Circumstantial Evidence

[potiche]

Woman drifted lane and hit drivers side of my daughter's car on the back door. They were at a roundabout & all evidence points to the woman being at fault.....where the damage is, her accident statement & her behaviour. She is trying to place blame on my daughter and because there were no witnesses, CIS have settled 50/50.
It wouldn't take CSI to look at the road & understand that what the woman is claiming is physically impossible (Dixon of Dock Green could do that). I have sent in google pics of road & it's even clear to see on that.
Why is CIS not able to investigate i.e. get an independent investigator to visit....their report to the woman's insurer would be able to confirm that she is lying.
What can I expect from my policy? CIS say if it goes to court the Judge will rule 50/50 because of no witness. With such strong evidence this seems the wrong attitude. My daughter's premium will go up & she'll lose £300 excess.
Will appreciate any help thnx

[factor-fiction]

Insurers have a duty to look after the overall pot of policyholder funds and would not want to spend money on expensive investigations and court costs when the prospects of success are deemed to be small. I'm not sure what an independent investigator could prove but if you are confident you could appoint one

[Buenchico]

Civil law matters are determined on 'the balance of probabilities'. It's actually far more likely that a 'leading' driver will cause an accident by changing lanes without looking (because they omit to check their mirrors) than a 'trailing' one will do so (because they can see the other car ahead of them anyway). So the initial view of the court might well be that your daughter was probably more likely to be to blame. In the absence of independent witnesses, '50/50' is probably a good outcome for her, so it might be unwise (and potentially expensive) to seek to challenge it.

[potiche]

Yes Chico,I questioned that myself. My daughter had been travelling in the inside lane which split into 2 lanes at the roundabout. My daughter was leading at that point because she knew what she needed to do & she was approaching confidently ( now in the middle lane). The third party was thrown by the new lane & began drifting to the middle because she wanted to carry over the roundabout at 12o'clock . She did not indicate to change lanes & cross over the road markings. This new lane emerges so close to entering the roundabout making her version of events ...that she was in the middle lane & my daughter drove into her....totally implausible. She had been the leading driver & she dithered because she thought she was in the wrong lane &moved sideways whilst my daughter (who had been trailing, in the inside lane) was driving confidently & totally in her lane (the new middle one).
Thanks, it's useful to be able to see it all in these terms. Seriously, pics of the site & her erroneous statement prove the case in our favour, has CIS been weak in failing to get this info across?
Going to court would be risky because this woman is a blatant liar & could say whatever she chooses under pressure.

[factor-fiction]

I don't think the courts would take into account allegations such as "the woman is a blatant liar"- they will deal with the facts and the 'balance of probabilities' as Buenchico says. I may be that the other party feels exactly the same about your daughter's statement. It may be neither is telling blatant lies- these situations on roundabouts are difficult to deconstruct and it is common in these situations for both parties to be convinced they were in the right.
She can always ask the insurer to reconsider but I think they feel that they are making the right decision bearing in mind their vast experience in such cases.
If they say no she can always pursue a claim independently if you can find a solicitor. It may be worth contacting one for an initial chat to see if they'd take it on.

[potiche]

Thanks, I know know my derogatory comment has nothing to do with the facts. Believe me, the circumstantial evidence is so obvious but the syrtem doesn't allow the insurance company to visit the site & see the facts. That is what is so frustrating. My daughter's account is physically possible whilst the account by the third party is physically impossible not just improbable.
If I do use a solicitor,does my family legal protection on household insurance cover that cost?

[boxtops]

Your daughter should have legal cover on her motor policy, potiche.

[potiche]

Yes but they have decided not to take it further so I would be taking an action without involvement of insurance co. That way I could present the evidence rather than lumping it in a category marked 'no witnesses so settle 50/50@