap details.

So today I got a phone call from my insurance company saying that he's now saying something different. He says he was already reversing and I went into his path. But he's also said he never saw me. So that contradicts himself.

All the damage is to the side of my car and I do have a sort of witness. She didn't see the actual impact but she saw him, parked up and not moving. She saw me come and pull into the track. Then 5 seconds later she heard the bang as he hit me.

Now I've told my insurance compnay all of this and they sort of sucked their teeth and said it could be 50/50. Well bollocks, I'm not happy with that. He's reversed into the side of a stationary car. His only possible defence would be if he'd already been moving but I have a witness to say that ain't so. So what are my options. My excess is £500 and there is no way I'm prepared to accept 50/50.

Any advice please

It'll be a 50:50, sorry.

I'm not sure I've got the geometry of this right, but you're sure he was stationary and no reversing lights on? And you've a witness - definitely worth persisting.

Tell your insurance co again that he has changed his story and is lying, and that they should not accept 50% of the costs as it was 100% the other drivers fault.

Any possibility of any other witnesses?

Bruxuer - how can it be 50/50 when I was staionary and he reversed into me? Its not right.

No other witnesses.

I've told the insurancee company not to accept 50/50.

It's 50/50 if it's his word against yours,and he could say he was reversing when you nipped in behind him. However if it was me i would push his lies and the witness bit - don't take it lying down. Do you have "legal" on yr car insurance?

I would push it but the insurance companies will want to go for 50/50 unfortunately.

In the absence of witnesses, it will not go anywhere.

I can't see why your insurance company would accept 50:50 unless they are also his insurers, and are after your excess and the chance to charge you more next year.

Like bobs says, it comes down to he says/she says. It will end up proportional - most probably 50/50.

You don't have a witness btw.

I disagree. He was moving towards the op, not vice versa.
Beaver - if you have legal expenses insurance you can be funded to litigate upon this.

I had an accident once and other party was to blame. Later they told insurance co that it wasnt their fault.
I insisted and insisted and eventually it went to court where we both gave evidence. I think mostly down to the fact that I was well prepared and clearly explained my side (she was a bit flustered and didnt really make sense) the judge ruled in my favour.

It didnt cost anything but due to the accident my insurance premium still went up as much as it would have done if I had just accepted 50.50 so I didnt actually gain anything either!

I have got legal protection on my insurance. Just spoke to my brother and he reckons they can't settle 50/50 unless I agree to it. He was in this situation once before and his insurance tried to get him to agree to 50/50 for 2 years and he refused. He made them instruct a solicitor and it went to court. I'm prepared to do this if I have to.

I know I don't have a witness to teh accident, but I have a witness to say that he wasn't reversing first which is what he's saying.

I've got protected no claims so not really bothered about the premiums going up but I am bothered about a £500 excess.

My brother reckons the insurance company aren't interested in fighting it becasuse if it goes 50/50 they get £500 from me and £500 from him. Plus my premium of £300 that they've already had. So they would get £1300 out of insuring me and will probably make a profit as I doubt the repair would be £1300. I've got a bodywork mechanic coming to pick my van up this evening so I'm going to get him to give me a real ball-park figure of how much he reckons the damage will cost to fix.

He was moving towards you - you said that he's admitted it's his fault.

Fight it as much as you can - if he went into your car, then he is at fault.

Even if you were facing him head on, he was the one moving.

He can't use the excuse he didn't see you, because it's his responsibility to check around him to make sure noone's there.

and your witness is all you need - He wasn't reversing before you went round him.

Did anyone witness him admit liability to you when he got out of his car?

Viva - I had Guaranteed Protected no claims, but when some delightful soul torched my car, the premiums on all 3 family cars went way high.

They explained - my "discount" of 60% or whatever still stands, but the premium they take the discount from went skyrocketing, so discount applied to that & net result is we were stuffed.

Only my 9yo heard him saying he was sorry and it was his fault.

You can use your 9-year-old.

even if not an official witness, it will bear weight.

I had a similarish thing a few years ago. Car ran into the back of me when I was waiting to turn right. No witnesses except my children (who I was told couldn't count). He was all apologetic and claimed full responsibility at the time (this counts for nothing apparently, as you can claim it's a common reaction to any accident) & then later he completely changed his story claiming I had been parked at the side of the road and had pulled out in front of him (utter rubbish) and tried to claim completely from me including compensation for whiplash which given his demonstrated propensity for untruths I was never entirely certain he had suffered from. Insurance thought it would go 50:50 as it was effectively my word against his & I wasn't happy at all. Motor legal protection advised me to draw out very accurately exactly what had happened & take photos of the scene etc. which I did. There were a few minor inconsistencies in what he claimed had happened (like the parking spaces where he claimed I had been parked weren't quite in the right place for the incident to have happened in the way he described and circumstantial evidence that I wouldn't have been parked there at that time and maybe one or two other points that I can't quite remember the details of). He didn't back down and eventually after about six months his insurance offered 50:50 - Mine called me to ask if I'd accept, I said no I wasn't happy and almost by return of phone call his insurance backed down and admitted liability.

I guess I may have been lucky, but imo if you know you are right it's worth holding out.

If you have legal cover I would stick to your guns and fight it. Could an expert witness demonstrate a blind spot in his vehicle? (still no excuse for hitting you). Even if he was reversing and you pulled in behind him he should still have been looking at where he was reversing and seen you and stopped! Its like saying 'I ran the pedestrian over because he walked out in front of me and I coulnt be bothered to stop as he shouldn't have been there!'

I may be understanding this incorrectly, but the damage to your car is down the side, yes?

And the damage to his truck is at the back?

So how exactly would you drive into him so that you only damaged the side/middle of your car and back of his? Did you handbrake turn into the road behind him, because that's the only way this is possible?

Of course not, hence the damage itself will show who is at fault. You can't have damaged that part of your car and be at fault.

I had something similar pulling into a junction and someone shot out of the junction too early and clipped the back of my car. They said it was my fault, I wasn't indicating, then I cut the corner when they realised not indicating wasn't a defence. Insurance co wanted to settle 50/50. I said no way, was fighting it, provided a long supporting letter, assured them of my status as a moral upright mother who would be confident in court, took loads of photos of the scene explaining how it couldn't have happened the way they said and the other driver was found to blame.

The insurers want a quiet life and minimal hassle. They don't know your area. Give them plenty of evidence to support your statement but make sure you put it in writing very clearly that you will not accept 50/50. If they still want to do it, there's little you can do, but the above tactics worked for me and a friend who I advised to do the same so it is worth a try.

Snorkie, sorry to hear you've been through this. Good to hear he finally backed down. I'm definetly going to hold out till he admits it or I'll take him to court.

One of the other mums at school has contacted me to say she saw it happen as well, she was behind me coming into the village. Saw he was stationary, saw me go into the track and saw him then reverse and go into me. She pulled over by the school and took her boys into school and by the time she came out to find us I'd exchanged details and left. So will ring the insurance company with her details tomorrow. Thats 2 witnesses I have now.

WingandPrayer - yes you're right about the damage. He admits he reversed into the side of my car but is trying to argue that its partly my fault. He's untruthfully saying that he was already reversing and I tried to shoot up the same track he was already reversing into. That I put myself into his path.