# Wing-mirror incident



## alert (16 Jul 2007)

Hi all,

About a month ago my wife was involved in an accident with another car, their wingmirrors clipped whilst passing eachother on very narrow urban road. My wfe was driving my car and hence was only covered third-party, this car's mirror just flipped back, the other party's car, a Ka, was not so lucky, it shattered. Unfortunately, my wife didn't realise this and carried on assuming all modern wing-mirrors are flexible. The other party ran after her and explained the situation so they called the Gardai as my wife was unwilling to accept 100% responsibility.

In the meantime, we've had a visit from the insurance accessor, both parties are insured by Axa, he has advised us to settle with the other party in order to avoid an insurance premium hike. However, we do not believe that this is just as it was too bad that the other party's mirror was not flexible and really not our fault as both cars were moving at the time.

Ours is a left hand drive and the other party believes that this, coupled by the fact that my wife "left the scene of the crime" gives them the right to declare that my wife is 100% at fault. If both cars had inflexible wing-mirrors then I think it would be fair that this was a 50/50 situation, however we seem to being punished as only ours was undamaged.

I would appreciate other people's angle on the above situation as I feel that I'm too close to see it clearly.

ALERT.


----------



## briancbyrne (16 Jul 2007)

Hey there - looking at the bigger picture, any damages claim regardless of the amount will result in a premium hike - therefore it does not matter if you claim for 1/2 of the costs - it will still have the same result.

I see this quite often through my work and I would advise you to settle privately with the 3rd party, making sure to get a short signed statement saying that this is the complete and final payment in relation to the incident.


----------



## ailbhe (17 Jul 2007)

Usually if there is an incident where cars meet on a narrow road and collide it will go 50/50. You would claim from the third party for damage to your car and they would pay for damage to yours. The fact that you8r car was not damaged does not matter. You hit them, you pay for their damage. They hit you, they pay for your damage. That's usually the way it works.


----------



## alert (17 Jul 2007)

Hi Ailbhe,

I'm afraid that I can't agree with your arguement, like I said before I'm probably too close but here's what I think.

Why does it not matter that our car was undamaged? Why, if our car is undamaged should that mean that we have to pay all of the other party's costs? Surely, in this scenario the fairest thing is to offer half of the costs of the other party's repair bill?

ALERT.


----------



## ailbhe (17 Jul 2007)

The reason for that Alert is that you cannot sue yourself. The incident is minor and small to repair so maybe the TP should be reasonable and pay half and not go through the insurance. But you cannot claim from your own insurance for damage effectively caused by someone else. You can only claim for own damage and this isn't really own damage as it was caused by your wifes car. You may not agree with it but this is how insurance companies work. The fact that you are both through the same company means they will probably just pay the third party. They won't fight it out for you as it would cost more than the claim. So, what I and others have been advising you, is that while it might choke you to do so you should just pay the small amount and have done with it or the insurance company will pay it and you will lose your bonus. It doesn't look good for your wife that she left the scene regardless of whether she thought the other car was damaged or not. 
So just think is it really worth the hassle for the same outcome or should you just cut your losses.


----------

