Monthly Archives: April 2012

Examples of case law

Posted on by
Reply

Most accidents have a case law that will closely relate to it. This means that in the past a case has been to court and the ruling of that court case has dictated how certain types of accidents are likely to be settled. There are a selection of the more common types of accident circumstances below and how they were settled.

 

Giving a misleading signal

Case: Wadsworth vs. Gillespie

Vehicle A approached a Give Way sign. The driver saw that Vehicle B approaching from the right was displaying a left-turn signal. Vehicle A pulled out and was struck by Vehicle B, which travelled on without turning.

Who’s at fault?
Liability (fault) is split 2/3s to 1/3.

It was ruled that Vehicle A was two-thirds at fault for not waiting to see what the other car did, and Vehicle B was one-third to blame for displaying a misleading signal.

Wadsworth vs. Gillespie is an oft-quoted case in the industry. However, there are other cases that had different results in court, such as Winter vs. Cotton. In this case the driver that gave the misleading signal is held to be 100% to blame.

However the judge would, in practice, prefer to settle cases such as this using the 2/3 to 1/3 rule of Wadsworth vs. Gillespie.

Jumping the queue

Powell vs. Moody

Vehicle A pulled out of a side road and was hit by Vehicle B, a motorcycle that was overtaking two lines of stationary vehicles on the wrong side of the road.

Who’s at fault?
Liability is split 20%/80%.

Vehicle A had a duty to ensure it was safe to pull out of a side road, so it had to accept part of the blame. However, jumping a queue and overtaking on the wrong side of the road is a maneouvre that should be undertaken with a great deal of care, so the biker shouldered 80% of the liability.

Speeding

Barna vs. Hudes Merchandising Corp.

Vehicle A pulled out of a side road intending to turn right. The driver’s view was obstructed by parked cards. Vehicle B, approaching from the right, hit Vehicle A on the side. Vehicle B was estimated to be breaching the speed limit.

Who’s at fault?
Vehicle A is 100% liable.

The judge considered that exceeding the speed limit, while illegal, is not in itself negligence. Vehicle A should have ensured the major road was safe.

At a junction

Williams vs. Fullerton

Vehicle A was on a major road and approached a crossroads with a minor road. The driver looked right and left, started to cross, and then was hit in the side by Vehicle B, which was travelling along the minor road.

Who’s at fault?
Liability is split 25%/75%

It was ruled that, even though Vehicle B should have given way, the driver of Vehicle A should have followed the Highway Code: look right again! Vehicle B took most of the blame though with 75%.

Overtaking while a vehicle in front turns right

Challoner vs. Williams and Croney

The driver of Vehicle A saw that the two vehicles behind it were not conducting any maneouvres, so he/she signalled to turn right and attempted to do so. Vehicle B overtook the two vehicles behind Vehicle A and hit Vehicle A in the offside (right-hand side).

Who’s at fault?
Vehicle B is 100% liable.

On appeal, Vehicle A was found to have done nothing wrong as he had checked the position of the two vehicles behind. (For this reason, if the driver directly behind had started to overtake then it would have been settled 50/50.) Vehicle B should have ensured it was safe to overtake.

Two vehicles overtaking simultaneously

Davison vs. Leggett

These two vehicles collided head-on whilst overtaking.

Who’s at fault?
Liability is split 50/50.

There was no evidence to indicate who began overtaking first. It’s possible neither party was negligent.

Overtaking

Holdack vs. Bullock Bros.

Vehicle A was a scooter and Vehicle B, a van. Whilst Vehicle A was overtaking, Vehicle B swerved right and hit Vehicle A.

Who’s at fault?
Liability is split 1/3 to 2/3s.

Vehicle B shouldn’t have changed course without warning, so takes two-thirds of the blame. The rider of Vehicle A was originally held negligent because he/she didn’t toot the horn prior to overtaking. On appeal it was felt that there was no need to toot, but still the result of the case was not changed.


Parents insuring the car in their name to reduce Insurance cost for young drivers

Posted on by
Reply

Due to ever increasing cost of car insurance this is becoming more common and is called policy Fronting – don’t think the insurers are not aware of this!! Older people have fewer accidents than younger people so are less of a risk to insure, therefore their insurance costs less. If you are a young driver but take out a policy in an older person’s name such as a parent, then the policy will be calculated with the older person as the main driver. In doing this you are in effect committing Insurance Fraud..if your Insurers find out they will void the policy or refuse to pay out for an accident. As you will have been refused Insurance you will have to declare this to other insurance companies and they will not insure you either.

Remember, your Insurance company will not look into it too much when you take out the policy but they will investigate if you have an accident. Any claim with a young named driver will be placed on hold and the policy checked for potential fronting of the policy. They will do this by:

  • Requesting the V5 documents to see who is the registered owner
  • Checking who’s account the policy payment comes from
  •  Requesting a copy of the  sale receipt for the car
  • Check what other vehicles are kept in the family (if you’re dad is a company director and drives a new BMW but is also  down on your policy as the main driver of your 10yr old Vauxhall Corsa then alarm bells will ring!!!)
  • Conducting phone interviews with both the policyholder and the named driver
  • And more!! You have been warned!!


No Claims Discount/Bonus EXPLAINED

Posted on by
Reply

No  Claims Discount (NCD) is built up over time when you do not claim for an accident.  The more years that have passed without you making a claim means you get a larger discount on your policy cost, because you are considered a lower risk to insure. When you have a fault claim or a split fault claim then your NCD will step back by 2 years. If you not claimed for have over 4 years, most Insurance companies will offer to Protect your NCD for an extra payment. This usually means they will let you have 2 fault or split fault claims within a five year period before your NCD starts to reduce.

If  you have an accident that is not your fault then this will not affect your No Claims Discount as long as your insurance company claims all the costs of your repairs back from the other Insurance Company. If your Insurance company is not able to claim the costs back (because you did not get the other vehicles registration number or the other driver was not insured), then it will be considered a claim on your policy regardless of whether you were at fault or not, as your Insurance company paid for your repairs but could not claim their costs back.

NCD is applied to the overall cost of the policy. Your premium is calculated by your driving history, previous accidents, where you live, where vehicle is kept overnight, if you use it for business etc. Once the premium is calculated that is when what ever No Claims Discount you have is applied. That means if you do have an accident but have protected  NCD, your premium will still increase as you are seen as a higher risk, it just means the same discount will be applied to a higher premium.


Accident Management Companies

Posted on by
Reply

Accident Compensation

Accident Management Companies (otherwise  known as Ambulance Chasers)  are companies that provide a service to people who have had accidents but are not at fault. They can arrange the repairs to your vehicle and provide you with a hire car and they will claim the costs back from the Insurers of the person that caused the accident, plus their fee for the service.


Liability

Posted on by
Reply

Most people’s expectations regarding road traffic accident liability are inaccurate, for this reason your Insurance company will advise you not to discuss liability with the other driver at the scene of an accident as you could possibly prejudice your own position and that of your Insurance company. Ie. You could accept fault for something that is not actually your fault in the eyes of the law, and now you have done it will be difficult to retract it further down the line.

Examples of liability:

ACCIDENTS WITH PARKED VEHICLES

Any accident involving a parked vehicle will find the moving vehicle at fault, regardless of the parked vehicles whereabouts.

Eg. Car A reverses off their drive and bumps into a Car B parked illegally on double yellow lines. Car A feels they are not at fault because Car B should not have been parked there.

Car B was parked illegally however it was parked and not moving, therefore it could not have caused the accident. Car A has the Duty of  Care (the responsibility) to make sure they do not hit anything whilst reversing – Car B was there to be seen. If Car A did not see Car B then they could not have been looking behind them properly – Car A is 100% at fault for this accident.  Nobody has the right to drive into a car just because it is parked illegally!!


You’ve had an accident involving another vehicle

Posted on by
Reply

Ok  so you’ve had an accident and there is another vehicle involved. In insurance terms the owner of the other vehicle is known as the Third Party. Depending on how the accident occurred, either yourself or the Third Party will be seen to have caused the accident or in some cases you could both be at fault.

There are two main types of Insurance cover and you’ll be covered by one of these policies:

  • Fully Comprehensive – this means that in the event of an accident you are covered for damage to your own vehicle, Third Party Cover (damage you may cause to a Third Party vehicle), fire & theft.
  • Third Party, Fire & theft – This means you are covered for damage you cause to a Third Party vehicle, fire & theft. This does not cover repairs to your own vehicle if you have an accident. Third Party cover is the minimum legal requirement of cover to able to drive in the UK.

If you are at fault and you have Comprehensive cover

Your insurance company will pay for the damages to your vehicle and they will also pay for the damages to the Third Party vehicle. You will pay your policy excess – the excess is the amount that you agree to pay towards the cost of your repairs in the event of an accident.

If you are at fault and you have Third Party cover

Your Insurance company will pay for the damages to the other vehicle only.

 


Excess

Posted on by
Reply

EXCESS – this is an agreement with your Insurance Company to pay a certain amount of money towards your repairs in the event of an accident. The agreed excess is payable regardless of who is at fault for the accident but if you are not at fault for the accident then you can claim this back from the other Parties Insurance company. If you are at fault for an accident you do not have to pay an excess towards the other persons repairs, this will be paid by your Insurance company. Your excess is payable towards YOUR repairs only.

A common misconception: Your policy excess is £250 and you’ve had an accident where you are at fault. You do not pay £250 towards your repairs and £250 towards the other drivers repairs. Your Insurance Company will pay the £250 towards the other persons repairs. Your excess concerns YOUR vehicle and YOUR repairs only.