Hi everyone,
I unfortunately involved in a car accident which I believed I was not at fault. However, the other party denied liabilities as well as her insurer. I have only third party insurance. Unfortunately, there was no witness on my side or the other party's side. I am seeking reputable road accident lawyer to bring the matter to court in Victoria. Could you please recommend a reputable lawyer in this field?
Thanks in advance!
I was in the same situation few years back — I only had 3rd party and the other party is comprehensive but denied his fault, his insurer did the same thing. You are not out of luck. My memory is not serving me well at the moment — and you can call up Vic Legal Aid to confirm — but basically you need to:
It was unfortunately a very long and stressful process but I got my payment at the end and hope you'll have the same result. Happy to answer any more questions you may have.
Edit: get quotes.
Keep in mind legally you have to address the person and not their insurer, unless the insurer has already contacted you. Since you can only request money from the individual and it is up-to them how they want to pay it. Directly to you or ask the insurance to settle it.
Good advice regardless, I will only add to this that be firm with the insurer and don't settle on the first price they give you. There is always room for negotiation.
well what happen, OzB lawyers are always here to help you :)
And tell the person that they're at fault no matter which side they're on lol
I have only third party insurance.
Then claim on it.
If your car wasn't worth enough to spend hundreds of dollars to purchase Comprehensive insurance, it's probably not worth thousands of dollars to spend on legal costs. With no guarantee of success.
OP may not have third party property damage insurance. could just be the compulsory third party insurance.
OP location is in Victoria, CTP is known as TAC charge and is just part of registration renewal, and not purchased separately. Hopefully this avoids the confusion of these terms.
Fingers crossed that OP does have third party property damage insurance.
I've never had a comprehensive insurance quote less than $1500. I could buy my own car again in 6 years for that money, third party is about 1/3 the cost. Not saying you don't have a point, but comprehensive is bloody expensive, and certainly something I know I can't afford.
That under 25 feeling
I thought this until a relative borrowed my cheap car and wrote it off in a rear ender (their fault). The driver in front was then chasing her personally for over $10,000.
I have comprehensive now. Not to replace my car; to replace someone else's.
then it's third party property damage (TPPD) insurance you want, comprehensive means it covers your own car as well.
If insuring your $9K car is costing $1,500, something is not right. The premium should be well under $1K.
I don't know your circumstances or driving history, but I insured a Mazda today worth a little more than that and the premium was around $750.
age
Something could be right, if you take the following into consideration…
His age
His location
If he's on P plates or under 25
Colour of car (premium for white cars cost less, can vary thousands of dollars depending on colour)
Where he parks his car
How many km's he drives per year
If he's made any claims in the past (premium goes up)
@koalafied: True, hence why I said "I don't know your circumstances" but;
His age - True but generally affects excess level more than premium.
His location - True but not by a large degree.
If he's on P plates or under 25 - See first point. P plates are not taken into consideration except for excess though.
Colour of car (premium for white cars cost less, can vary thousands of dollars depending on colour) - Incorrect. If this is asked of your insurer, you're probably with someone like Youi and they are one of the worst insurers out there. Very bad at paying claims and they're in trouble right now for taking money from people without authorisation. No reputable insures take colour as a rating factor.
Where he parks his car - True but not by a large degree.
How many km's he drives per year - Shouldn't be a factor for a cheap car but limited km policies are cheaper.
If he's made any claims in the past (premium goes up) - True.
Bottom line, if he's had no claims for 3 years, no criminal convictions and is 25 or over, he'd easily get comprehensive cover for under $1K. I would go so far as to say that even if he's under 25, it'd likely be at the $1K mark with a higher excess.
Don't forget you can take a higher excess if necessary (say, $800 or $1K) and bring down the premium.
There's new disruptor brands in the market right now which is pushing premiums down across the board too.
If you can't afford comprehensive insurance, you definitely can't afford a lawyer to represent you at Court. At best get some initial advice from them (or Legal Aid if available) and take it from there yourself.
This
You're going to need to provide all the details of the accident to us to prove how you're not at fault here as per all other traffic infringement posts. Please, go on..
Can you give us a few more details about the accident and what happened? Were you physically hurt?
https://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/find-legal-answers/traffic-o…
https://www.shine.com.au/service/motor-vehicle-accidents/
https://www.slatergordon.com.au/compensation-law/motor-vehic…
https://www.mauriceblackburn.com.au/rest/road-accident-injur…
wouldnt use slater & gordon right now….
http://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/hedge-funds-to-take-c…
I used to work at MB I would not even bother the fee will kill you mate. Just to walk in and have your first conversion will cost you 400+++ and hour.
Ps this would be a junior lawyer to
Wow.. that expensive
Sorry, but I'm spoken for.
I shall book mark this for those starting threads like 'Do I really need comprehensive insurance'?
or "should I buy a dash cam" ;)
Time for another deal on A119 ? I want one too…..
+1 I'm waiting to buy a 2nd one (for the rear window) and 2 for my brother (random surprise present)
Edit: Can someone who talks with the Chinese site reps bug for a deal, maybe link to this thread?
I have full comprehensive insurance on a car worth about 5k.
It's stories like these that remind me why. You aren't saving any money getting 3rd party if the insurance isn't there to help you when you need it
For under 25, comprehensive isn't worth it for a car worth not much. A dashcam would be better investment if you weren't at fault
I think the struggle is coming up with a "reputable lawyer in this field."
Reputable, yes. Ethical, no.
all lawyers in this field are ambulance chasers
No we're not.
Unfortunately, there was no witness on my side or the other party's side
Then whats your angle? The other parties insurance company has already ruled against you.
You might be best to take the money you had been going to spend on fighting this and just buy a new (to you) car, and FULL COMP insurance.
Your car is not worth enough to comprehensively insure and you want to take the risk of being stuck with lots of legal costs for a case you may not win? That is a big gamble.
I hear racv, aami, qbe are good lawyers before you have an accident
qbe is the worst, I had to deal with them with my previous insurer (racv) and it was a headache. They are painfully slow with communication, just check their reviews and see for yourself https://www.productreview.com.au/p/qbe-car-insurance.html
Thanks for all the replies.
I have some photos after the accident happened and also the situation of the accident. It happened on heatherton road, springvale, Victoria. There are 2 lanes to turn right to springvale road. I was on the right lane to turn right to springvale road. The other driver was on middle lane and wanted to get to my lane to turn right to the waltzing matilda motel. She didn't see me coming on her blind spot so she hit me on the side. She claimed she was already on my lane and I illegally overtaking her.There was no one hurt. I called police but they refuse to come as no serious matter to attend.
Are the slater&gordon, shine… will represent me on the court for this matter? I think they only fight for injury claim
She has to give way to her right.
Is this to do with getting your car repaired? Or more to do with defending against her insurer's lawyers?
This is an interesting one as I only have TPP on my junker $3k car. If if got damaged enough, I'd just see it as time to upgrade, but if I was not at fault and the other party claimed I was, would my TPP defend me still?
Anyway, looking at the interesction on Google Maps, there looks like there is still a decent distance to the entry of Waltzing Matilda once you've turned. Were you well and truly on Springvale Rd when she hit? Or did she start changing lanes in the intersection? Does the car wash there have any CCTV (not sure if it would be on a good enough angle to help)?
If I was not at fault and the other party claimed I was, would my TPP defend me still?
Normally no.
Hmm… Well that really changes my opinion on TPP. I had never even thought of that scenario.
Not correct.
For TPP insurnace, if other party claims you are at fault your insurer will defend you if only to avoid paying the claim.
Hence OP should discuss this with his insurer first and pass on the other party's claim
Yes i fight to get my car repaired. I got a quote nearly $10k for repair. From my view, it is likely they want to dodge the bill as their car worth max $3k. The driver is 81 year old.
The accident happened on Heatherton rd facing up McDonald direction . I asked the car wash for footage but their cameras can't reach that far.
The driver being 81 years old might make a lawyer more interested.
OP. So whats your car worth realistically?
She hit you…
Letter of demand telling your versions of events to her demanding she pays.
Send it by registered post.
I sent my version of events. They viewed it and denied liabilities
Sent by a lawyer…
Pass the matter onto your insurance company as it becomes a TPP claim.
If someone is entering your lane you must give way to avoid contact.
If they legitimatly merged into you without warning they are at fault.
If they were merging into your lane and you failed to give way or speed up you are at fault.
They will be able to tell from the damage area if it is on the side or rear of your car you have a claim, however if the contact was toward the front of your vehicle I don't think you have much to stand on.
Given no witnesses it's your word against theirs. You haven't mentioned how sever the damage is, sounds like <$1000 I would be inclined to pay it and move on. Legal fees may be more.
Not sure why this was downvoted, completely agree.
If there was any opportunity for you to slow down/brake or anything else and you held your ground being stubborn then there's partial liability on your end. Without knowing the details of the crash it's hard to tell what happened.
This is correct. Best scenario you can expect here is an "each bear own costs". That's where you pay for your damages (and more importantly, legal fees) and they pay for theirs.
This is an expensive lesson to learn but I can tell you that you won't get anywhere pursuing it without footage or an independent witness.
Get comprehensive insurance next time to save you these headaches and be thankful it wasn't a Ferrari that you collided with.
Looking at the intersection, she would have crossed the white straight line. Could use that as defence
So what Geryatric is saying is that if a driver wants to change lanes they do not have to look… just indicate and move over.
If the driver that is already in that lane does not give way then they are liable?
That sounds very odd…
Are you talking about when 2 lanes merge into one? If so than that's right. But if you're just driving along the road and someone in the next lane wants to change into your lane then they must only do so when it's safe to do so, which means not cutting a car off in the next lane.
Russell Kennedy & Ligeti law firms
Hi, citizens advice give free help on the matter, give them a call, we all love a freebie.
Thanks i will give them a call
I work with Maurice Blackburn Lawyers & know few lawyers here in Melbourne. I can refer you to one of them. PM me if you are interested.
pmed. please check
I used to work there for years don’t waste ur money mate. They would only get involved if someone was injuried aka they can make more $$$$$
Better call Saul
:D definitely win with Saul
I am seeking reputable road accident lawyer to bring the matter to court in Victoria.
A run of the mill may charge ~$400 p/hr + gst. Is your vehicle worth it?
Thanks for the link
You have enough for a lawyer but not enough for their excess?
unfortunately, I have 3rd party insurance only as I stated above
3rd Party WHAT insurance? I can't believe no one is pressing you on this. It sounds like you only have mandated 3rd party injury coverage. If you had actual 3rd party insurance (inc property) you would be covered.
The point is I don't want to use my money to fix my car and other car while the fault was not mine. Hope you understand
Does the other party insurer demand the policy excess amount? or the entire amount of the repair? (e.g. $500 excess vs $3500 actual repair costs)
I would think they'd love the opportunity to recover all their money.
They have not demanded any thing yet. I am pushing them to accept liabilities. They just denied it and accused me illegal overtaking their client
Were you illegally overtaking them? (note: if you were exceeding the speed limit during your overtake; you have overtaken them illegally)
Did you have right of way???
@eggmaster: I didn't overtaking her illegally. It was very close to the intersection and the light was red. There is no point to speed. I was travelling up the right lane and she was on middle lane. I think I was on her blind spot that is why she didn't see me coming
Did you have right of way???
There is no such thing as right of way when it comes to road traffic in Australia.
In the right lane; did she merge in to your lane? (Were you in the opposing lane?).
I still don't understand.
As she told me and her insurer she intended to turn right to Waltzing Matilda Motel. She was on middle lane initially. I think she was finding the way to turn to the motel from middle lane as there was a gap on right lane and she didn't see me coming up
As she told me and her insurer she intended to turn right to Waltzing Matilda Motel. She was on middle lane initially. I think she was finding the way to turn to the motel from middle lane as there was a gap on right lane and she didn't see me coming up
something doesn't add up here.
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/5119518/redir
The accident happened on Heatherton rd facing up McDonald direction . I asked the car wash for footage but their cameras can't reach that far.
you state that the collision happened at the intersection heatherton rd and springvale rd. that intersection is ~160m from the right turn to waltzing matilda motel.
why would the driver of the other vehicle look to turn right into altzing matilda motel from heatherton rd?
Please view the photos for more info
do you mean these images?
https://imgur.com/a/CB44z
https://i.imgur.com/G7c7jOJ.jpg
the images gives no indication to where the collision happened. are you saying that the collision happened somewhere else?
@skeleton_king: Looking at the google map image you provided it looks like you have her turning into the right hand turn lane into springvale rd not the entrance for the hotel. If she was turning into the hotel her car would be further back not where you have it.
@smokie1: There are 3 entrance to the motel and that what she said to everyone that she wanted to go to the motel. Accident happened around 6.30pm on Friday night. It is crazy to cross the road like she said
On the GoogleMaps image, you showed that the incident occurred when the other driver moved into the right-hand lane and you were in their blindspot.
For you to be in the right-hand lane, you must have been traveling over the traffic island. I should that correct?
This would mean that you were traveling behind the other driver, attempted to overtake using the traffic island, then you were involved in an accident when they merged into the right-hand lane.
It looks like the impact occurred towards the front of your vehicle. Were you still on the traffic island? Do you recall what speed you were traveling at?
Here is the google map of the accident. My car is red.
And also some photos of the cars. My car is the black SUV
I'm sorry to say, if you're the red box, then you're either already ahead of the other car so they should have seen you, if not, then you indeed did overtake illegally, by driving over the solid lined traffic island.
(Redacted)
Rule 138 of the Victorian road rules states:
If a painted island has:
- one line (single line) painted around it, you can drive on the island for up to 50 metres to enter or leave the road or to enter a turning lane. But you must give way to any vehicle entering the turning lane next to it
- two lines (double lines) painted around it, you cannot drive on the island
- a continuous line between you and a line of traffic travelling in the same direction as you (eg a freeway on-ramp), you cannot drive on the island
I am no lawyer but I would consider fighting it. If you satisfied rule 138(1), you cannot possibly give way to a car that's in your blind spot. Hopefully if you lawyer up you can get that old bird's licence revoked on medical grounds too, for it is most unsafe for someone who cannot see a large moving object near her front window whilst attempting a manoeuvre. Photos of the damage on both cars strongly supports your statement that she drove into you.
Thanks for the comments. Hence I would like to seek experienced lawyer in the field to help me with this case
I would write a strongly worded letter of demand addressed to the old bird (delivered via registered post) detailing what happened and include references to relevant bits of legislation. You might find that the insurers will settle because it looks like a pretty clear case that she's at fault, short of breath testing both parties (too late now) or examining tyre marks on the road to determine if speeding was a factor. Perhaps you can pop down to your local legal aid centre for the paralegals to look over your letter to see if your interpretation of the law checks out, and if you included the essential bits in your letter.
You can take it further and suggest the other driver is not fit to drive given her inability to see. Attacking the person is fine when writing letters of demand, so long as it's factual and can poke holes in their defence.
Insurance companies are scum, my mother got into an accident a few years ago and the NRMA immediately said 50/50 even though we had comprehensive car insurance, dash cam footage and the other party clearly broke road rules.
Why is an 81 year old lady not a better driver than the OP who judging from their very poor english is likely to have a lot less driving experience or knowledge of the road rules? The lady is also likely to be a local and to have made that turn hundreds of times. Why do you think it's acceptable to discriminate against someone because of their age?
Good work Niggard. Props to you on how far you went to show details…
This is not about rules as such. She claims you broke the rules. You claim she broke the rules. Both parties claim to be factual. Its a battle of facts/claims. And there are no witnesses. I wouldnt bank on a win. Its your word against hers.
As I have said already just put her claim to your insurer. You are covered if you have TPP.
If your insurer is successful in defending the claim then you can go forth and claim against her for damage to your car.
But dont be surprised if insurers agree that you are both at fault.
Thats a very common game they play to avoid paying claims or at least have you pay the excess to minmise thier costs.
That's gonna make it fun…