Driver Hit Side of My Car and Now His Insurance Company Is Demanding $7000. HELP!

Lfield1985 on 13/12/2016 - 17:47
Last edited 14/12/2016 - 20:03 by 1 other user

Hey everyone,

My car was involved in an accident in Melbourne, I believe the other driver was at fault, because he turned into the side of my car, but now his insurer is demanding $7000 for the cost of repairs to his vehicle. My car was not insured at the time because it was my old car which I was preparing to sell. The damage to my car has been quoted at $1400.

There is no dispute about what occurred, but the road rules are vague regarding the line markings and who had right of way.

Basically, he was in a long line of traffic at the lights, as I went past on the left (to turn left at the green arrow) he turned into my car, causing damage to driver's door (see photos), and damaging the front left of his bumper.

The problem arises because there are no lane markings where the accident occurred about 10 cars back from the intersection (they only start a 10 metres before the intersection). Therefore his insurer is claiming he was already in the "left lane" and therefore had right of way.

From the best of my reading of vicroads rules, I had right of way because he "must give way to a vehicle which has any part of its vehicle ahead of yours" even if "there are no lines marked on the road." (Source Zip Merging )

But I'm not an expert, nor can I afford proper legal advice. So I am hoping someone out there can suggest what I can do?

The other drivers insurer has given me until friday to tell them how I wish to proceed; court or payment. I'm a student, so I can't afford to do either (especially if I lose and have to pay court costs). I've talked to legalaid but all they did was send me an email pack that wasn't very helpful.

Who can give expert advice regarding road rules? police? vicroads?

Any help or suggestions would be much appreciated.

This is the location of the accident
And here's a diagram.

Thanks!

EDIT: Here are the photos of the damage
Other Car
My Car
Close up of damage to my car

Poll Options

  • 36
    Who was at fault in the accident?
  • 15
    <Me>
  • 299
    <Other Driver>
  • 4
    <50/50>
  • 3
    <Not sure>
Automotive

Comments

  • eggles01 on 14/12/2016 - 16:30

    to me it is quite plain,if your vehicle ran into his vehicle your front mudguard and bumperbar would be damaged would it not,so seeing the only damage to your vehicle is the front and rear right hand doors he/she must have turned and ran into you,for legal advise see it you can find a solicitor/ legal firm who allows a free 20 minute appointment/consultation,if they agree you were not the cause of the accident you can ask what it would cost for them to write an official letter to the legal section of the insurance company,just remember the larger legal firm the bigger impact the letter will have,b.o.l.(best of luck)

  • humdogg on 14/12/2016 - 16:39

    +1 vote for who was at fault in the accident because question.

  • eggles01 on 14/12/2016 - 16:45

    there may be a chance to make them think you would have to get a written quote and send both the other driver and his insurance company a letter of demand for your damages,this may not change anything but as the saying goes-: you will never have a chance of winning lotto unless you buy a ticket:

  • yycan on 14/12/2016 - 16:47

    I was in a different situation, so my experience with road rules won't apply here. HOWEVER, both the other person and I thought each other was at fault. Both of our cars were almost undamaged - can barely notice anything. We were both insured. Her insurance company came after me and wanted me to pay for the damages to her car. Instead of going through my insurance, I sent them a letter also demanding them to pay me for the damages (my damage would've costed more to repair) and arguing that I wasn't at fault. Never heard a reply from them again. I didn't bother to chase it up as I thought both of us were at fault, so I don't want to pay excess for my insurance company.

  • mreddie on 14/12/2016 - 17:15

    Both at fault

  • John on 14/12/2016 - 17:36
    -2

    Show us the photo of damages to the car. If the damage fits your description, tell the insurer about it and how obvious it was that your car was being hit from the side. The insurer might back down if the proof is black and white.

  • jlogic on 14/12/2016 - 19:09

    Sounds like a scare tactic from the insurance coNpany, to get you to pay.

    Was there a police report? If so have the police followed you up on breaking the rules? If not then you had right of way and the bozo is at fault for not checking his mirrors or over their shoulders.

    • whooah1979 on 14/12/2016 - 21:07

      had right of way

      This is a common misunderstanding in Australian when it comes to the road rules. There are no right of way written in the road rules.

      • jlogic on 15/12/2016 - 00:01
        +1

        Ok I used the wrong term. Giving way then.

  • factor on 14/12/2016 - 19:55

    Your diagram is great. Clearly you are in the right. Do your photos of damage unambiguously demonstrate the same thing your diagram does?

    If so - counter-claim! Get the insurer to pay for the damage to your car.

    You can have a good battle of letters with the insurance company before it goes to court. No cost for that. Send them your diagram, maybe the photos too. If they are smart they will discontinue when shown a reasonable weight of evidence against them. The clause about lines of traffic mentioned above is very clear.

  • MondaySleeper on 14/12/2016 - 20:10

    Very interesting thread. I think the main point here is if the other driver was stationary. If he was, it means he had the intention of going straight and you already indicated left to turn left. if he was not stationary, but you moved past him from left, you are at fault. Any manoeuvres from other driver to turn left without proper head check is a fault from his side.

    • berry580 on 14/12/2016 - 21:06

      sab2000, what does whether the other vehicle is stationary or not have anything to do with whether op is at fault or not?

      From what I can gather so far, the other driver is in another line, it would ultimately be for the other vehicle (driver) that wants to change line (to turn left) to only change line when it is safe to. If in the proceed of the line changing, there is an accident that involve side collisions, then the line changing driver would be at fault. Is that how it works?

      • MondaySleeper on 14/12/2016 - 22:56
        +1

        Certainly it has. There is no lane marking which means they are supposed to go 1 after other. Just because you have space, doesn't mean you can just overtake from left. What if the other car was moving an slightly adjusting the position as to indicate and turn left and another suddenly see a gap and decided to barge in. The situation changes completely if the other car has stopped completely and then decided to make a left turn. The other driver can easily argue that he had indicated and all of sudden this guys pulled in.

        If there was a dashcam he could have captured some evidence. the chances are 50-50 at court.

  • berry580 on 14/12/2016 - 21:10
    +2

    $7,000 for the damage to that Ford??

    Which unethical insurance company is demanding that? Please advise.

    Thanks.

    • BargainCowboy on 15/12/2016 - 08:21

      Unbelievable. I wouldn't be surprised if that bogan issued that letter himself.

    • field1985 on 15/12/2016 - 11:49

      AAMI

      • terrys on 19/12/2016 - 08:13

        Ahh - the company that appears to claim that if you hit the rear of a car parked facing downhill, you are responsible for any subsequent damage if the Bozo who parked it used neither the parking brake, gear lever or had the nous to place it in park to secure their vehicle, and was ignorant of the advice to turn the driving wheels to the kerb.
        That one is lower on my list that the one staffed by smarmy 'gits'.

  • bbear on 14/12/2016 - 21:11

    The photos are sufficient to prove that you weren't at fault because the other driver didn't check for oncoming traffic before "moving into your lane". I assume that the other driver was stationary at the time and decided to take the outer left lane at the last second hence causing the collision.

    From the information you have provided, you have a strong foundation for a counter-claim.

  • Kempe on 14/12/2016 - 21:28

    Any independent witnesses or is this a "he said she said" scenario

    • field1985 on 15/12/2016 - 11:54

      No witnesses came forward. But it wouldn't help anyway, as there is no dispute about what happened, it is down to who was supposed to giveway under the road rules. Since I was ahead, he was meant to giveway, the damage on both cars proves this (I was ahead) without doubt, therefore he is responsible for failing to giveway to cars already a line of traffic before turning.

      • Kempe on 15/12/2016 - 20:01

        Yeah but how do we know you werent aggressive and forced yourself in front
        Just today I was driving and it was a zip merge, I was in front and had right of way but a guy forced himself in front at speed
        That accident, if it had happened, would have shown him in front and me hitting him but the reality was different
        2 sides to every story, thats why you need an independent witness

        • dasher86 on 16/12/2016 - 11:39

          if he was aggressive and pushed himself in front he can't have hit the other vehicle with his door…
          different rules apply to zip lanes

  • djkelly69 on 14/12/2016 - 22:08
    +4

    I agree with those saying you are not at fault, but not with those saying to get a lawyer/paid legal advice.

    As said above, write back to them yourself and say you have received advice that you were not at fault, and will dispute any claim to the contrary. Do not give your hand away in terms of what sections you will rely on, why you think this or what the advice was.

    Then go on to claim he was at fault and list the damage claimed from them. Have evidence (2 or 3 quotes) to back this up, and do not negotiate on the amount claimed.

    They are definitely trying it on to try and get a small settlement or just have each party wear their own costs because you are unrepresented. They don't want this to go to small claims court or whatever because they don't have leg to stand on.

    • yycan on 15/12/2016 - 07:22

      This. They're unlikely to want to waste money going through the courts over this.

  • Kingofsl on 14/12/2016 - 22:36
    +6

    I have had a similar incident in Melbourne. I was driving a rental car and had an accident with a taxi. There was a slight scratch on the taxi and no damage on my car. The taxi driver was at fault, but it wasn't very obvious. However as the damage was tiny on both cars, we agreed to not make a claim.

    I returned my vehicle and rental company did not even file a claim as it wasn't very visible. Once I was back in Sydney, I got a call from the legal team of an insurance company asking me to pay compensation for the damage or request the rental company to pay for the damage.

    I didn't want to pay for the claim and I didn't want my insurance company to pay for the claim. So I refused to give them any details. They threaten to take me to the courts, and I was happy to meet them in Courts. Then I received a letter by post demanding $3000 or legal action would be taken. I called them up and told them to stop sending me letters and proceed with legal action. That was the last phone call, no action was taken after that.

    I think you should write to them and attach the diagram and a screenshot of google street view. Ask them to carefully look at the images and if they still believe you are at fault, to proceed with legal action. Also mention that you would appoint a legal representative if legal action is taken.

    I'm quite sure they will drop the case.

    Good luck.

  • wjb on 14/12/2016 - 22:47
    +3

    damn are those tattoos or stockings?

    The poll results are your answers. Good luck!

  • Marcsie on 14/12/2016 - 23:01
    -1

    I never understand that when the people are going to learn ? you just can't drive a car without insurance, at least the third party, sorry, no sympathy from me !

  • dj69 on 15/12/2016 - 00:42

    I feel your pain. The insurance company is obviously claiming that there was only one lane and therefore the other driver is allowed to move within that lane.
    Common sense would deem the other driver at fault as you would expect that other cars would be moving within the same lane, so I would fight it in court and let a judge decide.
    Good luck…

  • CVonC on 15/12/2016 - 00:46

    Did you tell him you have no insurance at the time of the accident? Perhaps that's why he went to claim against you because of that.

    Always get insurance even if third party. Even if about to sell.

    Goodluck trying to fight this one, honestly I hope you win even with no insurance cos it's clearly his fault.

  • smittenkitten on 15/12/2016 - 00:50

    Not really a helpful comment but I'd like to know who's tattoo leg sleeve is that in the photo?

    Also, imo I have to agree with Outlander's comment on page 1:
    If the other car was already in the left lane, the other car would have been hit on the side or from behind.

    OP this looks like an open and shut case, I would not be worried at all. Insurance company is trying to take you for a ride. My advice is to use this as a learning experience to see how the courts work.

    sorry noob doesn't know how to add quotes properly.

    • smittenkitten on 15/12/2016 - 01:06
      +1

      looked at the photos again; his right front is damaged and your left side is damaged from the back of your headlights clearly proving that he merged without head checking and after you had driven past him. His negligence in failing to do a head check is what caused the collision. He also failed to follow Rule 148 (2) - 148 Giving way when moving from one line of traffic to another line of traffic.

      Just from photos alone we can ascertain that what you've said is legit and you haven't twisted the story. If I were in your shoes, I would write a formal letter requesting a claim to have your car fixed(at end of the letter), deny having to owe any money toward the third party, state the law protecting you, attach all your diagrams, and give them a due date to respond (3 or 5 business days). Even though you are not insured, it should not mean that you have no rights; it just means that you pay for your own if you're at fault OR you fight for yourself if you are not at fault. So fight! Because you are not at fault. Be polite and courteous in your emails with them and make sure you LOG every thing in writing.

      Good luck OP! Please update us with how the process goes. It's really a delight to see OZbargain members to be so supportive and helpful. It's exactly what we need during this hectic time of year.

      • jv on 15/12/2016 - 01:49

        His negligence in failing to do a head check is what caused the collision.

        Yep, but you'd still need a lawyer to prove it in court…

      • Geewhizz on 15/12/2016 - 06:28

        He also failed to follow Rule 148 (2) - 148 Giving way when moving from one line of traffic to another line of traffic.

        Given OP's diagram it could be argued that there was no other line of traffic. A single random vehicle would hardly be considered a line of traffic.

        All things aside though, the other driver clearly was not driving with due care. It could just as easily have been a pedestrian or cyclist that they veered into.

  • johnno07 on 15/12/2016 - 01:37
    +3

    Bro. Third party property can be had for probably less than $150 a year. Get it.

    • highdealer on 15/12/2016 - 05:57
      -1

      Can you show me a quote for $150? The lowest i can find in NSW for some one over 30 with pitch perfect record and 1.3L car is $280. I would really like to know where an under 25 can get TPP for less than $150 a year. And how much is the access fee? $7000?

      • johnno07 on 15/12/2016 - 08:59
        +1

        Cheers for the downvote, mate. I'm with Bingle in Queensland. I literally pay $130.69 a year with a $650 excess for my old Falcon. Similar vintage to OP's car. I'm also below 30. Hence my fact-based statement. I don't have comprehensive, because my car is worthless, but having $20 million coverage for third party property is well and truly worth ~$11 a month.

        • highdealer on 15/12/2016 - 09:57
          -6

          Just be cause you might be able to get it for $130.69 doesn't mean everyone else can. The $130 policy only apply to people living in QLD where there are half the amount of people living in a much larger city by area.

          A 1994 Falcon for someone in Melbourne with perfect record would cost at least $240. Also Bingle raise their access fees to $795.

        • johnno07 on 15/12/2016 - 16:07
          +9

          @highdealer: Dude. You asked to be shown a sub-$150 policy - I showed you. Sure, maybe it's a bit more expensive in Melbourne, but it's still not a load of money for the benefit you're getting. I also wanted to quash your ridiculous "$7000 access fee" statement. So what? Now it's $795. Still good value. And for the love of God it's EXCESS - not ACCESS.

        • leetguy101 on 16/12/2016 - 22:26
          +1

          @johnno07: Thanks, I got confused as to wtf an 'access fee' was.

  • jv on 15/12/2016 - 01:47

    but now his insurer is demanding $7000 for the cost of repairs to his vehicle.

    Of course they would… They're not going to pay out if they can bluff you into paying…

    however, to avoid paying and to get them to pay for your car, you'd need to be insured or get a lawyer, otherwise the insurance company's lawyers will run rings around you in court…

  • Randxyz123 on 15/12/2016 - 04:53

    My car was not insured at the time because it was my old car which I was preparing to sell

    Sorry to be frank but you are an idiot…. Why do people not insure their cars. Do you have insurance on your new car?? If so will they help you out?

    Send a letter of demand to the other driver rejecting the charges and telling them what happened from your point of view. Include a invoice from the repairer for your car and give him 14 days to pay.

    He'll pass it onto his insurer and they'll make a decision, hopefully in your favour…

  • [Deactivated] on 15/12/2016 - 06:20

    Any pictures of the incident at the sight ? Probably get a dash cam next time.

    • whooah1979 on 15/12/2016 - 06:35

      Probably get a dash cam next time.

      it's understandable that many motorists can't afford tpp. a dashcam is the next best thing. they're cheap and can be had for less than full tank of fuel. there is no reason to not invest in one when they can provide strong evidence in claims like this.

  • chillin222 on 15/12/2016 - 07:00
    +3

    OP, where are you studying?

    All major universities have a free legal service for students. Contact your student union ASAP to find out details.

  • BertieBrown on 15/12/2016 - 07:23

    Ok, I definitely need to get myself a decent dashcam to avoid this kind of thing, does anyone have any suggestions for something that is relatively good for the price?

  • wtfnodeal on 15/12/2016 - 08:21

    Has OP got yourself 3 quotes to fix your car yet? It comes handy we when you decide to turnaround and ask the insurance company to pay for your damage.

  • [Deactivated] on 15/12/2016 - 08:50
    +4

    Hi OP I am going to do you a favour by giving you the practical truth, even though this is not legal advice.

    1 Do not admit any liability or acknowledge that you owe anything

    http://consumeraction.org.au/debt-collection-old-debts/

    2 Wait for them to go away after 6 years

    Tell any debt collectors on the phone that you don't owe them anything and not to contact you again, don't reply to their letters.

    3 Don't do anything unless you area being actually sued (Community Legal should be able to help with that if you are, or a paid lawyer)

    4 They can't make any dent on your credit rating unless you agree to a credit check or they have a judgement against you. You didn't sign anything with them for you to access your credit file, so they can't just access it on their own accord since there is no written agreement that you owe them anything.

    5 Given the age of your car (very similar to mine, except mine's a Camry) the unfortunate truth is that other drivers treat our ever reliable old cars like they are literally trash on wheels, but comprehensive insurance is too expensive given their value for us to defend ourselves from these monsters.

    Without your own insurance, if you fight them/their insurance privately to pay you (which is certainly technically possible) you are inviting a Lion to fight you and you could lose. Personally I would let it go (unless they ACTUALLY sue you, then you counterclaim), and just fix up the broken indicator from the wreckers and give the surface a coat of Rust Cheater so that it doesn't rust (or just go over the rusted bits when it comes up).

    6 Don't be an idiot and get yourself some 3rd party insurance, if some moron in a Maserati did this you would be boned, they would not easily give up if the damages were higher.

    • djkelly69 on 15/12/2016 - 12:34
      +1

      It is not a debt which the OP owes them (at least at this stage). It is really a settlement offer the insurer is putting forward, and OP can either accept or decline.

      They would have to go to court and have the court say a debt was owed before it was enforceable.

  • harley on 15/12/2016 - 10:11

    Make an appointment with your nearest community legal centre: they might just have a mva clinic. Also read this for options: it is quite thorough but is more relevant for vic https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http…

  • argamond on 15/12/2016 - 10:16

    This isn't that black or white. The location is a 3 lane road turning into a four lane road.

    My gut feel (if both had insurance) is that both would have to pay an excess because both would be at fault (contributory negligence).

    Having said that, I think it may end up with each party repairing their own car

  • nathand on 15/12/2016 - 10:19
    +1

    They will not want to go to court for $7K, it's not worth their time. This is similar to what they do with write offs. They tally up the repair cost of damage against the amount they would have to pay out and then decide to write off based on that.

    Worst comes to worst you can offer them a reduced amount and they will make this call. If you think you will lose say to have this matter completed I am prepared to pay $500 otherwise I will have to dispute in court and then see what they say, NEVER ADMIT THE ACCIDENT WAS YOUR FAULT, ever.

    After you make an offer, they make the call, they consider if it goes to court they have to hire a lawyer and it will cost them, there is a chance you win at court and they have to pay costs then its even more expensive. They use court as a threat that they are not prepared to take anyway in most cases.

    As a student you can try and get legal advice from legal centres in victoria, unfortunately this time of year most of them shut down and don't take on new cases. http://www.fclc.org.au/find_a_clc.php

    My question would be have they provided you with the other drivers version of events? You need to ask for that and get that from them. Tell them that before you can make a decision on fault you need to know what exactly they are claiming.

    People on here have commented and it looks like "Rule 148 (2) - 148 Giving way when moving from one line of traffic to another line of traffic" is your key here. DO NOT TELL THEM THAT IS WHAT YOU PLAN ON USING YET. Wait till after you receive their version of events to bring up this rule.

    Then with this rule mention the damage is to the front of their clients car, which is a strong indication that they caused the accident, once the damage in on the front its very hard to say they didn't cause it. Tell them you believe the liability is 100% with the other driver and that you are prepared to dispute this in court and seek your own compensation.

    You will see the figure come down from $7K dramatically. You could even ask for a payout on your damages and take it to court yourself. Say something like I have an appointment at (your local legal centre) to get advice on my options of seeking compensation for damages and the mental anguish that this accident has caused me.

  • lint on 15/12/2016 - 11:06

    My opinion is the other driver is at fault. Their insurance company is probably threatening you because you're uninsured. I'd say argue your case and be prepared to take it to court if need be.

    One of the first things insurance companies try to do if they blame you is try to get you to admit fault, with the threat of further action if you don't do as they say. As the poster above says, do not admit fault under any circumstances.

    They will weigh their options and may not even take it to court if they figure they'll lose or it's not worth the cost. If you admit fault prior, it's pretty much a guaranteed win for them.

    On the other hand, if you fight it and win, the loss to you is only that you'd still have to pay for your own repairs unless you decide to take them to court.

    I understand this may be a burden on you, but I think $7000 is a lot of money to not fight on this one.

    Pro-tip for the future: There's never a reason not to have comprehensive car insurance. You save yourself the headache of this sort of thing and your insurance company will duke it out for you since it's their money at stake.

    Saying you're going to sell your car soon is absolutely not a good excuse to not be covered - when you sell your vehicle and you cancel your insurance, you'll be refunded for your cover pro-rata.

    • johnno07 on 15/12/2016 - 19:28
      +2

      Pro-tip for the future: There's never a reason not to have comprehensive car insurance

      That's really not the case. If you drive a car like the OP does, it's literally not worth the premiums to comprehensively insure it. On the other hand, there is no good reason not to have third party property insurance.

  • trapper on 15/12/2016 - 11:30
    +1

    It looks like you are not at fault.

    What did the police say? is the other driver being charged with careless driving?

  • DeepSea on 15/12/2016 - 12:33

    Count yourself fortunate as you may not be at fault. Nevertheless, third party car and comprehensive home insurance are things you don't simply forget, and being uninsured because you were preparing to sell sounds strange. Good luck.

    • field1985 on 15/12/2016 - 16:29

      I have a newer car with comprehensive insurance. The old car had been sitting idle in my garage for two months before the day of the accident (I had let its insurance lapse as I wasn't using it). The one day I needed to drive it a few kms the accident happened.

  • nautic on 15/12/2016 - 13:16

    i can only imagine all the chaos and confusion that would ensue, if everyone became fearful of doing the very thing you did.

  • dbun1 on 15/12/2016 - 13:32

    Based on the damage to the cars I can't see how the insurer can claim that he was already in the left lane.

    If he was already in the lane far enough to become the 'lane user', then the damage would be on the rear

  • PurpleWinter on 15/12/2016 - 13:39

    At most, both drivers were at fault if it is claimed the lane in which you were in and which the other driver was turning into is not a lane.
    Did you see the other driver indicate prior to pulling into that lane and how long did he indicate for?
    Insurance companies are renowned for shifting blame. You need to stick to your guns and maybe even speak with a solicitor who is willing to represent you 'no win, no fee'…

    Further to that, a civil court, which this one would be, only requires the parties prove at fault on the balance of probabilities. Unlike criminal offences that are beyond reasonable doubt. Simply put, probability is like 51% and beyond doubt is like 99%. This is, however, over simplification…

  • OzzyOzbourne on 15/12/2016 - 14:24
    +2

    I don't see what's wrong with passing a stationary line of traffic on the left. The other driver set off from a standstill and turned into another moving vehicle. Good job it wasn't a cyclist. The insurance company is just trying what ever they can to scare you into paying

    • PurpleWinter on 15/12/2016 - 21:36

      Well, if there's no line to I do care another lane, then there is only one lane and the OP has overtaken on the left side within the same lane…

      • nautic on 16/12/2016 - 01:44
        +1

        perhaps there's a reason why that particular lane is wide near that section.

        • PurpleWinter on 17/12/2016 - 12:40

          Its not for motorists to assume the reason a lane is wide. Otherwise motorists could also assume that signs and traffic lights are not meant for them…

  • Talonparty on 15/12/2016 - 15:26
    +2

    Insurance companies always try to blame the other guy first just to see if they can get away with it. Submit your counter claim and then take it to court if necessary. In my opinion you're clearly in the right.

    I had an accident about 5 years ago where some (profanity) turned into moving traffic and caused me to crash into his car. We both knew he was at fault but his insurance company tried to blame me immediately. All it took was a bit of back and forth and my statement of the facts and then it was a payout to me.

  • AMLagonda on 15/12/2016 - 16:31

    Never ever admit its was even partly your fault, he turned into you end of story.

  • lonix on 15/12/2016 - 16:55

    Seems like the standard fishing letter to me.

    They send you a bill for it to see if you'll just pay it.

    Now that you have the insurers details, send them an invoice for damages to your car, and see if they pay it.

  • imurgod on 15/12/2016 - 19:48
    +7

    I am in insurance and responsible for some of the largest fleets in NSW. From an insurance perspective, the insurer is simply trying it on.

    Serve the other driver and the insurer with a letter of demand for your damage then call the insurer and advise them that you are holding their client responsible for the damage citing the fact that they failed to merge safely and the damage to both vehicles (as evidenced by your photos) substantiates your claim.

    You're a fool for driving uninsured though. Regardless of what people say.

    I have a client with a new Ferrari who was hit in the rear by an old Barina driven by a student - uninsured.
    Went to court and she is now up for the $44,000 damage.

    Times have changed, courts don't let you off at $10 per week anymore.

    • TheOneWhoKnocks on 15/12/2016 - 23:37
      +1

      I have a client with a new Ferrari who was hit in the rear by an old Barina driven by a student - uninsured.
      Went to court and she is now up for the $44,000 damage.

      😮

    • andyken on 16/12/2016 - 13:24
      +5

      Serve the other driver and the insurer with a letter of demand for your damage then call the insurer and advise them that you are holding their client responsible for the damage citing the fact that they failed to merge safely and the damage to both vehicles (as evidenced by your photos) substantiates your claim.

      take this guy advise

      • nith265 on 16/12/2016 - 13:28
        +1

        Seconded! – this really does sum up what OP needs to do

  • lethalmoney on 15/12/2016 - 21:31

    You are in the right, if your diagram is right . you have no insurer and require a solicitor to prevent being witch hunted

  • ankor on 15/12/2016 - 22:05

    Please note this is NOT legal advice. It is something you can take to a community legal centre to ask questions:

    1. That lane is in practice, two lanes, but unmarked, since it appears to be intentionally wide to incorporate both parking spaces and a lane
    2. The signs along that stretch of road show that its a clearway for a certain, significant portion of the day
    3. Outside of the clearway hours, it appears that people can park in the left hand lane
    4. The Vic RTA for whatever reason decided not to put dividing lines to delineate between the far left informal lane that you were in, and the lane second from the left that the other driver was in (why??)
    5. The other driver was stationary prior to the incident according to your diagram
    6. You had already "created your own lane' by travelling as far left as possible within this one wide 'double lane'.
    7. You had your nose past the other driver's vehicle while he was still stationary
    8. The other driver has pulled left, with the intention to 'create his own lane'
    9. As a result of #8, the other driver has collided with the driver side front and driver side door of your vehicle
    10. The other driver did not check his side view mirror, or his blind spot prior to executing his manouever

    http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/LTObject_Store/LTObjSt5.nsf/dde300b846eed9c7ca257616000a3571/a1ea37d8e6e0e200ca257761003fffbf/$FILE/09-94sr003.pdf

    Questions for you:
    - what is a marked lane?
    - what is overtake?
    - did you overtake on the left?
    - did you form your own lane?

    Questions for the other driver:
    - did he keep a proper lookout
    - why did he not see your vehicle?
    - why did he move from a stationary position and then turn left, into your vehicle?
    - why had he not kept as far left in the marked lane as possible?

    You should ask the community legal centre what they think regarding liability for the accident.

  • Trosticles on 15/12/2016 - 22:21
    +4

    As a barrister, I suggest the following generic course of action, without proffering any legal advice for your specific situation.

    Ideally, your first step is to obtain some preliminary advice from a lawyer. You could try to find a junior barrister willing to provide the advice for a fixed fee on a direct access basis, though a barrister may not be willing to do so and much depends on the rules of the state in which they practice. If you have difficulty, try asking a local solicitor to brief a junior barrister for you. A junior barrister will most likely be cheaper.

    If you decide not to obtain advice, but decide the other driver is at fault, get quotes for your damages and demand this payment from their insurer in settlement of your claim. Let them know you intend to take legal action if payment is not received. If they don't pay, or decide to take action against you, try to find a junior barrister (again), perhaps willing to act on a direct access (and possibly speculative) basis, to draft your pleadings and represent you.

    Your course of action really depends on who you believe is liable, how certain you are as to that liability, and your appetite for risk (e.g. the risk of court action, the risk of not settling the claim prior to court, the risk of winning but not recovering your costs, the risks of losing and being liable for costs etc etc). The reality is that you need advice specific to your situation in order to answer each of these variables. Having said that, many individuals with varying levels of competency have taken on insurance companies and won. The courts are also (generally) very accommodating to self-represented parties.

    Good luck.

  • Ivan Krazy on 15/12/2016 - 23:14
    +1

    Third party insurance would of avoided all the hassles/liabilities involved and they would've dealt with the case!

  • [Deactivated] on 16/12/2016 - 00:16
    -1

    I think it will come down to whether you have witnesses that there were stationary cars queued and a safe, separate lane for yourself. I think you need a person who was also in the queue or a pedestrian.

  • peterpeterpumpkin on 16/12/2016 - 09:34
    +1

    That's why in Russia, dashcam watches you.

  • cwongtech on 16/12/2016 - 10:35

    Hey OP can you please turn on your Private Messaging?
    There's a really helpful OzB member who works in the insurance industry that gave me some advice in regards to reduced payment of an accident. (I had $800 in damages to pay, paid $650!)
    Different situation but they may be in a better position to help you!

    P.s. it looks like the other guy was trying to get into the left lane and didn't do a blindspot check :\

    EDIT: Oh there's another dude in insurance who's commented.
    Well, I've messaged the person that helped me, they may or may not comment on this thread.
    Regardless, hope all goes well for you!

  • HalfRiceHalfCracker on 16/12/2016 - 10:45
    -4

    I've been in this sh1tty situation before (car accident, no insurance, other party trying to claim $14k).
    When the other parties insurer calls you do not say you are at fault soon as you say that GG.

    This is what you do, get rid of the car and get rid of your mobile number so the (profanity) stop callin ya and when you start receiving the letters in the mail get someone to call the insurer and say such such doesn't live here stop sending letters to this address.
    Years on no bad credit rating, happy days.

    • cameldownunder on 16/12/2016 - 10:49
      +2

      You're either trolling, or a scum-bag with no sense of responsibility.

      • HalfRiceHalfCracker on 16/12/2016 - 11:05

        what can i say I was young and dumb, but if you had known the scenario of the accident unfolding maybe you'd reconsider.

        my car was a p.o.s at the time, no point arguing to the insurer or going to court, only making the situation worse.
        Its easier to blame the driver who doesn't have insurance, so cut my losses and learned from it (and that's why i have insurance).

        • [Deactivated] on 16/12/2016 - 11:18
          +1

          There is a reasonable risk of getting bankrupted using this approach. If you have assets, the bare cupboard defence really isn't an option. If a collections agency sees a sign you have a significant asset, that asset will be gone with legal collections costs in no time. Collections agencies have cosy deals with law firms and they will add lawyer fees onto your debt for any action of a work experience kid. There are a few cases hitting the news of $4000-$20000 debts blowing out to $200,000. I think the bankruptcy action cost is $50k ballpark.

      • andyken on 16/12/2016 - 13:26
        -1

        the other guy who hit OP is a scum-bag too, scum-bag only can be done with scum-bag way

    • melb-ourne on 16/12/2016 - 17:32

      lol…thx. Might try this next time.

  • tempco on 16/12/2016 - 11:51

    Why is it ok for insurance companies to basically intimidate OP into settling for something that likely isn't OP's fault? Whether or not OP should be insured is an unrelated question.

    And even if OP was insured, then presumably there's some cost incurred by OP's insurance company that has to ultimately be paid by everyone (someone has to foot the bill). That sounds like a complete waste of money and time.

    • doodo477 on 16/12/2016 - 19:55

      It cost basically nothing to generated the letter and send it to OP. They've probably have a business process in place for x number of days without payment the ticket get elevated to the next stage. If a payment comes in they walk away with $$$ in the bank without spending any effort.

  • nith265 on 16/12/2016 - 13:19
    -1

    I like most people here feel you’re probably in the right but it could maybe be argued that you could have done more to anticipate the other driver’s actions – we all have a "duty of care" to one another. With this in mind they would at least look for a percentage split on the settlement – given their claimed amount is so high compared to yours you’d still be out of pocket with say a high 90%/10% negligence split. You’d need to pay $700 to them and they $1296 to you - $596 net to you. You might want to get another quote….

    One fundamental thing in your favour is that they clearly caused the damage by hitting you. Irrespective of the exact road law regarding merging etc, if you hit another car you are considered at least partially to blame even if the other car was breaking the law.

    I’d also suggest attaching to your letter of demand a note saying that if they cant settle quickly you’ll be forced to engage legal advice/counsel which you will also look to recover from them in addition to your vehicles damages

  • Stolniik on 16/12/2016 - 15:20

    There is a street I drive frequent which is very similar to the road which you had the accident. It technically is a single lane that then merges into two lanes. Until the markings on the road begin, unfortunately it still remains a single lane.

    In my situation I normally sit in the middle of the road to avoid an event like this. Even though I know the road is wide enough for two cars, I don't trust the cars around me to know how much space they need to give.

    In the last 2 months I've been in dispute for an accident which both parties were at fault. Driver was speeding through a round about and as a result I didn't see him and hit the side of him. I spoke with the insurance company and so long as I admitted fault, they were happy to discuss reducing the price. It dropped from $7k to 3.5.

    I thought the hassle was too much of a pain and just get it over with. Their army of lawyers will probably out lawyer you in court so unless you are confident, it might be best to just pay it up. They can even arrange payment plans so you can pay it off over time.

    Sorry for the bad news!

  • vigsparks on 16/12/2016 - 18:28
    -1

    I don't think you are at fault. You had done the same manoeuvre that the other person had intended to do. He tried to overtake the car in the from from the left side the same way you did his.

    But the Driving rules mandates that a person should do a head check and mirror check before making such a move. This is basic driving lesson and he would not have got the license if he done the same in a Driving test.

    Just ask to be taken to court and get help from legal Aid. Also ask them to give this to you in writing so that you can use it against them in the court

  • vegemite2008 on 17/12/2016 - 04:23

    Hi,

    Looking backwards on google maps one can clearly see that there are only 3 lanes marked. If the accident happened before location where the left lane was divided into 2 lanes, then you would be at fault as you tried to overtake him but could not do so safely, you caused an accident.

    Scenario, what would happen on a country road where there is one lane moving forward, a car is driving in front of you and you try to overtake on the inside… You would get a fine.

    I am not a lawyer and do hope I am wrong about this.

  • [Deactivated] on 17/12/2016 - 13:40

    I think the OP should carefully consider the form of first action or response to the insurer, particularly whether money spent getting the response sent from a lawyer with legal letterhead is money well invested. It might well be. The insurer will be evaluating the risks and rewards of pursuing each case and abandonng some based on merit, some on effort required or risk. One large factor is how vigourously it will be defended or countered.

    Even if you plan on defending yourself, I would find out the cost of having your first contact with the insurer come from a reputable legal source. People who have access to family friends who are lawyers save a fortune just having letters sent on formal legal letterhead stationary. It's hollow. It's bluffwork. But it might be money or a favour well invested.

  • Baysew on 17/12/2016 - 18:24
    +1

    The other drivers insurer has given me until friday to tell them how I wish to proceed

    OP - Any update? Friday has come and gone.

  • grasstown on 17/12/2016 - 18:30

    I don't think you give us enough info

    You say "Basically, he was in a long line of traffic at the lights, as I went past on the left (to turn left at the green arrow) he turned into my car, causing damage to driver's door (see photos), and damaging the front left of his bumper".

    This is the google map viewed further up the road.

    https://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/28589/45016/image.png

    i think the problem you have is that it really was a one lane road at the accident location. And that cars drive in the center of the road and you have snuck up the left side of a wide one lane road.

    You need to tell us if he was stationsary before pulling out or if he was moving.

    It's not possible to give an opinion on only the info you gave in the op

  • garffi on 17/12/2016 - 20:30
    -1

    You're not at fault. This is like those wide lanes that can have 2 cars travelling in it. If he was going to turn left, why didn't he keep to the left side of the lane? He obviously didn't, otherwise you wouldn't have been able to pass him. He probably changed his mind and swerved without doing any mirror checks or head checks.

  • isthisreally_me on 17/12/2016 - 23:41

    I live near where this happened and its one lane until the markings indicate two imo. As such the OP is at fault.

    • McFly on 18/12/2016 - 00:05
      -1

      It's this kind of post in this thread that makes me apprehensive about getting back on the road (in Vic.)

    • tomsco on 18/12/2016 - 16:05

      The post here indicates it may have been a legal maneuver, as long as the remainder of the traffic was stationary.

      • McFly on 18/12/2016 - 17:45

        Exactly. Which is why I get more apprehensive the more neg's I get.
        Some people have no clue about road rules eg. roundabouts - it's not like they are a modern edition to our roads!

        • ProspectiveDarkness on 18/12/2016 - 17:54
          +1

          I've seen a car reverse around a roundabout. On two separate occasions.
          Some people are just plain bafflingly stupid.

        • McFly on 18/12/2016 - 17:57

          @ProspectiveDarkness: Wow. I don't even mean that bad. The most common thing I see is people 'turning' but not using an indicator. AFAIC that's not only selfish but stupid too - may as well put a target on the passenger door!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join