This is not a life or death issue but it is bizarre and I need some advice from the collected wisdom of NSC drivers.....
Three months ago, in December, someone drove into me in a supermarket car park. My insurer is via AA so you have to flit between them and the actual insurance company to get things done. The episode was a bit bizarre, and involved a woman driving a van slowly into the side of my car, putting a dent in my driver’s door. She had entered the main car park from a slip road (that is not part of the national ‘highway’) just as I was exiting into the same part of the car park. What normally happens in such cases is as shown in the attachment below. There is not a lot of room and there has to be a bit of give and take.
The collision was weird. I am not sure the other driver signalled to turn left into the part of the car par I was driving into. However, with me where I was, she continued to drive, slowly, at me. I braked and was stationary when she hit me. Whether her brakes failed or whether it was aggressive ‘get out my way’ driving I cannot tell. Her van was unscathed. She initially accused me of driving into her. But didn’t argue when I pointed out I was stationary and the front of her car had hit the side of mine.
I had to go into the supermarket to buy a pen, and we exchanged details. In the meantime she had called out the boyfriend. He was very keen to fix my door without involvement of insurers because it would cause his girlfriend’s ‘premium to rocket’. I was noncommittal.
After a day I decided, no, my car was expensive and new and I was not going to risk a bodge. I explained all this to my insurer and the AA and they told me to get repairs done. I had already found 3 estimates, and the one I preferred was approved.
Some weeks later the AA contacted me to say ‘did I give the wrong number plate as the car you say hit you is registered (somewhere way oop north) and not to the woman whose name you gave us’. I said, no indeed. I later checked the number plate online and it gave the same make of van to the one that hit me (albeit I could not access the name of the driver via my search).
The AA then started asking me for drawings and pictures and google map images because they ‘couldn’t understand’ what had happened. I sent them things.
A few more weeks later I received separate letters from the AA and the insurer to say that the accident was my fault as I had driven across a stop line into an oncoming vehicle, and that I would lose my no claim bonus going forward.
Obviously I phoned both the insurer and the AA. No, they had not been able to trace the other driver. The reason for their decision was because ‘we can’t prove that your version of events is correct’. I asked them if they were accusing me of being a liar. They said ‘no, but it is difficult to prove who is right when it is one word against another’.
However, and here is the rub, the AA still have not been able to obtain a response from the owner of the other vehicle or its insurer. So there is no ‘other’ version of events.I pointed out to them that it was a poor show that they were in effect taking sides with the other party, especially given that they had no statement from the other party.
The AA then said they would try to contact the other party and their insurer again. Given that it is now 3 months since the episode, the AA found, when they contacted the supermarket, that the CCTV records were deleted. Why act so late?
My feeling is the AA and insurer want to wheedle out of their obligations here. Clearly I have not made all this stuff up (I gave them a name, address and phone number of the woman involved – they could easily phone the number and pop round to the address). Why would I supply my insurer with a false name and address and phone number? Either I am lying or the other driver is lying – surely it is not an insoluble problem?
So my questions are these:
1. Do the laws of the highway apply in a supermarket car park regarding who gives way to whom? (I ask this because I claim I entered the space where I was hit before the other car turned in, but my insurer is caiming 'this is just my word against theirs' - and please note 'they' have not claimed anything; it may be the laws don't apply in a car park anyway so the AA is just making up things).
2. If a driver in a car park thinks they have a right of way does this allow them to drive into any vehicle in their way?
3. If I had decided to not involve the other driver, I could easily have claimed that I found impact damage to my car when returning from shopping – if I had done so would the AA and my insurer accuse me of lying or say the damage was my fault, or shrug their shoulders, pay up and move on?
4. Having approved the repairs (which cost about £1,000) can the AA and the insurer later turn round and say ‘actually we have now decided it was your fault so we are going to penalise you via your next policy’? (If there was any doubt about culpability at the time of the repair I would have not gone to the repairer I was recommended by the car dealership, but would have gone to the bloke who quoted £600 and I would have paid him out of my pocket, not involving the insurer. So surely the insurer and the AA can’t backslide as they appear to want to do, after the repairs have been done and the bills paid?).
I am prepared to get proper legal advice if my insurer continues to **** me around, but I though, first, I’d see the views if the NSC hive mind, especially the views of those who know about these things….
Three months ago, in December, someone drove into me in a supermarket car park. My insurer is via AA so you have to flit between them and the actual insurance company to get things done. The episode was a bit bizarre, and involved a woman driving a van slowly into the side of my car, putting a dent in my driver’s door. She had entered the main car park from a slip road (that is not part of the national ‘highway’) just as I was exiting into the same part of the car park. What normally happens in such cases is as shown in the attachment below. There is not a lot of room and there has to be a bit of give and take.
The collision was weird. I am not sure the other driver signalled to turn left into the part of the car par I was driving into. However, with me where I was, she continued to drive, slowly, at me. I braked and was stationary when she hit me. Whether her brakes failed or whether it was aggressive ‘get out my way’ driving I cannot tell. Her van was unscathed. She initially accused me of driving into her. But didn’t argue when I pointed out I was stationary and the front of her car had hit the side of mine.
I had to go into the supermarket to buy a pen, and we exchanged details. In the meantime she had called out the boyfriend. He was very keen to fix my door without involvement of insurers because it would cause his girlfriend’s ‘premium to rocket’. I was noncommittal.
After a day I decided, no, my car was expensive and new and I was not going to risk a bodge. I explained all this to my insurer and the AA and they told me to get repairs done. I had already found 3 estimates, and the one I preferred was approved.
Some weeks later the AA contacted me to say ‘did I give the wrong number plate as the car you say hit you is registered (somewhere way oop north) and not to the woman whose name you gave us’. I said, no indeed. I later checked the number plate online and it gave the same make of van to the one that hit me (albeit I could not access the name of the driver via my search).
The AA then started asking me for drawings and pictures and google map images because they ‘couldn’t understand’ what had happened. I sent them things.
A few more weeks later I received separate letters from the AA and the insurer to say that the accident was my fault as I had driven across a stop line into an oncoming vehicle, and that I would lose my no claim bonus going forward.
Obviously I phoned both the insurer and the AA. No, they had not been able to trace the other driver. The reason for their decision was because ‘we can’t prove that your version of events is correct’. I asked them if they were accusing me of being a liar. They said ‘no, but it is difficult to prove who is right when it is one word against another’.
However, and here is the rub, the AA still have not been able to obtain a response from the owner of the other vehicle or its insurer. So there is no ‘other’ version of events.I pointed out to them that it was a poor show that they were in effect taking sides with the other party, especially given that they had no statement from the other party.
The AA then said they would try to contact the other party and their insurer again. Given that it is now 3 months since the episode, the AA found, when they contacted the supermarket, that the CCTV records were deleted. Why act so late?
My feeling is the AA and insurer want to wheedle out of their obligations here. Clearly I have not made all this stuff up (I gave them a name, address and phone number of the woman involved – they could easily phone the number and pop round to the address). Why would I supply my insurer with a false name and address and phone number? Either I am lying or the other driver is lying – surely it is not an insoluble problem?
So my questions are these:
1. Do the laws of the highway apply in a supermarket car park regarding who gives way to whom? (I ask this because I claim I entered the space where I was hit before the other car turned in, but my insurer is caiming 'this is just my word against theirs' - and please note 'they' have not claimed anything; it may be the laws don't apply in a car park anyway so the AA is just making up things).
2. If a driver in a car park thinks they have a right of way does this allow them to drive into any vehicle in their way?
3. If I had decided to not involve the other driver, I could easily have claimed that I found impact damage to my car when returning from shopping – if I had done so would the AA and my insurer accuse me of lying or say the damage was my fault, or shrug their shoulders, pay up and move on?
4. Having approved the repairs (which cost about £1,000) can the AA and the insurer later turn round and say ‘actually we have now decided it was your fault so we are going to penalise you via your next policy’? (If there was any doubt about culpability at the time of the repair I would have not gone to the repairer I was recommended by the car dealership, but would have gone to the bloke who quoted £600 and I would have paid him out of my pocket, not involving the insurer. So surely the insurer and the AA can’t backslide as they appear to want to do, after the repairs have been done and the bills paid?).
I am prepared to get proper legal advice if my insurer continues to **** me around, but I though, first, I’d see the views if the NSC hive mind, especially the views of those who know about these things….
