Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Just wanted to moan about my insurers...the claim has been passed onto a claims management company, and they are being very slow handling my claim. They contacted me on Monday and I ran through the circumstances of the crash. I was told I'd hear from an engineer in two days and about a courtesy car by the end of the week. I called again yesterday (since the engineer didn't phone me), to find out that they didn't even know where my car was in storage. I'd assumed they would have known as the insurers were the ones who recovered my car. They told me an engineer would call today, but no call so I rang again. The engineer STILL hasn't been arranged (they've promised to visit the car in the next day or two), but also they won't furnish me with a courtest car because they believe they won't be able to recoup the cost from the police, who are naturally contesting liability for the accident.

    So, now I'm carless, and will only get a courtesy car if the engineer determines my car is repairable and then sent in for repair. BUT if my insurers are going to repair my car (or reimburse me if it's a write-off) surely then the police are liable and the claim handlers could recoup the cost of lending me a car. It's a **** for me because I work as a delivery driver, so I'm not earning at the moment; if the insurers write off my car then I won't see any money until mid-February and so can't replace my car until then. I'm tempted to complain to my insurers themselves to try and get a car out to me, but without a car the next few weeks are going to be a struggle.

    It's also annoying that from my perspective the accident is clearly the fault of the police; it gives you very little faith in them when I've co-operated entirely at the scene of the accident and now they want to contest liability. I appreciate there are consequences for the officer who was driving, but at the same time he should have been sure the coast was clear before going through the lights. Now I'm having a load of hassle, I'm losing money, and they're trying to make out that I'm the guilty party.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Only traffic cops, armed response, specialist units and a FEW normal cops are given the advanced training. Your average bobby on the beat has very basic driver training, and its likely to be a basic bobby driving a meatwagon unless its a tactical aid group on route to a bust or similar.

    (Original post by Riderz)
    I'll say again. No collision between 2 moving vehicles is EVER 100% one persons fault. You'll get maybe 70/30, or possibly 80/20, but dont expect any more than that.
    rubbish.

    plenty of situations where its 100% someone elses fault. Eg rams you from behind, cuts into your lane from outside lane, pulls out without looking, a non emergency vehicle running a red light at a fast junction, etc etc etc.

    Defensive driving only reduces the chance of being hit by some moron not following the rules. Its impossible to stop someone hitting you unless you sell your car and dont drive!!!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I cannot believe the gall of those officers. I've had a letter through this morning from their solicitors, they are contending that I drove through a red light, that I was speeding, and that I was driving without due care and attention. That, and they're suing me for whiplash. They're complete *******. How can they be so ok at the scene of the accident, checking that me and my passenger were ok, chatting to us like you would anyone else you do in the street, and then turn around and do this? I'm incensed, how are you supposed to have faith in our police when they are prepared to lie to cover their arses. I really don't know what to do, all I wanted was for the insurers to sort my car out and get me back on the road, I haven't put a claim in against them because I haven't had an injury, and I really doubt that they are injured. It's ********. I guess I'll have to wait and let this play out, but I imagine if their claims are successful, it's going to have implications with my insurers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    erm lets hope its a cctv monitored junction and you can get a solicitor to get a tape before the evidence supporting you "dissapears" or is "lost".
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Surely the police have Dash cams?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Sucks to hear they're being dicks about it. Not that I'm in any way surprised. Who's your claim management company that you mentioned earlier? You should be phoning them directly to see what they're doing and push them if necessary. It's not the first time I've heard of police falsifying evidence regarding a crash in order to cover their own backs. If it goes to court, it wouldn't be the first time they've lost, either. You'll probably find that two officers will have put their names to the crash report and chances are the more junior officer will have been pressured to back up his higher ranking 'mate'. Don't concede anything, push claim management company, take to court if needed. Good luck!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not sure if there was in the van that hit me. Even if there was how would I go about getting a copy of the footage?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sync)
    Sucks to hear they're being dicks about it. Not that I'm in any way surprised. Who's your claim management company that you mentioned earlier? You should be phoning them directly to see what they're doing and push them if necessary. It's not the first time I've heard of police falsifying evidence regarding a crash in order to cover their own backs. If it goes to court, it wouldn't be the first time they've lost, either. You'll probably find that two officers will have put their names to the crash report and chances are the more junior officer will have been pressured to back up his higher ranking 'mate'. Don't concede anything, push claim management company, take to court if needed. Good luck!
    Definitely, I am going to be calling them on Monday to let them know about the letter I received today. The scenario I'm dreading is one where it comes down to my word against them, although there is no conceivable reason why I would ever run a red light in the way they alleged I did. The simple fact is that they weren't cautious enough entering the junction and there was no way we would have missed each other. I've run the accident through my head so many times, I couldn't see or hear them until it was too late, so irrespective of his lights being on, I can't see around corners. I am going to stick to my guns, as you say, I'm not going to let them pull a fast one on me.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Carl)
    I'm not sure if there was in the van that hit me. Even if there was how would I go about getting a copy of the footage?
    Since it wasn't a traffic police vehicle that hit you, I suspect the chances of it having a dash cam are slim. Even if it did, I imagine the data would have magically become 'corrupted' in the accident.

    Might be worth asking your claim management company to phone the police directly and enquire as to whether a cam was fitted or if there is a possibility of them obtaining evidence from a nearby CCTV camera? Claim management company should be doing all of the running for you at this stage - the police are far more likely to be co-operative with them than they are with you.

    Phone up your claim management company, see what they're doing to obtain evidence and ***** like hell if they're not working hard enough for their money. They're the pro's and should be doing all the leg work for you - at this stage, the less you're involved personally, the better.

    The police are unlikely to come clean before the case gets to court. Don't be afraid of taking it that far - even in cases with two police officer witnesses, the court has been known to find against them.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Dont go to police for local authority CCTV. Most are council run so you can get footage from the authority themselves. Youd probably need to get the footage via a solicitor to get it unedited, but you can get an edited copy showing your vehicle as an individual. they should only edit out reg nos and faces of others due to data protection. you should then be able to see accident and lights.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Riderz)
    I'll say again. No collision between 2 moving vehicles is EVER 100% one persons fault. You'll get maybe 70/30, or possibly 80/20, but dont expect any more than that.
    That's rubbish. Insurance companies usually put 100% of the blame on one of the drivers.

    OP- I'm sorry to hear that you're being messed around by the police. It's what they're good at.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    *******s. I have had similar problem with a roundabout accident. Wasn't police mind, counciler.
    Got him in the end once proved with the nature of the damage to my car and the geometry of the roundabout it was impossible for it to be anything but his fault.

    Oh police when looking at both cars check VERY carefully that mine was road legal etc and didn't bother with his much. Being a young driver is a bit of a ***** sometimes.

    Good luck!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    All I can do is sympathise, trying to sort out a claim which is the other drivers fault is difficult enough as it is, let alone having the police fabricate lies about you in the process.

    Obviously cost is an issue here, but maybe look at some legal cover? This sounds like it could get pretty hefty very fast with the way the police are acting.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJWB)
    That's rubbish. Insurance companies usually put 100% of the blame on one of the drivers.
    Um.. no they generally dont. It hardly ever 100% someones fault because in most cases either party could have stopped to prevent an accident. Before you come out with "right of way" crap, both parties have a duty to avoid an accident no matter whos right or way it is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Riderz)
    Um.. no they generally dont. It hardly ever 100% someones fault because in most cases either party could have stopped to prevent an accident. Before you come out with "right of way" crap, both parties have a duty to avoid an accident no matter whos right or way it is.

    What utter rubbish. Every claim I have ever had or heard off, has either been 50/50 or full liability one way. I don't think insurers even bother with this 80/20 rubbish.

    Secondly just because I don't notice the numpty side swiping me, or don't accelerate forward when someone rear-ends me, does not make me at fault. Infact if someone causes an accident it is there fault, it makes no difference if you could avoid it - if you cause it, your to blame.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Carl, take them to court. Its the only way you'll get anything out of them. In fact, any insurance claim these days seems to require court action. We've had 3 guys go through our hedge in the last couple of years, and its only when a court date has been arranged they they've admitted fault and paid up. They weren't even police.

    Get CCTV footage. Get witness' if you have any. The police Van would have a dash cam I'd have thought, most cars seem too. Although I wouldn't be suprised if the footage "vanished" in the accident.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Minardi)
    We've had 3 guys go through our hedge in the last couple of years, and its only when a court date has been arranged they they've admitted fault and paid up.
    WTF :eek: How the hell can anyone refuse to admit fault when driving through a hedge?? :woo:

    Did they claim the hedge just jumped infront of thier car and dragged them into your garden??

    They should do a blood drug test of all people involved in accidents!! would be quite telling i think!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by warrenpenalver)
    WTF :eek: How the hell can anyone refuse to admit fault when driving through a hedge?? :woo:

    Did they claim the hedge just jumped infront of thier car and dragged them into your garden??

    They should do a blood drug test of all people involved in accidents!! would be quite telling i think!
    Denying they were there, denying they ever use the road, denying it was them driving etc
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    so the car magically started itself and drove into a hedge LOL.

    Have you got CCTV now to catch the idiots?

    You should put big rocks in the hedge so they trash thier car and cant drive off. Bit hard for them to deny it then!!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Riderz)
    I'll say again. No collision between 2 moving vehicles is EVER 100% one persons fault. You'll get maybe 70/30, or possibly 80/20, but dont expect any more than that.
    I don't think you know what you are talking about.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: February 1, 2010
The home of Results and Clearing

1,776

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Will you be tempted to trade up and get out of your firm offer on results day?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.