Who is at fault?

I'm a little confused as to why there is such a fuss if both cars were insured. I've been told that insurance companies have a "knock-for-knock" policy where they often pick-up the tab on one job even if their customer was not at fault with the understanding that another company may pick-up the tab on the next - sort of a swings & round abouts arrangement. So if each party just went to their own insurer to sort out the damage, with neither party accepting responsibility then I would not have thought your mate would have even needed to be further involved.

I have always been told no matter what the circumstances - never accept responsibility for a collision. Just pass the details to your OWN insurer and let them sort it out - company to company. It only becomes messy if the other car has no insurance.

Regardless of what the other driver said, your mate did the right thing by not accepting responsibility and should have just let his insurance company take it from there. The issue should not be whether or not they will cover the claim, just whether or not they will drop his rating down a notch.

Then there is proportionate fault. You immediately are 10% at fault just for being there, wether you did anything wrong or not. Have heard this mentioned by Police at MVAs and in general reporting of accidents. Absolutely stupid logic. I would suggest this was brought about by insurance companies so they can get the excess from both drivers and wipe your no claim bonus.
:o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken

He shouldve pushed her into the oncoming traffic then she wouldve been at fault for pulling out in front of someone else :o:D:D:angel:

---

Ken

That is just silly, because the last car into the bingle usually gets charged for the lot.

Wot I H8 about insurance companies is that they are always on for the cheapest way out irrespective of the person at fault. I had a incident where an idiot in a Jeep didn't like being beaten off at traffic lights, and then there were merging lanes and right turn bay. From the second I was across the intersection ahead of him, I had a right of way (ARR 149 from memory), anyway after completing the merge the clown tried to overtake in the right turn bay and ran out of room, my rear step bar removed the wheel arch extension from his car. No damage to my vehicle.

He claimed that I didn't give way, and claimed through his insurance. I spoke to my insurance and they say that in a disputed claim they just pay the claim and I would lose my excess. No way I thought, so didn't lodge a claim with my insurance, I told his insurance company's claims officers the story multiple times and refused to make any payment, when it got to their lawyers I re-stated my evidence, complete with, second by second diagrammes (very professionally done in .pdf), photographs of the road and intersection in question and the lack of damage to my car, then specified the particular Australian Road Rules which gave me right of way and suggested that I was happy for them to take me to court.

It all seemed to stop after that.

Diana

If you are reversing a car you have no Rights, you must give way to all other vehicles using that road.
Unless you have a witness in your favour it is your word against hers, Regards Frank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by colrospeake

If you are parked to close to vehicle and they run into you from the front --- you are at fault. The person in front of you has the right to reverse backwards. If you are hit and have a witness- that the person in front of you reversed backwards -- I dont know -- may be you were parked to close.. If the paint work on the old work vehicle is bad maybe that is a new sting to get the car paid for or a new paint job. If you reverse into a police car or hit them to hard the airbag goes off and you can get away while the officer is trying to get the airbag under control so I have heard. No i have never tried it.
Redback

---

THE LAW says that if you are REVERSING a vehicle (no matter the circumstances) you must do so SAFELY, Safely doesn't include running into another vehicle, YOU MUST GIVE WAY to all other road users if you are REVERSING, Regards Frank.

theres no need to even worry about what gear she was in...

try "failed to avoid a stationary object" for why shes in the wrong.

In 90% of circumstances, even if youve stopped in the wrong spot (assuming youve been stationary for sufficient time for everyone to be aware of the fact that your stationary) and someone hits you then they are in the wrong..

theres exceptions to this like if you stop in a blind spot or somewhere where people driving reasonabley (at the speed limit for the area) wouldnt be able to stop in time once they had seen you.


Every ADF driving test Ive ever given or taken has a box marked "strikes fixed object" and is an instant fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hucksta

Joel...

Further to my last, tell your mate to stand his ground, by the sounds of it her insurance company is just blowing hot wind mate, i cannot see how in any way they would be able to hold him responsible, his insurance company should be able to tell him that anyway, they need to get their act together.

Moral of the story, if any doubt as to fault ladies and gents, call the cops, at least we can make recommendations about fault and so forth. Could help you avoid this sort of headache later on......

remember, us police think you are all important and we like to help....:twisted::twisted::twisted:...if you are lucky...:D:D Hucksta

---

Not in Cranbourne.....:mad:

On 3 occasions so far with the locals they have just brushed us off and not done a thing, once with the DH's accross the rd doing burnouts in the T intersection near my house and smoking out the street, even with photo's and rego numbers as well as videos of the same bloke riding his quad bike up and down the street they say "we cant do anything" and disappear out the back without even taking any details.:mad:

I tried reporting some suspect Emails and they wouldnt even tell me who to contact so I rang Packanham instead who were very helpfull.:)

MrsMc had a stupid chick drive into her Carolla in a carpark while she was stationary and even though there was no rego lable on the car, the driver admitted it wasnt her car and wouldnt give any details other than her phone number so she went to report it to the local's and they fobbed her off as well and told her they couldnt do anything..:mad:

There are better cops around than what we have here I hope your one of them Huckster :mad:

I had similar happen to me years ago, 1 week after getting the brand new AU III ute, this older lady rolled back into me in her Lancer with a tow bar.

The only damage at the time was a small crack in the bumper where the towball split it when it pushed through the hole that it seemed to be prefectly lined up for.

I asked her to just get in and let it roll back a little more so that I could remove her towbar and release her car from mine and what does she do, puts it in reverse and backs through my aircon condenser, radiator and smashes all the bumper and bumper mounts as well as stuffing her rear bumper and boot support panel.

She said at the time that she didnt understand what I wanted her to do and that she panic'd but when it came to the insurance claims she put that I hit her and added "at speed".

My boss had already spoken to her as the insurance co that she gave originaly didnt have a clue who she was so he asked her what her side of the story was and she backed me up so he knew I was telling the truth but I think when they recieved the quotes from my ute they tried to get out of it.

In the end we just ended up paying for both cars to be fixed through our panel beater as it was cheaper than fighting it through court and seems my car was fixed the same afternoon due to needing it for work it would have been difficult to proove on our behalf anyway.

It sux but even knowing that he is more than likely in the right, I'd be putting money on that he will have to pay for it. if he only has bomb insurance, the insure co's are normally not much interested in paying out anyway.

"did the right thing by not accepting responsibility"

I object to that being a default response in any occasion. That is the sort of muddle headed legalese trickery that will stuff this country.

People need to own what they do.

The first of the only two collisions I have had wrote of my A40.
I was turning right at a T intersection and a van T boned me from the right.
I was fortunate that a witness told the police that the van had just passed him at about 80 in a 60kmh zone less than a hundred metres before the intersection.
It probably also helped that as I realised he was approaching me much faster than I had expected a vehicle to do in a built up area, I kept going straight across the road and was prepared to run onto the grass on the other side to avoid him.
Problem was he decided he could get around in front of me and followed me onto my side of the road. I was well and truly on my side of the road when he hit me.
The attending police had no hesitation in saying that he was at fault and I think they were charging him with something like negligent driving.

The point of this story is that in spite of all that I got a letter from his insurance company a month or so later saying that I was at fault.
I told them the police were charging their client and heard no more about it.

I'm not sure whether the other driver had just lied to his insurance company or whether it was standard practice for that insurance company to try to bluff the other party.

It was over 40 years ago, but I don't imagine things have changed much.