Insurance company wants to settle 50:50 - what do I do?
Discussion
I was involved in an accident last September. I am adamant that a bus failed to stop for a red light, and clipped the back of my van as I went through the lights on green.
There were two policemen in an unmarked Focus at the junction, and they claimed not to have seen the accident - fair enough, I wouldn't want the paperwork. I had assumed there were CCTV cameras at the junction, although there apparently aren't. I'd also assume the bus has cameras fitted, but I've no way of finding out.
At the end of the day, I'm sure it wasn't my fault, but have no way to prove this. My insurance company (big, well known. My van is insured for hire and reward), called me today to say they wanted to settle 50:50, and asked if that was ok. It goes against the grain to admit any liability at all, but is this worth making a fuss over?
There were two policemen in an unmarked Focus at the junction, and they claimed not to have seen the accident - fair enough, I wouldn't want the paperwork. I had assumed there were CCTV cameras at the junction, although there apparently aren't. I'd also assume the bus has cameras fitted, but I've no way of finding out.
At the end of the day, I'm sure it wasn't my fault, but have no way to prove this. My insurance company (big, well known. My van is insured for hire and reward), called me today to say they wanted to settle 50:50, and asked if that was ok. It goes against the grain to admit any liability at all, but is this worth making a fuss over?
My brother was in exactly the same situation (only it was a car that hit him rather than a bus) and had to settle for 50:50 like you.
The problem is that without witnesses that actually saw the bus go through the lights, it's your word against theirs with no way to find out who was actually at fault.
Good luck if you try get any further with it, but I doubt you will.
The problem is that without witnesses that actually saw the bus go through the lights, it's your word against theirs with no way to find out who was actually at fault.
Good luck if you try get any further with it, but I doubt you will.
I'd like to make a fuss, but I'm not sure what the point is? What do I lose by accepting 50:50, and what do I stand to gain by making a fuss? I'm quite busy, and if there's no tangible loss or gain to me, then I'd be inclined to roll over. I've enough battles to fight at work and home, without adding another one!
s2sol said:
I'd like to make a fuss, but I'm not sure what the point is? What do I lose by accepting 50:50, and what do I stand to gain by making a fuss? I'm quite busy, and if there's no tangible loss or gain to me, then I'd be inclined to roll over. I've enough battles to fight at work and home, without adding another one!
your no claims, and next years renewal with a no fault claim, versus a fault claim.I guess you'd lose any unprotected no claims bonus by accepting 50:50. If it was something you could prove then fair enough, I'd make sure they didn't settle for anything less than agreeing that is was 100% the other driver's fault, but is it worth the hassle of trying when there's almost no chance of changing the outcome anyway?
Alfa numeric said:
s2sol said:
What do I lose by accepting 50:50
All or part of your no claims bonus? I'm in almost the same boat. I was crashed into in May. No witnesses, etc. I'm fighting against 50/50 tooth and nail.
It wasn't my fault - why should I just pay out for something that wasn't my fault?
Right. Maybe worth a fight then. The van renewal was about the same as it has been for ages - H&R, 3 drivers, 70k miles/year. It's always been between £1000 and £1200, for the 7 years I've been running a van.
The car's about £240 a year, with full NCB. If I lose all my NCB, what't that likely to go up to? I'm 40, it's a dull, but very comfortable 407SW Diesel Auto, an I live in a dull, but fairly comfortable area just outside Cheltenham. If it more than doubles, it's worth a fight.
I've been Adam Ant since last September!
The car's about £240 a year, with full NCB. If I lose all my NCB, what't that likely to go up to? I'm 40, it's a dull, but very comfortable 407SW Diesel Auto, an I live in a dull, but fairly comfortable area just outside Cheltenham. If it more than doubles, it's worth a fight.
I've been Adam Ant since last September!
It occurs to me that insurance companies like people to lose their NCB's as it means the premium paid goes up, and the industry in general makes more money. In the OP's situation, if one person loses their NCB then one person pays their excess and one person's premium goes up next year. If they settle 50:50 then two people pay the excess, two premiums go up and no-one wins but the insurance company. (Is there a flaw in my reasoning? Please let me know if there is.)
Your difficulty is in proving the bus did jump the red light.
(This post may have just opened two large cans of worms!
)
Oli.
Your difficulty is in proving the bus did jump the red light.
mitch78 said:
You have full NCB and didn't protect it?
Protecting NCB's is a bit of a scam; a protected NCB doesn't mean your premium doesn't go up next year if you have an accident, it just means it doesn't go up as much. And the amount you pay to protect your NCB is set artifically high; higher than the risk involved says it should be. I have full NCB and don't protect it for this reason. (This post may have just opened two large cans of worms!
) Oli.
Edited by zcacogp on Wednesday 18th August 16:32
When its one vehicle into another unless there are witnesses or a clear rule being broken that your insurance company to get the other driver to admit to then it'll be 50:50 as you said one persons word against the other. I got done like this, I was in the left turn only lane approaching a roundabout and the person to my right who was going straight on (no right turn) cut in on me before we'd got on to the roundabout. I was forced on to the kerb, where my car came to a stop. Woman got out "I didn't see you, blah, blah, blah I pointed out where my car was and why to her ok I see it was my fault." We swap details - I get home an call insurance company. They call me back an hour later to say woman thought I strayed right and hit her! I told them how she'd pushed me up the kerb to the left etc. They said "well her husband probably breifed her what to say", only end to this is accepting a 50:50 it won't get settled any other way. If your a lying b
d / bh you can get out sole blame of most car to car contacts it seems.
d / bh you can get out sole blame of most car to car contacts it seems.zcacogp said:
It occurs to me that insurance companies like people to lose their NCB's as it means the premium paid goes up, and the industry in general makes more money. In the OP's situation, if one person loses their NCB then one person pays their excess and one person's premium goes up next year. If they settle 50:50 then two people pay the excess, two premiums go up and no-one wins but the insurance company. (Is there a flaw in my reasoning? Please let me know if there is.)
The flaw in your reasoning is that the OP's insurance company will currently have to pay out to fix his car. If they could lay the blame 100% at the other driver's door, his insurance company would have to foot the bill for both cars. While the OP's premium may increase next year, it's unlikely to cover the costs they incur in repairing his car now. The only situation where your argument holds true, is when both parties are covered by the same insurer.Oh, and protecting my NCB only cost me a fiver more than not protecting it, hardly going to break the bank is it?
mitch78 said:
zcacogp said:
It occurs to me that insurance companies like people to lose their NCB's as it means the premium paid goes up, and the industry in general makes more money. In the OP's situation, if one person loses their NCB then one person pays their excess and one person's premium goes up next year. If they settle 50:50 then two people pay the excess, two premiums go up and no-one wins but the insurance company. (Is there a flaw in my reasoning? Please let me know if there is.)
The flaw in your reasoning is that the OP's insurance company will currently have to pay out to fix his car. If they could lay the blame 100% at the other driver's door, his insurance company would have to foot the bill for both cars. While the OP's premium may increase next year, it's unlikely to cover the costs they incur in repairing his car now. The only situation where your argument holds true, is when both parties are covered by the same insurer.Oh, and protecting my NCB only cost me a fiver more than not protecting it, hardly going to break the bank is it?
Not quite sure I follow. The only situation in which one person being 100% liable from the ins co's POV is if their premium then goes up by more than the amount that both premiums would have gone up if it went 50:50. If that made sense. Which it probably didn't.
Protecting my NCB was going to cost into 3 figures for my insurance. On a premium of under £500, that's not worth it. (There have been other discussions on this topic on PH before - opinion is divided on the merits of it.)
Oli.
Aye, the insurance company paid out to fix my van. I assume, because they're wanting to go 50:50, they'll pay for the injury claim made by the lying passenger on the bus, too? When the police in the unmarked car turned up, there was nothing wrong with her. When the uniformed lot turned up, she claimed to be in agony with an injured knee.
I paid the excess, and the VAT on the repairs - which I claimed back. I didn't protect my NCB. It's not an option for me on the van, and I never thought to do it on the car. However, I've just checked the documents and I was paying £420, not £240. My new quote is just over £550. For the sake of £130, albeit for the next few years, I'm tempted to take the hit.
It's lazy, but I can't prove anything, and I value my time. Any more than half a day, and I'd be better off working than talking to a call centre.
I paid the excess, and the VAT on the repairs - which I claimed back. I didn't protect my NCB. It's not an option for me on the van, and I never thought to do it on the car. However, I've just checked the documents and I was paying £420, not £240. My new quote is just over £550. For the sake of £130, albeit for the next few years, I'm tempted to take the hit.
It's lazy, but I can't prove anything, and I value my time. Any more than half a day, and I'd be better off working than talking to a call centre.
entwisi said:
you mentioned that they clipped the rear of your van? then surely irrespective of the lights they are at fault as they shuld always leave room to stop.....
This. Some idiot hit the rear of my car three years ago. No witnesses, only photos of the damage. Insurers wanted 50-50 but I said no. 12 months later they set a date to sit in front of a judge in chambers. 1 hour later I won. Total time spent? Filled out claim form, rejected 50-50 proposal over the phone and 3 hours out of my day for court. Less than 1 day total. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff