Car Accident Liability

[CuppaTea123]

I had a car accident on 28/10/12 which was not my fault. I was stationary at a roundabout when another car banged into the back of me. When we got out of the cars to examine the damage he apologised to me and we exchanged details.
I contacted my solicitor this morning for an update and have been advised by him that the 3rd party are not accepting liability and the defendant is claiming I "suddenly and without warning reversed into his vehicle whilst he was waiting at the roundabout". He is also claiming that there was 2 "witnesses" to the accident and, in actual fact, there was none.
I am just a bit concerned how this is going to progress and what happens if it goes to court and they cant come to a conclusion. Would I be liable for the cost of the repairs etc to my car?

[VHG]

Do you mean October 2012 (over a year ago) or October 2013 (nearly 3 months ago)?

[boxtops]

It may be your word against his, but if he says he has witness statements, you are entitled to see them.

Can you clarify please, why are you contacting your solicitor, not your insurance company? Your insurers should be handling all this, that's what you pay them for (unless I misunderstand you).

[CuppaTea123]

VHG I meant 2013...(slightly wound up)

boxtops The solicitor I'm using is through my insurance company as I pay for legal cover

[factor-fiction]

Even though you have legal cover the insurance company should still deal with any claims against you. presumably the legal cover is just so you can claim any uninsured losses

[boxtops]

Thanks for the clarification, cuppa! The legal cover also helps if the matter should go to court (if it ever did) and to handle any personal injury claims.

If liability can't be determined then it may be dealt with on a knock for knock basis - each insurance company will pay their own insured's costs in that case, but it is likely to affect your no claims bonus in the future (unless you have paid to protect it).

Don't forget that the "other party" often puts up a defence which can later fall down. Ask your solicitor to find out more about these alleged witnesses.

[CuppaTea123]

Thanks boxtops

[FredPuli43]

Common sense, which, contrary to popular belief, prevails in courts and even with lawyers and insurers, suggests the other side's version is so implausible as to be laughable. Don't know about others, though it would probably be common experience, but in 50 years of driving I have never seen anyone reverse suddenly when at a roundabout and hit a car behind but I've seen or heard of dozens of rear end shunts when the driver behind runs his vehicle into the car in front. It's the quality, not the quantity, of evidence that matters. Where were these 'witnesses' found ? Did you see them ? Worth these worthy citizens just passing by, and took it upon themselves to find the name and address of just the one driver so they could nobly explain his actions in court months later? Yeeeees, as Mr Paxman would say !

[FredPuli43]

Were for 'worth'.

[bhg481]

This is one of those situations where a dashcam would have provided evidence. I appreciate it was a rear-end shunt but the video would have shown your car stationary and then being lurched forward.