Off Topic Need some advice following the accident

Currently reading:
Off Topic Need some advice following the accident

Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
1,480
Points
403
Location
Fleet, Hampshire
Hi people, I apologise in advance for writing here as I don't have a Fiat anymore but I really need help and advice... (if you really squint, Twingo looks like a 500 :D)

Woman backed up on me in car park (we were both reversing, but she started her maneuver way after me, while I was looking back), totally her fault but she is contesting so 2 questions:

1. I was too distraught to get witnesses (two children crying in the car) but, looking at the photo - do you think its obvious that the silver Focus was to blame?

2. Looking at the damage, I think I need a new door. The car is going to the insurance company approved body shop on Wed for them to have a look. Do you think is repairable, or a new door job?

Many thanks for your thoughts...

P.S. I only had a car for two weeks!:cry::cry:
 

Attachments

  • 4500128839- photo 4.jpg
    4500128839- photo 4.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 127
  • QMH- Jokic 5.jpg
    QMH- Jokic 5.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 113
  • QMH-Jokic 4.jpg
    QMH-Jokic 4.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 124
Last edited:
Oops! Sorry to hear that Mel, from the photo presumably you just reversed out of the space on front of you? If so as you say she's clearly in the wrong as she reversed after you and obviously dident look where she was going. Door looks like a replacement job I'd reckon - it's a new car so should be done right imo.
 
From your description, I assume you reversed from a space opposite her. From your position, you got there first, and look as if you were ready to move forward, so might have been stationary. If you were stationary, that is significant, as she has hit a 'parked' car. If you were still moving, it gets less clear.

Sadly, it is likely that both insurance companies will share the costs, blaming both of you equally. That is the easiest way out for them, as the total cost is then shared equally, and both of you get higher premiums next year, so they reduce their losses. If they apportion blame only to one party, overall they get less income next year.

If you were stationary, worth pointing that out and asking your insurance to pursue all costs from the other person. Did the other person's reversing light work? Might be useful to know/remember.

In future, reversing into the space might help avoid these issues as you'd have more view. When reversing, consider having at least your window open, better both, to hear other vehicle's engines, so you can look around and parp at them.
 
Condolences, Mel - that's a horrible thing to have happen, made even worse by the other driver contesting liability.

I've no doubt from what you've said, and from looking at the picture, that the other driver was at fault. That said, a still photo can't show the relative speeds of the two vehicles at the time, and in the absence of witnesses, if neither driver admits liability then I'd be seriously surprised if the insurers didn't treat this as a 'knock for knock' claim. There's simply not enough at stake for the respective insurance companies to contest it. Unfortunately I think this will be treated as an 'at fault' claim for both drivers, so both of you will have to pay your respective excesses.

It'll need a new door, and on a two week old car, I'd be moving heaven and earth to get an OEM part.

Just remember that no one was hurt, and at the end of the day, a car is only 'stuff'.
 
Thank you all for your thoughts. Yes, we were both reversing from the spaces in front of us. When I started the maneuver, there was no indication of anyone intended to reverse (no reverse lights, no movement). She just backed up into me when I have already finished reversing and was selecting first gear. I did see her at the last possible moment and beeped, but she didn't stop...

I will definitely ask for a new door and it has to be OEM part, as that is requirement for keeping my Renault warranty.

My excess is horrendous £580 (to keep my insurance low...)- maybe not such a great idea now...:(

And, you are right of course, nobody got hurt which is the most important thing...
 
Sorry to hear of this. Portland Bill is absolutely right though, likelihood is, both insurance companies will share the blame. It happened to my own wife in her old Mazda in a supermarket car park. Three witness stated it was the other woman's fault but my wife's insurer capitulated and did a deal with the other insurer and both were deemed at fault. It was absolute BS, even to the point whereby the other party somehow managed to procure a false statement of witness stating my wife was at fault. The whole saga went on for months. As a result, she'll never insure with the company she was insured with at the time.

Similarly, in the same car, the wife was sat in her car, stationary, engine off, when a woman reversed into her in a large 4x4 immediately admitted responsibility stating that she 'didn't see her down there'. The insurers once again tried to do a deal to blame both drivers, even though my wife wasn't driving her car! merely by virtue of the fact she was present, claiming she should have sounded her horn! We subsequently discovered the car was owned by the NHS and their insurer was allegedly trying everything they could to avoid paying out but gave in after almost six months after CCTV came to light!

As for excess, I always opt for zero excess now where I can, though I've just reinsured on my Saab and I had no choice but to opt for £150 excess.

Hope you get it sorted. ;)
 
Last edited:
I going to disagree with the knock for knock call on this.

You were clearly in position and as you say "selecting 1st gear". Therefore you were stationary behind her. Even if you were further forward (i.e. your rear rear wing was behind her) she has still reversed into you. If you had pulled off to drive away and she'd hit you, she would have reversed / pulled out into passing traffic and so would definitely been at fault. I can't see any difference in the actual situation. She has made her move when her path is clearly blocked. Therefore she has failed to look and failed to see you. I put it as her fault for failing to observed her surrounding area.

If you had hit rear bumper corner to rear bumper corner and were both moving then I would call a knock for knock situation. But you were clearly already behind her and would have been visible in her mirrors and if she'd had looked behind.
 
Last edited:
I going to disagree with the knock for knock call on this.

Mel, I hope for you that B7TMW is right and I am wrong.

I'd add that the absence of scratching on your paintwork might also be evidence that you weren't moving at the time of impact.

Do you have legal protection insurance? If so, this might be a good time to use it, though you've likely thought of this already.
 
What a load of hassle it all is for something that happens in the blink of an eye...! :(

We had something similar happen in our 500 (I wasn't driving), both vehicles were moving, but luckily both drivers reacted just in time to have only a few minor scratches which I was able to sand/polish out. I can definitely understand how this sort of accident happens, it can be hard to see another vehicle that may not have been there when the manouevre began. Portland Bill gives good advice for the future. I actually get very nervous with opposing angled parks for this reason.

The car can be repaired perfectly but it's the dealing with insurance companies and repair shops that's the problem... you have my sympathy.

-Alex
 
Last edited:
The most insane thing about car insurance repair jobs, is the alleged hiking of costs for work carried out. I had my Saab front valance repaired by my local bodyshop who told me this exact thing went on so much, he was now refusing to do insurance work. He charged me £150 to do the repairs to my front valance and told me that had it gone through insurance, it would have more than likely cost around £700 to do the same job. A total rip off was his exact words.

If you check your policy, many insurers will charge upwards of a £200 excess for not using their 'preferred' insurer. However, as an owner, you can have the repairs done at whichever bodyshop you want. They might not like you doing it, but they can't force you to have the work done where they want it done. By all means, get them to recover the vehicle if it's undriveable, but have it taken to a bodyshop of your choosing if that's the route you want to go.

If for instance you buy a brand new car and insure it with whomever your preferred insurer is and it is subsequently involved in an accident, the repairs done on the car don't necessarily have to be carried out using genuine manufacturer parts. This can have consequences, certainly when it comes to body panels. If your car manufacturer offers a six year anti-perforation warranty on body panels and your one year old car is fitted with a cheap knock off panel which is not prepped/painted/baked to the manufacturer standards, it more than likely won't be guaranteed for the same time limit as the manufacturer guarantee.

And then what about fitting replacement engine or braking parts etc? Again, cheap aftermarket alternatives might be used. This might be fine on a 5 year old car, but I wouldn't be happy for that to happen on any car less than 3 years old.

I know one thing, if anything should happen to my wife's Hyundai i10 whilst it's under 5 year warranty, we'll happily pay the excess and it'll be Hyundai that repair the car and charge the cost of the repairs back to the insurer.
 
Hi all .The person who backed in the OP was doing what I believe the insurance companies tell you to do after an accident,do not admit liability.
I know it will not help in this situation, but ALWAYS ALWAYS back into a parking space.
 
If you check your policy, many insurers will charge upwards of a £200 excess for not using their 'preferred' insurer. However, as an owner, you can have the repairs done at whichever bodyshop you want. They might not like you doing it, but they can't force you to have the work done where they want it done. By all means, get them to recover the vehicle if it's undriveable, but have it taken to a bodyshop of your choosing if that's the route you want to go.

If you're making a no-fault claim against a third party insurer, you can have the car repaired by a repairer of your own choosing, provided of course you're not being unreasonable. The third party insurer will have to pay the full cost of the repair - there will be no excess.

If you're claiming through your own insurance, you're limited by whatever the terms of your particular policy happen to be. Many will surcharge you any difference in cost between your chosen repairer and what they claim their approved repairers would have charged - you need to check the small print of your policy. If yours says you can have it repaired anywhere by paying a £200 additional excess, then IMO on a newish car, it's worth paying that excess to guarantee OEM parts will be used and the full manufacturers warranty will remain intact.

If for instance you buy a brand new car and insure it with whomever your preferred insurer is and it is subsequently involved in an accident, the repairs done on the car don't necessarily have to be carried out using genuine manufacturer parts. This can have consequences, certainly when it comes to body panels. If your car manufacturer offers a six year anti-perforation warranty on body panels and your one year old car is fitted with a cheap knock off panel which is not prepped/painted/baked to the manufacturer standards, it more than likely won't be guaranteed for the same time limit as the manufacturer guarantee.

Generally any areas of the car repaired after an accident won't be covered by the manufacturers warranty unless some pretty strict conditions are followed, which would almost certainly require OEM parts to be used, and may also involve using a manufacturer-approved repairer and/or having the repair inspected (usually by a franchised dealer) after the repair. Instead, most insurers (or their approved bodyshops) will offer their own warranty on repair work, the terms of which vary between companies and may not necessarily be the same as the original warranty (sometimes they are better, particularly on an older car).

The big hole in the swiss cheese comes if you are returning a car at the end of a pcp; if the pcp company isn't satisfied with the standard of the repair (which could a number of years old by then), you'll likely be surcharged whatever the cost of correcting it happens to be. For example, the warranty probably won't cover any differential fading of repaired panels, but if this has happened by the time you return the car, you'll have to pay the cost of respraying the panels.
 
Last edited:
Thank you all for your input. You are right, my insurer had a list of approved repairers in the area. I have chosen one of them (checked as much as I could about their work). If I've gone with one not on the list, it would have been £250 extra. As my excess is already massive, and I do not know at this moment if I'll get that money back- I have chosen to go with insurers bodyshop to keep the cost down (Rainbow in Farnborough). I got assurances from them that only OEM parts will be used (it will be in writing), and will get 5 year warranty on their work. Considering I only got 3 and half years of warranty left from Renault, I think this is OK. The new door will be sprayed and blended in and decals put on. They will also put in new window regulator, as the old one might be bent. It all sounds OK to me. Let me know what you think...
 
Let me know what you think...

That all sounds above board to me Mel. If they are using OEM parts, then I don't think there's much to be gained by spending another £250 to go somewhere else that you don't know any more about. It'll be a straightforward repair that shouldn't involve cutting into the car, so basically any bodyshop worthy of the name should be able to do a decent job.

I'm not getting any red flags for Rainbow Farnborough; they seem to get good reviews, this for example. Replacing the window regulator shows they've thought through the implications of the accident.
 
Last edited:
So this happened today, no I didn't hit another car in a nut shell the insurance says write off or we pay for repair, how did it happen a unsecured load flew off a van and hit our car, insurance says they insure the car not the load it was carrying so I can't claim against the other party even though I have dash cam footage. #Typecastboy

This link might work https://youtu.be/6DUiGByVSzQ
 

Attachments

  • 20201114_153557.jpg
    20201114_153557.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 48
Last edited:
So this happened today, no I didn't hit another car in a nut shell the insurance says write off or we pay for repair, how did it happen a unsecured load flew off a van and hit our car, insurance says they insure the car not the load it was carrying so I can't claim against the other party even though I have dash cam footage. #Typecastboy

This link might work https://youtu.be/6DUiGByVSzQ

Doesn't matter about insurance opinion.

Vehicle carrying a load has damaged your car.
You have a civil claim against the driver for your damage.
This is the case for any collision, but usually the risk is covered by an insurance company.
Insurance company saying not their responsibility, just moves it back to the driver of the other car.
Start a small claim in the county court.

Submit dashcam footage to the police, an insecure load is a serious offence.
 
Back
Top