# Accident - rolled into at lights



## MichaelDonal (14 Dec 2015)

Wife was at lights with baby in back. Stopped on a hill, good bit back from car in front. 

Car in front starts to roll back, wife hits the horn to warn them. They keep coming until they hit our car. 

Other cars drive around us to get by so no witnesses. Driver claims they didn't hear the horn and had momentarily sneezed and were picking up tissue. 

Exchanged insurance details and called the guards. Guards won't come if no one injured. Wife was extremely upset as was the baby but other driver left even so. 

We called our insurance people right away and got two quotes for damage done next day. Then today we find out the other driver is claiming they did nothing wrong, they're saying my wife drove into her. 

I wouldn't mind if that was the case but my wife drives by the letter of the law and has  never once  had an accident or anything close to one.  

So, emotions aside and given that this damage will cost 700 euro to fix, what can we do? I'm astounded at the gall of some people but I know they're probably thinking the onus is on us to prove anything.  What can we do?


----------



## PaddyW (14 Dec 2015)

Unless there's a witness I'd say there's very little that can be done. Had something similar when a northern reg van, driving the wrong way around a roundabout (!) hit my car. I took details and all but then they disputed and said I was in the wrong(?). Eventually had to drop case as they would not back down.


----------



## thedaddyman (14 Dec 2015)

Unfortunately the country is full of chancers who will do what they can to get away with things.

Is there any CCTV at the lights?

I'd be inclined to push the claim with his insurance company for now to see if he will back down. If you end up paying it yourself, it might be worth seeing if you can make a claim under the small claims court.


----------



## Guns N Roses (14 Dec 2015)

MichaelDonal said:


> What can we do?



Inform your insurance company that the other party is disputing the claim and let your insurance company's claims investigator go after the other parties insurance company.


----------



## MichaelDonal (14 Dec 2015)

Thank you for all the replies. Quick update, this accident occurred on quite a step hill so it's harder for them to claim we ran into them. 

Our insurance company said  they weren't happy with the other companies contention that it was our fault and they're asking us to push for a review of the incident. This we are doing. 

We have photos of the scene, one of which shows clear Road markings that prove the driver was quite a distance from the lights.  Part of their claim is that there was no one in front of them at the lights and that we drove into them. In actual fact they were a good few cars back. We have also been contacting all businesses in the area for any cctv, nothing so far but we are hopeful that this level of activity on our part may show that we are the victims here, otherwise why would we bother to seek out witnesses. 

Its hugely upsetting, and a real downer at this time of year. Some people have no moral compass.


----------



## odyssey06 (14 Dec 2015)

That's a very good point about their distance from the lights, if they said there was no one in front of them, why would they stop so far back. If you hit them from the rear, they would if anything be shunted closer to the light ... Hopefully that will convince your insurance company to be resolute in this.


----------



## Seagull (15 Dec 2015)

I know if doesn't help you here, but there's a lot to be said for setting your phone to record before getting out the car when you've been in an accident.


----------



## horusd (15 Dec 2015)

Also not much use in these circumstances, but I read a lot of drivers in Eastern Europe have dashboard cameras to directly counter this sort of thing. Having said that, it is still very disappointing that the TP didn't just fess-up. And, also as an aside, I understood one can insist that the Gardai attend the scene regardless of whether or not there are injuries, not so?


----------



## emeralds (15 Dec 2015)

If there are no injuries you may be waiting hours for the gardai to arrive..


----------



## AlbacoreA (16 Dec 2015)

Look for CCTV from shops and other buildings. Many of which are on a 24hr or even a week cycle before they overwrite. Wait and it might be too late. 

The insurance companies should encourage people to get dash cams front and rear. Would save a lot of money and disputes.


----------



## Leo (17 Dec 2015)

horusd said:


> Also not much use in these circumstances, but I read a lot of drivers in Eastern Europe have dashboard cameras to directly counter this sort of thing.



They're getting a lot more common here too. I got one earlier in the year after a few close ones through the Walkinstown roundabout!


----------



## xoxoxo (17 Dec 2015)

Leo said:


> They're getting a lot more common here too. I got one earlier in the year after a few close ones through the Walkinstown roundabout!


 
That roundabout is an absolute nightmare!


----------



## DirectDevil (19 Jan 2016)

I had trouble recently with a blatant liar who drove through a red light and hit my car whilst we were going through on green. He argued the toss from the outset. We were blessed to have an independent witness who nailed the liar. This type of blatant denial is now more common and is a form of brass necked bullying designed to intimidate you and put you off pursuing your claim. I would not back away from this and would persist.

If you have comprehensive cover and claim under your policy you will lose NCD and have to pay an excess as well. In this scenario your insurers can fund a District Court case to recover outlay and your uninsured losses.

Otherwise, you have to threaten to issue proceedings against the other driver but be prepared to do it. His insurers will keep asking you for evidence but even they will have to make a decision - eventually.

The geography of the accident locus is against the other party. It is generally more probable to an objective observer that he rolled back.

The physical damage to the vehicle can be useful evidence. If OP whacked in to the back of the other driver I would expect to see one type of damage as distinct from what you might see from the rolling car scenario.

The legal position is that OP carries the onus of proof if making a claim and or issuing proceedings. The standard of proof required is that of the balance of probabilities i.e. something is at least 51% more likely than not. So, it will come down to a swearing match namely between drivers and passengers. BTW there is no principle whereby a greater number of witnesses on one side will cause the issue to swing one way. Much turns on the quality of evidence they give and on their credibility.

Out of curiosity is there a claim from the other driver ? It would be curious if he sustained damage and insisted on being in the right but made no claim.

PS : BTW if other driver issued proceedings against OP and lost the case and OP got an order for costs there might still be a loss of NCD unless insurers recover all their outlay.

PPS ! I have just been reminded that NCD might *not* be lost under some motor policy wordings so please check that OP.


----------

