Should my insurer give me more information before I agree to 50/50 settlement?

[Mandoidi]

My husband was in a minor car accident with a third party. We have both gone through insurance. Husband is a named driver on my policy.

My insurer has contacted me to say 'the 3rd party is proposing a 50/50 settlement, do I accept?'

Is that all the communication that I should expect? Or should my insurer be talking to me about the investigation they have carried out, the evidence they have collated and the type of settlement that they propose?

As well as an email just stating the line above, I've had two phone calls where they have said just the same line. Both times I have explained that I don't know if I should accept as I have no information to go on, and they have both said that they would speak to someone looking after my claim and get back to me and they haven't.

I don't want to drag this on and I don't want to go to court so I do want to resolve this, but I genuinely don't know if it's in my best interests, and it feels like my insurer is acting passively, letting the 3rd party call the shots.

Thanks!

Just to follow up, my other two claims were definitely my fault (i rear-ended someone at a roundabout) and definitely not my fault (someone pulled out of a car park entrance into the side of me), so im just not familiar with 50/50 and what to expect.

Was your husband partly at fault? Or fully at fault? If yes then take the 50/50

Was husband of no fault at all? If so then say no.

Has your husband not given you details about the accident?

Surely your husband can give you the information you need?

Thanks @pinksheetss
Its tricky, i wasnt in the car so i don't know.
Husband doesn't really know who was at fault. It's a tricky junction, husband faily new driver so actually hard to tell.

I think we are most likely going to take 50/50 on that basis

But my question was about the information from the insurer, should it be that lacking in detail/passive?

Yes, husband has given me (and the insurer) all the info but it's just not cut and dry.

Am I being unreasonable to expect more info from the insurer, rather than just being told what the 3rd party wants to do?

If it's not cut and dry I'd accept 50/50.

If it’s not cut and dried, your DH isn’t sure and it was a tricky junction, then 50-50 is the right outcome, isn’t it? What information do you think the insurer could give you that you don’t already have from your DH was there?

The information that the 3rd party gave would be something that might shine some light on it.

But 50/50 itself isnt the question- its the way the insurer has delivered this information to me. Is this what i should expect, or should there be more information?