Woman reversed into my wife's car at traffic lights but won't accept liability. Please help

[domelsnake]

Hello all,

My wife had this incident a while ago.

While waiting at the traffic lights as soon as the light has changed from red to green the car in front of her put the reverse gear in and reversed into her.

The lady apologized saying she is a new driver and put the reverse gear in error.

Luckily for us there was no damage on our car and little dent on the other's car bumper. Because the driver of the other car was in fault they have decided to forget about this and come back to work therefore no personal details have been exchange.

I have reported this to my insurance company any way just as a backup.

After few weeks my insurer came back to me no saying the other party is blaming us for the accident and trying to make a claim.

Because no details have been exchanged they have reported this to the Police saying it was a hit & run and asking for the driver details that time which we have provided.

After few months we have received a court documents saying the other party is claiming their car to be fixed as well as £5k injury claim.

I spoke to our lawyer provided by our insurance company and have been told there is no way to win this case without CCTV footage, dashcam footage or witness (unfortunately there is none of those.) and have been asked to sign the from of consent which basically means my wife takes responsibility for the accident which we don't want to do.

Apparently the court bases their decision on statistics saying 9/10 times with this type of collision is the person in the back in fault.

Is there anything we can do to get the decision to be made in our favor?

He can provide a witness statement but as he wont be considered 'independent' it is unlikely that he would give evidence as his evidence isn't particularly helpful to the Court.

I was in a similar position though I had an independent witness backing me up. My insurance company still wanted to settle. I refused but ended up having to engage a personal injury solicitors to fight it for me which if the other driver had just admitted it I wouldn't have claimed for. They agreed liability the day before the court case.

My wife is on the same page as me but she is stressed a lot already thinking about going to the court and being questioned by the other parties - you know how they ask these questions - just to make it look like you are the one who is guilty.

This is her car but she is a named driver on my policy.

I do have no claims protected so I believe it's only one year which I haven't earned - please correct me if I'm wrong.

They do ask about any accidents in the past 5 years when looking for a new policy - will that claim on my policy affect me a lot?

Also if it goes 50/50 is that mean what they are claiming is going to be paid by my Insurer or theirs?

We have not made any claim against them as there was really no damage to our car neither any injury.

Insurance companies and their lawyers will have done the ££ calculations. I imagine that such cases will be a pile on their desk and referred to as 'Just another rear-end shunt'. To be processed and got out of the way as quickly as possible.

If they settled 50/50 it means that your insurers would only pay 50% of the claim - the claimant wouldn't get the remaining 50% from anyone.

The amount she's claimed is just an estimate. It is likely any settlement would be negotiated up to that price. Really depends on what the medical report says.

Yes you would have to disclose the claim to other insurers but if you have no claims protected and stay with that insurer your premium shouldn't increase because of the accident (but it might increase generally as insurance does normally).

Cozie is right in that your insurers will weigh up the cost of defending (and potentially losing) against the cost of paying the claim straight away. It's an expensive process to run a case to trial if ultimately you lose.

But it is up to you / your wife to insist on defending it if that is what you want to do. But you must also be prepared to accept that you might not win.

Personally I would go to court out of sheer crossness - there's no way I would admit to something that wasn't my fault. But you have to do what's best for you, and of course you could lose.

Can't believe how often these type of incidents happen - I have had someone claim I hit their car when I was nowhere near, simply because I already had a scrape on it. Luckily they were challenged by a witness and the whole thing was on CCTV so they didn't do anything about it.

Your lawyer sounds hopeless and this has crash for cash scam written all over it.

Do you have legal cover on your house insurance? Can you afford to see a different lawyer?

If you made a statement at the time to your insurance company about what actually happened, I would stick with that and go to court stating that the other party is lying in an attempt to defraud their insurance company and claim compensation fraudulently.

Persistent neck injuries from a low speed bump that caused no damage sound very unlikely. I thought insurance companies were supposed to be cracking down on shit like this, rather than encouraging it along? Sadly, I think that they often pay out the 'easy' claims without question as it is cheaper for them than fighting it.

Common law relies on precedents to decide cases

Rubbish. If there is a conflict of fact, the judge will decide upon which witness was more truthful.

OP, I have been googling. I live quite near one of the country's crash for cash hotspots, so there have been lots of news reports locally. Fraudsters would remove their brake lights and slam their brakes on on one particular road, in an attempt to get someone to rear end them. Anyway, how about seeking advice from the [[www.insurancefraudbureau.org/ Insurance Fraud Bureau] to see if they can help?

I'd definitely go to court, what have you got to lose? Do you even need a solicitor? Won't the judge/magistrate just ask questions and decide who is telling the more credible story.

I don't quite see why you are both so worried. I don't suppose you're going to be facing the top legal minds in the country for a minor ding. Just go and tell the truth.

In fact I would relish the chance to look the other person in the eye and hear their lies in person

Fight it. I think all insurance companies automatically blame the other party as a tactic as pp said.

lborolass

If they even turned up. Many of these matters are down to people filling in forms in their own living rooms, encouraged by other people saying things like ' Oh just put X - who's going to check? ' Actually turning up to court is frequently not in their mind.

I have provided my insurance company with the statement in the beginning which clearly says what happened and we do stick to it.

What is going to happen if the other party won't turn up in the court?

I was actually thinking about finding a different lawyer but I have been googling before I came here and every where they say it's very difficult to win this type of case.

Ugh it sounds like mine. My car rolled approx 10ft on a slight slope when handbrake failed. I was parked at the time and not in the car
Apparently my small car caused £3000 worth of damage to a Toyota Hilux (and none to my car!)
Insurance paid them about £900
2.5 years later I get a letter to say they're taking me to court for the rest of the money and personal injury! The letter said "and as both cars were parked, I was sat in the house" - I circled that and sent it back
Insurance company paid out for the rest of the damage despite saying the investigator said it wasn't my car that had caused it. Because it was cheaper to pay the remaining £2000 than go to court

This is what I'm saying hollinhurst84...

I have a feeling this is what is going to happen in my case too.

It will be cheaper to settle it down rather that go to the court...

also my lawyer said if we decide to go to the court my Insurance company will have to get this approved first as they are the one who will be paying for all this.

Check the legal cover in your insurance policy. Some won't cover you if you go against legal advice, so if yore told to settle and not go to court, you may be stuck with that if you don't want to pay your own legal expenses. If you have one of the better policies, fight it. Clearly a scam and judges have seen this loads and have an uncanny ability to see through BS

It sounds like your solicitor is working on a fixed fee structure with the Insurer and is reluctant to do any extra work on a case which they think on the face of it they can’t win.

What’s the worst that could happen if it does go to court? You’ll be found liable and your Insurers will have to pay costs and damages. If they admit liability now they’ll still have to pay both, although the costs will be reduced slightly. If your wife has the courage of her convictions I would fight it. Imo in the grand scheme of things that couple of hundred quid is unlikely to effect your premiums much beyond what it has been already. I don't know a whole pile about underwriting but I would be very surprised if it did.

Your Insurers will likely have the final say, so I would have your wife write to them again and set out your position; you feel that this is a fraudulent claim, you want this matter defended and you are required to give evidence if required.

I haven't got legal cover unfortunately.

Check to see if you have legal cover on home insurance which might help.

I'm wondering whether the Financial Ombudsman might get involved in something like this? The notion of being advised, on behalf of an insurance company, to accept responsibility for something I wasn't responsible for really makes me see red.

cozietoesie believe me it makes me red too but it caused too much stress to me and my wife already.

How long will this be recorded on my policy for? Is it 5yrs?

If the other side don't turn up to court without good reason and you do, the judge will take that into account when considering the evidence. I would find it difficult to see how he could then prefer the other side's evidence and hence you would be believed.

When you say evidence do you mean my wife's verbal statement?