A couple of months ago my wife's car was hit from behind in stop and go traffic. My wife was driving, she and the other party stopped and exchanged details, but she didn't file a police claim or take pictures of the other car (I was not there).
It is an old 2005 sedan, worth maybe 2000 dollars. We only have liability on it.
Their insurance now claims that the other party was pushed into our car so they are not liable. My wife talked to the dude after the accident, he was sorry, and a bit bumbling, but didn't mention any other car pushing them, and nobody else stopped. It is all kind of BS.
Shouldn't they still pay us and then go after the "3rd party" that hit their policy holder?
What do we do now? Do we ask the other insurance for details on the "3rd car"? Should we sue in small claims? And would their insurance give us their home address if we ask (to file the small claims)?
I am okay taking the loss on the car and selling it for scrap, we didn't have collision coverage because it just wasn't worth the cost. But I also don't want the people who hit my wife to get away with lying.
Edit: We are in California.
Claimed denied due to unknown third party. What is next?
byu/waitingtoeat inInsurance
Posted by waitingtoeat
8 Comments
Why would they pay you for something they’re insured was not at fault for? Can you prove there was no 3rd vehicle. Not guess or say, prove? Chances are there are rear damages to that vehicle that was behind you that confirms that they were rear-ended. If that is the case, it doesn’t matter what you do you won’t get a penny from them since they are not at fault.
Doesn’t sound like there’s any identifying information for the third vehicle. Is there a possibility you have UMPD on your policy?
I use this analogy.
If you were standing in a line waiting for movie tickets or whatever, and the guy behind you just shoved you forward for no reason, and you fell into an elderly lady standing in line in front of you, old lady falls and gets injured.
Dude who pushed you runs away, never to be identified.
Would it be fair for the old lady to sue you and say recovering from the dude who ran away is your problem?
Now it def sounds like the guy isn’t being truthful about getting pushed, but that’s neither here nor there. The logic stands. If true, it wouldn’t be reasonable to hold him accountable for your cars damages.
As for suing – you certainly can try. Your main hurdle is getting proof that the dude was not struck to the rear.
To me it sounds like there was no police report made and since your wife didn’t take photos there’s really no evidence. If you’re planning to sue the driver it will be on you to prove that they weren’t rear ended by a third party.
This is a situation where you file a claim against your own policy and let them deal with it.
Every accident I’ve had, my sister and I have in fact done that even when the other party was clearly at fault and accepting liability, like the other driver stopped and gave information after hitting our legally parked cars. I pay premiums to my own policy to get my car fixed without having to deal with adverse partys and their adverse party’s insurance myself.
Did your wife talk to the other insurance company and explain there was no third vehicle, no vehicle fled from the scene, no mention of it at the scene? People come up with stories after an accident, I think most of them actually believe whatever they’ve come up with too. This is a common one, nobody wants to be at fault for an accident.
When I’ve had claims like this, I ask the front car about it, ask if there even would have been a way for another car to flee the scene – was it bumper to bumper traffic, etc. and I get pictures of the rear of my insured’s car. If there’s no damage, or if there’s minor damage in the rear but heavy in the front, I’m probably not buying that there was a third vehicle there. Depends on if the damage and statements make sense. If my insured can’t even tell me what type of vehicle it was like a car, truck, van, even a color….I will have my doubts.
It seems like it would be pretty easy for the vehicle that hit you to prove they’re not lying, all they’d have to do is show rear damage. Your carrier has tools that would help prove (although not with 100% certainty) that if they did provide photos of rear damage that it was not preexisting. I’d confirm with your adjuster they did their due diligence here and if they have, well take the L. If somehow they don’t have damage photos of claimant vehicle I’d ask them to get them and if the claimant refuses you’d probably do well in small claims.
How did their insurance contact you? Certified mail? Serve you papers? Until that happens, I would just ignore.
You can ask the insurance company to provide photos showing the damage supposedly caused by the car that rear ended their insured. The damage would have to be somewhat significant to have pushed their car into yours and it would have to look recent. Unless they coincidentally just got rear ended or backed into a car they won’t be able to show any damage to support their story.
If all else fails you can sue them in small claims court. The insurance company will send someone to represent their insured and they’ll likely try to settle with an arbitrator before even going in front of a judge. Include the repair costs and estimated rental costs based on repair days in the claim.