Car Accident Issue

I'm not going to say what TamSV and DMC do for a living, it's not my place to, and I don't know what many of the people on the thread do for a living either. All I will say is that they are both subject matter experts when it comes to insurance claims, and personally if they told me I'd got something wrong with respect to insurance, I'd be happy to accept it.

Originally Posted by ogden

so the grey car claims from the red car

Your post is a bit confusing Ogden. The red car was the one that caused the shunt then drove away.

[TamSV]

Originally Posted by ogden

That's all lovely, but the simple fact is the blue car hit the grey one, not the red one, so the grey car claims from the red car. During the wrangling that follows, the red car may be found to be 100% liable, and the blue car 0%, but that's for the insurers to resolve between themselves.

All this "you weren't in the car, it's not your fault" is quite sweet, in a naive way, but doesn't reflect the reality of how the chain of claims will work.

Of course the right thing to do here is ask a solicitor, not a web forum.

I missed this post. LOL. Sweet and naive - I get that alot.

I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with TBH. Grey car may well launch a claim against Blue. They may even be successful, for the reasons that DMC and I gave, or because there is some other information that we don't have. However, if what the OP is saying is correct then there's no reason liability should automatically attach to the Blue car.

You are right that there may be some "wrangling" to establish liability but you seem to be saying that Blue cars insurers will pay up anyway? So what is the purpose of the wrangling?

Is it just for academic purposes or is the wrangling about establishing liability and then deciding who should pay? If it's the latter, then how do they establish liability if you don't think negligence is relevant? Rock, paper, scissors?

I've dealt with a number of multi-vehicle crash claims and they're all different. Vehicle 2 doesn't always pay for the damages to Vehicle 1.

There's a heavy dose of certainty in your post, as well as a few others in this thread. If it's just your opinion it's helpful to the OP to say so. If you believe it's fact then cite your experience/reasoning.

Not much point in consulting a solicitor BTW - waste of money apart from anything else. I get local solicitors phoning me when they get cases like this. I give them general advice for free but I often wonder how much they charge their clients for recycling it.

[MisterTommyH]

Originally Posted by ogden

Of course the right thing to do here is ask a solicitor, not a web forum.

Why?

If we all just paid people for information everytime we didn't know something we'd all be skint (or even more skint than we are already).

He's using the resources at his disposal to canvass opinions, and might even decide to appoint a solicitor based on that (although from the above advice it's probably pointless).

I agree that forums can be hit and miss, but there are lot of people on here with a lot of knowledge about things other than bikes, and if you can spot who are the people sharing knowledge rather than their opinion it can be an invaluable (free!) resource.