Daughter, liability in vehicle collision with neighbour?

[Louise5k]

Hi.

My daughter passed her test a few months ago. We have no concerns over driving and feel she’s a careful, very capable driver.

We live up a short, very quiet, narrow cul de sac, we’re on the right. It’s not fully wide enough for two cars to pass, but when driving you naturally stay to the left side. Only one property past us on the right which is a farm, occasional to and fro traffic from there so always have to check both ways out of our drive, typically the lane is very quiet for traffic. We turn left out of our driveway to exit to the road junction. We have quite a wide tall front hedge to the left (very typical of our local rural properties), no problems with it particularly, doesn’t overhang the road, but it means you come out cautiously and need to look round it, obviously as a rule anything coming will be to the other side albeit it’s still a narrow road.

Yesterday daughter pulls out of our driveway, looks carefully right, checked left, it appeared clear, proceeds slowly out and collided with our farmer neighbour’s car coming from the left. Unfortunately, one of the other houses on the opposite left had a visitor who had parked partly on the road so neighbour had been passing that car, and was still on the right hand side from that passing and was well tucked in to our hedge as he approached our driveway, she obviously didn’t anticipate a car there and didn’t see him until too late.

Despite the low speed there’s considerable damage to both cars, his is a newer, much more expensive car and there’s scrapes etc to wing, bumper and wheel, perhaps estimated 2ks worth. He blamed her completely, she was extremely apologetic and very upset. Her policy is up for renewal next week so the claim will have a significant effect on her premium, plus she has excess of £550. She’s a student and doesn’t have the funds to settle without claiming though we could possibly pay this for her. I imagine we’ll have to go through her insurance though but he’s getting a quote via his usual repairer approved by the NFU.

I’ve been thinking about the liability today and wonder, maybe clutching at straws, if in fact she may not fully liable?

She/we accept she possibly could’ve looked better or longer in order to see him, but, if he was in an unexpected position, tight to the hedge, approaching blindly, could he be partly to blame? We wouldn’t want to fall out with the neighbour, he thinks it’s clear cut but I really don’t. Could this be 50/50 fault situation or all things considered she just accepts full liability and takes it on the chin?

Lots of contributing factors, narrow road, other parked car, hedge etc, and if fully responsible she’ll accept it, but I want to be sure the outcome to her is fair as the financial cost is considerable as is the knock to her confidence.

Sorry for length and huge thanks for reading.

[des8]

your poor daughter!

Your daughter was pulling out of a private drive on to the public road on which your neighbour was travelling.
It was for your daughter to ensure the road was clear, as the neighbour has right of way.
You don't suggest your neighbour was driving fast or recklessly.
Because of the contributing factors you mention, it will be assumed that if the driver exiting your drive cannot see the road clearly they should obtain assistance when exiting. If not a person to help, then strategically placed mirrors.

Your daughters only possible argument would be that your neighbour was travelling too fast or without due care and attention if he came round blind and collided with her.
I don't think though that will be successful as a defence, especially as you state she collided with him

[Louise5k]

Thanks for you reply, it’s essentially what I expected to hear.

The driveway, hedge set up has been in place many years, because it’s a very quiet little residential cul de sac, as opposed to entering on to a highway with passing traffic, exiting the driveway has never previously caused any issue, you can see once you’re out a little and there’s no flow of traffic to make this dangerous to do. The main factor was that he was hugging this hedge on the wrong side making him very difficult to see, she just didn’t account for him being immediately in her path as she turned left. I wondered if this was a mitigating factor in her defence?

The rural roads around here have many concealed residential driveways, just this morning on a short drive on B roads near my house, twice people started to creep out of driveways to look to pull out. Both times I saw them, slowed and had to move out to avoid. Our neighbour didn’t see our daughter, he may have been a little distracted, he may have been driving a little too fast, I can’t say and I won’t assume either of those, I accept the bottom line is probably that the onus should be on her to see him. The neighbour didn’t make any allowances for approaching a driveway on the wrong side, i.e., reducing speed in case of exiting traffic, especially being on the wrong side and therefore in their path?I don’t know if there is any onus on him to have done so? He had no view into our driveway because he was approaching on the wrong side. Does he have no responsibility in this situation?

Now there has been an incident we both cut the hedge back and install a convex mirror for peace of mind.

[des8]

As I said, the description you gave initially was "she collided with him". From that I assume she hit the side of his car.

If however he collided with her, ie T boned her, ran into her side, there could be a chance that she could argue he was travelling too fast for the situation.
If he could not see her coming out of the drive in time to stop in the distance he could see it might be argued that he was to blame.

If it was a meeting of the front corner of each vehicle perhaps 50/50.

The best thing to do is advise her insurers of the incident (even if you pay for the damage yourselves you still have to notify the insurers at renewal, and it may still impact her premium!)
Be careful how you word the claim
Don't admit liability

[Louise5k]

Thank you. All in the wording, I’ll take that on board. I should’ve been more exact on the description of the collision. It was a meeting of the front corners, I think it was a case of they hit each other .

I appreciate you taking the time to read through and reply.

[des8]

When you submit claim, illustrate it with maps, distances and photos from both view points
Stress your daughters creep speed, and suggest other vehicle may have been going too fast for the circumstances.
No need to accuse him outright of causing accident, just deny your daughter's liability!

assume the third party is older than your daughter so can expect he will automatically blame your daughter

And possibly expect a certain cooling in your relationship with your neighbour.

[Louise5k]

Yes, much older, an immediate and automatic full blame on my daughter. Your points are helpful and well noted. Many thanks.

[Laticsforlife]

It hardly matters to her premium what she says i suspect - it HAS to be reported as an accident, regardless of fault, and her insurance (at least some Companies) will hike the premium.

You offering to pay the damage won't change this fact.

And most insurers will just hot both drivers with a knock-for-knock, essentially each pays 50% of the damage and both drivers lose some NCB, hence the insurers win in the end!

[Louise5k]

It’s now in the hands of the insurance company. I suspect you’re right in what you say, we hoping at least for an outcome that doesn’t hold her fully liable, With measurements and photos etc all in place and in context, it’s very clear she wasn’t fully at fault, if at all actually. So we’ll see what the insurers say.

[Laticsforlife]

They are lazy, and will just likely share the blame so they don't have to do much, and you both lose.

[des8]

They are lazy, and will just likely share the blame so they don't have to do much, and you both lose.

That is an unfair comment.
Insurers are not "lazy". They take a commercial decision about whether or not to accept full liability, partial liability or to dispute liability.
In cases where there is doubt they have to weigh the cost of court against the risks.
The insured buys insurance, in doing so they pass the risk on to insurers who are then subrogated all the rights of the insured.

if you don't agree with the way insurers work, you can always (except for statutory required insurance) keep the risk yourself and forgo the protection of insurance