This means an agreement between motor insurers that their “outlay” – in other words what they pay for their policyholders’ repairs or total loss value, will be excluded from the amount claimed in any civil Court proceedings between the drivers.
The intention is primarily to ensure that the claim remains wherever possible within the Small Claims Track thus reducing Court Fees and the likelihood of legal fees becoming payable to the successful driver’s solicitors.
WHAT DOES MEAN?
Absolutely nothing!
People still talk about settling cases on a knock-for-knock basis even though the concept has not been used for over twenty years and never meant what everythone thought it meant!
WHAT KNOCK-FOR-KNOCK ACTUALLY MEANT
Back in the ’80s , motor insurers used this bizarre idea which meant that if, for example, the policyholder of Insurer A rear-ended the policyholder of Insurer B, the “knock” would be chalked up in favour of Insurer B then cancelled out when one of Insurer B’s policyholders was at-fault in an accident with the policyholder of Insurer A.
The problem was that the value of the claims that knocked in each other out could vary somewhat – a dent in the bumper of a Mini cost less than a written-off Bentley even in those days!
To a large extent, the concent was replaced by the insurers Memorandum of Understanding (or MOU)
WHAT EVERYONE THOUGHT IT MEANT
Most people imagined that this was the correct expression when both parties were equally to blame but this should more correctly be described as a 50/50 settlement. Surprisingly the expression has survived many decades of misuse!
If you would like to ask a question about 50/50 Settlements or need legal representation just go to our On-line Enquiry Form.
Whether you are client or simply need advice about the aftermath of a road accident in the UK, here’s the place to find the answer.
Car Accident Advice is both a website and blogsite.
If you are not yet a client of Kaslers RTA but would like initial free advice on any matter relating to a road traffic accident in the UK, whether relating to an injury or vehicle damage, click here for our New Enquiry Form
If you are an existing client of Kaslers RTA , go to the Client Areasection to find numerous documents not available to general browsers. You will have been provided with a password for these and as most of our correspondence with clients is by e-mail, you will find hyperlinks in out letters directly into the relevant section of this site.
We also now have a selection of on-line forms (also found in the Client Area) to simplify your providing us with instructions.
For the commercial motorist, go to our Fleet Section.
Other than documents to which existing clients are specifically directed, this blog is intended to provide information not legal advice – please see the disclaimer page. No two road accidents are identical and no reliance should be placed on comments in these pages. We are always happy to assist clients wherever possible.
Follow us on Twitter as @CarAccidentAid
Kaslers Solicitors LLP
Kaslers Solicitors LLP is a limited liability partnership (England, LLP No. OC310653) and has its registered office at Suite 3, 10 Churchill Square, Kings Hill, West Malling, Kent ME19 4YU and is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (reg. no.408936). The LLP Members are Michael Breeze (SRA reg. no. 110184) and Simon McCree Scott (SRA reg. no. 298202)
Tel: +44 (0) 845 270 2511 Fax: +44 (0) 845 270 2513
DX 92863 West Malling
Effectively anyone who saw the accident or was involved can give witness evidence.
Consequently, if you are the driver but not the owner of the vehicle damaged in an accident you will be the Claimant’s (or Defendant’s) main witness.
Independent Witnesses
The best witness is someone completely independent of either driver and preferably not a passenger in any of the vehicle involved. However, a fare paying passenger in a taxi or bus may be regarded as independent if he or she did not know the driver before the journey was commenced.
Other motorists whose vehicle were not involved are good independent witnesses if they actually saw the accident rather than just the aftermath of it.
Where there has been a three (or more) car shunt – see Rear End Shunts – the driver of Car One may eitness how many impacts were felt.
Non-independent witnesses
Passengers in a vehicle can give evidence at trial as they are “competent and compellable” but their evidence will carry less weight than a witness who is fully independent.
If however, the passenger is injured and liability is disputed, then the driver of their vehicle is potentially a party in any action they may bring. Consequently, they cannot give witness evidence until their claim has been settled or an agreement reached as who pays their claim (nor can they be represented by the same solicitor as the driver).
Witnesses who did not actually see the accident
Sometimes, a witnesses may arrive upon the scene seconds after the accident or have heard the impact rather than seen it or can comment on the reckless driving or speed of the negligent driver immediately before the accident took place.
Their evidence may be of more limited value but nevertheless they can give evidence if desired.
Whose witness?
Whilst a witness may be called by any driver involved, “there is no property in a witness” which means that he or she can contacted and compelled to give evidence by either party – and this can apply to passengers in the opponent’s vehicle.
Police reports
In more serious accidents, the Police may have taken statements from witnesses and there may be statements from the officers attending. However, one should be wary of reying on any comments attributed in the police report to either party or any independent witness unless part of a Witness Statement actually signed by that person.
Expert witnesses
An expert witness is a person who did not witness the accident but has been asked in a professional capacity to give evidence.
Thus an independent GP or consultant may be the medical expert or a consulting engineer may be called upon to provide evidence of the value of the vehicle.
Whilst they may have been instructed by one of the parties, they owe a duty to the Court not to the person responsible for paying their fees.
If you are not yet a client of Kaslers RTA department but would like initial free advice on any matter relating to a road traffic accident in the UK, whether relating to an injury or vehicle damage, click here for our New Enquiry Form
Many road traffic accidents are settled on the basis that both drivers are partially to blame and whilst there are no absolute rules, the starting point in such cases is often a 50/50 settlement, unless there is witness or other evidence available to alter the percentages.
A 50/50 settlement means that each driver will recover 50% of his financial loss (& compensation if injured) and his insurers will pay 50% of the opponent’s losses. However any percentage split is possible and 72/25 or 66.6/33.3 arrangements in favour of one the drivers are quite common.
50/50 settlement are often misdescribed a Knock-For-Knock agreements.
Injured passengers are unaffected by such splits but will recover 100% of their losses from a combination of the two insurers but must be separately represented from any solicitors acting for the driver.
A split of this nature falls under the concept of Contributory Negligence- which occurs in any accident, where the Claimant is partially to blame.
Drivers often feel bullied into accepting this type of arrangement – sometimes they should be resisting the pressure but frequently they may have to accept the inevitable.
Roundabouts
As both vehicles are travelling in the same direction and inevitably will be changing lanes, a 50/50 split is very common without independent witness evidence, some which is quite as one cannot stop on a roundabout to exchange names and addresses and generally there are no pedestrians.
Lane changing accidents
One motorways and dual carriageways, it is often hard to prove which driver has changed lanes into the path of the other.
Head On Collisions
Whilst almost certainly one of the drivers is not at fault, it can be very hard to prove without witnesses of photos of any skid marks or the position of the vehicles after the impact.
Traffic light accidents
If there is no local authority evidence or CCTV footage to assist, it can be hard to prove which driver went through the red light. If the matter goes to court, a split settlement is not really possible as the judge would have to find wholly in favour of our driver or worse still make no order on the basis that neither driver has proved that the other one was to blame.
Car parks
Normal driving rules do not apply in car parks. First most accidents occur when one or both of the vehicles are reversing and courts will expect that drivers who proceeding in a parking lane should be expecting other vehicles to reverse out of a parking space.
Whilst there may be a 50/50 presumption, all too often insurers and legal expenses insurance claims handlers will not look further than that presumption – it means the claim can be disposed of quickly and particularly where one company insures both parties, there seems to be a recommendation of a split settlement where otherwise there might not be.
How can the odds be changed in your favour?
Photographs - of the location, skid marks, vehicle damage etc. are all useful even if there are no photos taken at the time.
Witnesses - even if they are passengers all add weight
CCTV footage – particularly helpful in car parks
Police prosecution – against the other driver(!)
It should always be remembered that if the matter gets to a court hearing, it is up to each driver to prove his claim on the balance of probabilities, thus often very hard for the Judge to prefer the evidence of one driver over the other.
If you would like to ask a question about Split Settlements or need legal representation just go to our On-line Enquiry Form.
Car Accident Radio Podcasts
