Family & Relationships0 min ago
What happens...
3 Answers
in the event of a person running into the road and being hit by a vehicle, and then in turn being thrown into the path of and being hit by a second vehicle? How does the insurance claim process work for the second vehicle?
Thanks in advance (and hope the actual Q makes some sense...) , whisks.
Thanks in advance (and hope the actual Q makes some sense...) , whisks.
Answers
1 to 3 of 3
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by whiskeysheri. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's a very, very difficult one to give a single and simple answer too.
If we take the simplified explanation that the accident is 100% the pedestrian's fault, and that absolutely no fault could be attributed to the driver who initially strikes him, then the insurer of the second driver should (I think) be taking action solely against the pedestrian.
The same would apply if a vehicle pulled out of a side road, was hit by an oncomging vehicle, and was pushed into a third, parked, vehicle.
However, in real life, the scenario you put forward would be an absolute nightmare to deal with.
I've personally seen one where a pedestrian has had a form of epilepsy, had a fit, and in the trance he was in, has run out of his house and into the path of our policyholder. He got up, then ran into the path of a bus. He has then somehow ran to the top of a caqr park (multistory) and thrown himself off the roof.
The fit caused him to go into some sort of trance where he wasn;t in control of his actions, but as he lay unconcous for a while, there was much buttock clenching as to how much damage our initial impact had caused as he had multiple injuries, any of which could be attributed to our impact, the impact with the bus, or jumping off a building!
All sorts of factors were taken into account such as whther the house he ran out of had a front garden (so our policyholder should ahve seen him before he ran into the road), etc. very complicated
If we take the simplified explanation that the accident is 100% the pedestrian's fault, and that absolutely no fault could be attributed to the driver who initially strikes him, then the insurer of the second driver should (I think) be taking action solely against the pedestrian.
The same would apply if a vehicle pulled out of a side road, was hit by an oncomging vehicle, and was pushed into a third, parked, vehicle.
However, in real life, the scenario you put forward would be an absolute nightmare to deal with.
I've personally seen one where a pedestrian has had a form of epilepsy, had a fit, and in the trance he was in, has run out of his house and into the path of our policyholder. He got up, then ran into the path of a bus. He has then somehow ran to the top of a caqr park (multistory) and thrown himself off the roof.
The fit caused him to go into some sort of trance where he wasn;t in control of his actions, but as he lay unconcous for a while, there was much buttock clenching as to how much damage our initial impact had caused as he had multiple injuries, any of which could be attributed to our impact, the impact with the bus, or jumping off a building!
All sorts of factors were taken into account such as whther the house he ran out of had a front garden (so our policyholder should ahve seen him before he ran into the road), etc. very complicated
Wow! That is complicated, isn't it? Thanks for taking the time to answer, gouldc. The pedestrian was actually an 11 year old child and passed away in the ambulance.
Obviously it's still with the police to determine travelling speeds, etc, although both parties claim they were driving below the limit, and the child ran straight in front of the van without looking. They also have witnesses to verify this.
My boyfriend was the second driver and he is being told by his insurance company that he will have to pay a high excess, lose his NCB an not be given a courtesy car in the mean time. I just wanted to find out whether this is right.
Thanks once again. :)
Obviously it's still with the police to determine travelling speeds, etc, although both parties claim they were driving below the limit, and the child ran straight in front of the van without looking. They also have witnesses to verify this.
My boyfriend was the second driver and he is being told by his insurance company that he will have to pay a high excess, lose his NCB an not be given a courtesy car in the mean time. I just wanted to find out whether this is right.
Thanks once again. :)
It's a pain in the as dealing with these type sof claims.
Even with witnesses to say that the child ran out, the worst case scenario is that the police could still state that being in a built up area (I'm speculating here as I have no real idea about the circs of the accident), the speed of either party should ahve been lower and they should have been looking more closely at the pedestrians.
However, with a degree of common sense, the police should treat this as simply being an unfortunate accident.
In regards to your boyfriend, I can't see that he should be unfairly penalised here if witnesses can confirm that the child was thrown into his path and he had no way of avoiding the collision.
Sounds cold I know, but having seen quite a few of these, you have to try and distance yourself/
Even with witnesses to say that the child ran out, the worst case scenario is that the police could still state that being in a built up area (I'm speculating here as I have no real idea about the circs of the accident), the speed of either party should ahve been lower and they should have been looking more closely at the pedestrians.
However, with a degree of common sense, the police should treat this as simply being an unfortunate accident.
In regards to your boyfriend, I can't see that he should be unfairly penalised here if witnesses can confirm that the child was thrown into his path and he had no way of avoiding the collision.
Sounds cold I know, but having seen quite a few of these, you have to try and distance yourself/
1 to 3 of 3
