Totalled 996 advice please

rdodger · 18 May 2018

I'm afraid Insurance companies nowadays favour 50/50 as it works out cheaper for them to settle the claim. They don't have to involve investigators or solicitors. Unless it's 100% obvious to everyone with witness statements from the Queen they will just settle.

I bet the Golf driver and his passengers even get a pay out for whiplash etc. :dont know:

cheshire911 · 18 May 2018

rdodger said:
I'm afraid Insurance companies nowadays favour 50/50 as it works out cheaper for them to settle the claim. They don't have to involve investigators or solicitors. Unless it's 100% obvious to everyone with witness statements from the Queen they will just settle.

I bet the Golf driver and his passengers even get a pay out for whiplash etc. :dont know:

I think you may be right. The damage looks like bonnet, PU bumper and front wing + mechanicals. The cost of repairs would not be economically viable versus the value of the vehicle. Sad state of affairs when Insurance companies take a 50/50 approach in such circumstances.

Exelzion · 18 May 2018

This is the exact reason why I have dash cam in my 911

Alex · 18 May 2018

DO NOT GO ROUND TO HIS HOUSE!!!!!!!

Unless its to fill the **** in. I once got advised off my Insurance company to call round and get more details when I woman ran into my parked car. When she answered the door I was veey pleasant with her. She denied knowing who I was, lied about bumping into my car, even though she admitted fault at the scene, reported me to her Insurance for threatening behaviour and also threatened to call the Police. My Insurance company then called me saying alsorts about cancelling my policy, notifying the Police, etc. and denied advising me to call round. Turned out her husband was a Solicitor and they have form for making claims.

He's even got a lifetime ban from the restaurant next to his house because he tried to sue them as he could smell food cooking.

asterix_the_gaul · 18 May 2018

OK, probably not a good idea then. I have tracked down the recovery firm that picked up his car and they 'might' be willing to give a statement saying what the kid said at the time plus their opinion that it was his fault. If I can get that I might have a chance but I called the claims handling guys this morning, they were pretty much looking at 50:50, they are outsourced by the underwriter so they really don't care.

Dashcams all round..

Jpitshanger · 18 May 2018

I had something similar happen to my Alpina but fortunately had an independent witness. My insurer was happy to go go 50/50 but I wasn't - Im a lawyer and there was no way I was going to accept liability. It required signed witness statements and I had to threaten court a few times to get the right outcome. It took me about six months to sort out if I remember correctly.

If in doubt, consult a solicitor and potentially a crash specialist as the pictures may say more than you think.

I don't think the passenger in the car will generally be regarded as a reliable witness. I hope you wrote everything down as quickly as you could as you will need to refer back to it often and the story needs to remain straight.

Good luck!

Gazc2 · 18 May 2018

Dont see how they can go 50/50 blame if you were stationary

Alex · 18 May 2018

Prove he was stationary. One story vs. another.

FZP · 18 May 2018

What c****. I'd send Phil around to "Have a chat" with a couple of spy photos taken from that day. That will soon square them up. Oh and I'd take an "ethnic persuader" along to discuss the intricacies of the Fijian Ceremonial War Axe
Mines back in Aus but may bring it back on my next trip home. Lovely bit of art they are :bandit:

jonttt · 18 May 2018

50:50 or none fault is only an excess issue ie you get it back if none fault. The problem is no matter what you will go down as "being involved in an accident".

It happened to SWMBO last year, car parked on road outside shops, she comes out to a note apologising for hitting her car, ring x number. she rings to say don't worry not much damage, literally a scratch and we could not be bothered with the hassle, the old guy insisted it go through Insurance so we had it "repaired" at the recommended repairer. Refused a hire car 3 times as we did not need one and did not see the need to bump up the cost :roll: .... thbought nothing more of it ...... until Insurance renewal time....... premium went up significantly...... so I phone around, all higher ...... turns out the MID records the claim against SWMBO even though it was none fault at £1,500 claim value (presumably her car, his car and his hire car :roll: ). I ask how that can be when she was not even in the car "it just the way it is as she was involved in a a claim"...... absolute joke..... it would have cost me £80 for a smart repair and instead has cost her £200 more Insurance premium for 5 years that it stays on file !!!!!!!

I feel for the OP but the fact is it will cost him whether its 50:50 or none fault as he has been "involved" in an accident :frustrated:

jotaking · 18 May 2018

IMHO the critical evidence for this one is the gouge in the verge.

If this is inline and at the same point as the collision with your car then he could say that he moved over to avoid you and ran out of room.

That said, if the gouge is well before the impact with your car; then I think you have a very good argument to say that the initial collision with the verge was the point at which HE lost control and that caused his vehicle to rebound across the road to hit you. Your incident is secondary to the initial impact.

Also...

An image showing the final positions of both vehicles with your car on the correct side of the road would help.

And

The fact that there are no skid marks from your car?? I assume that he left skids on the road as well as his pants!

That said...

My experience, and as others have said. Most insurers just roll over on a 50:50.

Hope it works out for you!

911munKy · 18 May 2018

Going off on a bit of a tangent...

I know your car is an Insurance right off but it may be worth buying it back on the cheap and repairing it yourself. Parts from breakers yards and eBay and it could be back on the road for much less money than official repairs.

It may be Cat C/D but just enjoy thrashing it around and don't worry about the odd scrape. Good excuse to give it a wild wrap as the resale value has dropped but so has its cost to you.

cheshire911 · 18 May 2018

911munKy said:
Going off on a bit of a tangent...

I know your car is an Insurance right off but it may be worth buying it back on the cheap and repairing it yourself. Parts from breakers yards and eBay and it could be back on the road for much less money than official repairs.

It may be Cat C/D but just enjoy thrashing it around and don't worry about the odd scrape. Good excuse to give it a wild wrap as the resale value has dropped but so has its cost to you.

Not sure how that works. Once a high street/comparison site Insurance firm pays out settlement in a total loss, the scrap car becomes theirs to dispose off as they see fit - usually to bodyshops who bid for the carcass. Specialist insurers on the other hand such as Locktons allow you to keep the carcass with a deduction from the total loss settlement. If the OP is with such a firm, then this is a possibility. Not sure how it works with other insurers.

Captain Lockheed · 18 May 2018

If Golf boy is 18, chances are be will have one of those monitor/tracker things.
Get your Insurance to request the log for the time of the collision from his Insurance.
If they refuse, instruct solicitor.

Alex · 18 May 2018

I thought ALL Insurance companies gave you the buy back option if it's written off :dont know:

Totalled 996 advice please

Spa-Francorchamps

Portimao

Trainee

Nordschleife

Barcelona

New member

Magny-Cours

Nordschleife

Zandvoort

Attachments

Monaco

Hockenheim

Imola

Portimao

Montreal

Nordschleife

Similar threads

Porsche Model Range

Porsche 911

Porsche Hypercars

Other Current Porsche Model

Porsche Legacy Models

Forum statistics