Kurmond car accident lawyer: when fault is argued

The insurer that decides fault will not have been there. It relies on what people recorded at the time. So record what you can: the time, the weather, the road surface, the lane markings and the direction each vehicle was travelling. If a witness stopped, ask whether they'll give their name. A note written that evening is worth more than a memory months later.

• The lane each vehicle was in, and any lane change
• What the traffic lights or give-way signs showed
• Skid marks, debris and the damage to each vehicle
• Exactly what the other driver said, written down that day

Fault works more like a dial than a switch. A small share reduces some later entitlements. A share above 61% limits benefits to the first 52 weeks and rules out damages. No share at all keeps every option open. Knowing where the evidence puts you on that dial helps you decide whether a lawyer's view is worth having before the insurer settles its position.

Fault is decided on evidence, not on who sounds more certain. The usual pieces are the police event number and any police record, photos of where the cars stopped, the damage to each vehicle, dashcam footage and independent witnesses. No single piece is always decisive. Together they usually show what happened, even when the drivers tell different stories.

Some evidence only exists for a short time: skid marks, debris, temporary signs and camera footage. Other evidence can be gathered later, such as the police record and witness statements. If fault is disputed, a lawyer can ask for footage and records to be kept and, where the claim justifies it, obtain an expert opinion on how the crash happened.

• Dashcam footage, saved as the original file
• The police event number and any police record
• Independent witnesses' names and numbers
• Your own written account from the first days

A seatbelt argument is the classic example. If the insurer says your injuries were worse because you weren't belted in, it may reduce what you receive. The percentage isn't set by a formula. It's argued on the evidence, including medical opinion about how each injury happened, which makes it worth checking rather than simply accepting.

In a two-car crash, the injury claim usually goes to the CTP insurer of the car at fault, which is your own vehicle's insurer if you caused it. When fault is shared or unclear, the insurers may not agree at first. That shouldn't hold up your claim. Lodge with the insurer that fits the evidence you have, and let the fault question be worked out as the claim proceeds.

Passengers and drivers caught in the middle of a chain crash often feel stuck between insurers. Your claim generally shouldn't stall while the insurers sort out their shares. Keep a note of every call, who you spoke to and what they said. If no insurer will take responsibility, that is a good moment to ask for advice.

Being a passenger doesn't make fault irrelevant. It shifts the question to the drivers. If the driver of your car and another driver both contributed, your claim may involve both vehicles' insurers. Your own conduct can still come up in limited ways, such as not wearing a seatbelt or travelling with a driver you knew was affected by alcohol.

Passengers in a crash between two cars sometimes find that each driver blames the other and neither insurer will accept the claim at first. You don't have to take sides. Give an honest account of what you saw, lodge on time, and let the fault question be worked out between the insurers. If it stalls, that's when advice helps most.

If the other driver says you caused the crash, or the insurer won't accept that the other driver did, the evidence decides it. This is the point where an independent lawyer is often worth talking to. They can test the insurer's reasons, gather what's missing and advise whether to ask for a review. Insurers make decisions under the scheme rules, and those decisions can be challenged.