Following A Car Accident

Avatar Image
Redhelen72 | 16:04 Sat 21st May 2022 | Insurance
19 Answers
Will the insurance company investigate or just pay out as both involved are elderly.
At least 1 car will be a complete write off.


1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Redhelen72. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Very much depends on the circumstances, age of drivers has nothing to do with it.
Question Author
1 driver in main road, 2 driver making left turn onto main road, ends up with 1st car ramming side of 2 car .
Both drivers blame each other no police involved
"Probably" the driver pulling out into on-coming traffic would be deemed to be at fault and his insurer should pay up. Don't suppose there's any dashcam footage or independent witness(es).
Question Author
No, but driver 2 is adamant that driver 1 is in the wrong.
They are demanding that driver 2 fixes driver 1 car despite it apparently being totalled and 20 years old
give them all the facts & let the insurers sort it out
Driver 1 should tell driver 2 to claim through his insurance. Driver 1 should report the accident to his own insurance company. Let the insurance companies sort it out
I agree - (the one pulling out from a side road into oncoming traffic). They'll both tell their side of the story and the insurance company will decide who's wrong.
One of my relatives had a similar accident and the person turning into the main road was found to be at fault. He tried arguing that the driver on the main road was going too fast but this wasn’t accepted. It was settled by the insurance companies.
the driver pulling out is 100% at fault, no contest.
well they wont pay for it themselves
and if they claim on their insurance
they give up all their right in the matter and MUST follow the insurance co.

and I imagine it will be knock for knock
the legal principle is called subrogtion
and here is me making a mess of it all

with someone who wished to micromanage the claim
who ends up saying " foo datta lot of hieroglyphics dat is" and then wished to get back to the job of telling the lawyers what to do.

- but me? I am ever ready - ever ready to have a nother go....
PP: "and I imagine it will be knock for knock " - on what planet? It's 100% the fault of the guy that pulled out, end of.
driver 1 car despite it apparently being totalled and 20 years old

no the insurance company of driver 1 will pay on the wreck - the wreck before it was wrecked that is! It isnt worth them paying...

I had a perfectly good bentley wrecked by a lorry and the insurance co paid out £2000 whilst they ran down the road shouting "whooppee saved a bomb on that one!"
It's not Knock for Knock. The driver pulling out into the main road is clearly at fault.
thank you judges all - we will have to wait and see
I think "knock for knock" was a way of 2 3rd party insured drivers getting paid out for damage to their car from the other drivers insurer.
With fully comp your insurer will pay out for damage to your car then take the other driver (and/or his insurer) to court to recover their costs if they think they have a good chance of winning & it being cost-effective. (IMO only)
I know I'm going to regret this but PP how could it possibly be knock for knock? please explain.
e.g. A young guy rear-ended me (ooh Misssus!) at a roundabout. My insurer paid to have my car repaired & a couple of days car hire but didn't want to take the case to court. Not wishing to lose my NCD I took the other driver to the small claims court & won. His insurer paid the £700 repair cost to my insurer.
The driver emerging then arguing the toss is clearly a roaster and the other should have nothing to do with them.

This is why we pay insurance.

1 to 19 of 19rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Following A Car Accident

Answer Question >>