Insurance Siding with Lying Driver

[mattsautoquest]

What is the name of your state (CA).

Here is the situation.
It was just after dusk, twilight.
I was making a legal U-turn. Its a 4 lane road, 2 lanes going each direction, with a wide grass medium. So my u-turn was from a left hand turn lane into the inside lane going the opposite direction. The point is there was lots of room.
I waited 12-to-15 seconds until all oncoming traffic passed, then proceeded when no more headlights were visible. About 85% through my U-turn, when I heard tires screeching, I looked around and didn't see anything, then a car's driver side mirror scratched up from passengers side tail-light the length of my truck and her outside left bumper hit and bounced off my passenger side door. When we both stopped the car that hit me was next my car, but it had its headlights off.

I called the police because the person that hit me would not willingly provide their insurance information and had a thick accent, when the police arrived she provided her contact and insurance information but no report was done. The other driver told me they did not have full insurance coverage and everything had to be my fault as her husband coached her through the phone. The other driver kept saying, you must confess, you must confess. I said I couldn't see you because your headlights were off and I took photos of her car with his light off, and provided them to my insurance company.

Nobody was hurt and both cars were drivable. I reported this to my insurance company. 4 days later I followed up with my insurance company and they said the other driver didn't report the accident to their insurance, yet. A week later I was called by my insurance investigator and told my story. The investigator told me they will be contacting the other driver then determining their conclusion. 10 days later I get a letter in the mail from my insurance company stating they have completed their investigation and determined that I'm principally at fault for the accident for not maintaining a proper lookout when making a u-turn.

I called my insurance and said, you've got to be kidding, I couldn't see her, she had her headlights off.
They ask if I had a photo of her car before she hit me with its lights off. I replied, if I could have taken a photo of her car before she hit me with her lights off, I wouldn't have proceeded with my u-turn. Also, how could I possible take a photo of a car I couldn't see in the dark?

Obviously I don't feel good investigation was done. Nobody measured the other drivers skid marks, nobody questioned my passenger and if she was in the other lane and paying attention why didn't she just stay in her lane or move into the bike lane. I think she wasn't paying attention, slammed on her breaks lost control and hit me.
Luckily no one was injured. I don't feel I'm 100% at fault.

My questions are:
What actions can I take to have this investigated more.
I don't want my insurance rates to increase because i got hit by a car I couldn't see because it had its lights off.
Any assistance would be appreciated. I cannot believe she flat out lied and is getting away this it.
I'm starting to think my insurance company is just keeping my monthly dues and not representing me when I need them the most.

Thank you,

 

[Cali408nia]

I missed the part where the other driver actually lied. Or where you have proof that they lied.

The other driver may not have lied and the insurance company may have determined that since you "proceeded when there were no more headlights" that you were being negligent. Pedestrians don't have headlights on at night but yet you are still responsible for avoiding hitting them. I do realize your frustration though, especially if they were driving without care. But you may not have done enough to prevent the accident by simply thinking it was safe to turn when no more headlights were to be seen.

 

[sandyclaus]

I missed the part where the other driver actually lied. Or where you have proof that they lied.

The other driver may not have lied and the insurance company may have determined that since you "proceeded when there were no more headlights" that you were being negligent. Pedestrians don't have headlights on at night but yet you are still responsible for avoiding hitting them. I do realize your frustration though, especially if they were driving without care. But you may not have done enough to prevent the accident by simply thinking it was safe to turn when no more headlights were to be seen.

I'd have to agree with this.

It sounds like OP decided that no more cars were coming based solely on whether or not they saw additional headlights. Obviously, since the car they hit had no headlights on, that assumption caused them to be at fault for the accident.

The problem here is not that the other driver lied. It's that the insurance company was able to complete a thorough and unbiased account of the accident that puts the fault squarely on YOU, OP.

 

[Zigner]

It is not a legal requirement for headlights to be on simply because it is "just after sunset"

 

[CdwJava]

It is not a legal requirement for headlights to be on simply because it is "just after sunset"

Well, maybe ...

280. "Darkness" is any time from one-half hour after sunset to
one-half hour before sunrise and any other time when visibility is
not sufficient to render clearly discernible any person or vehicle on
the highway at a distance of 1,000 feet.

24400. (a) A motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, shall
be equipped with at least two headlamps, with at least one on
each side of the front of the vehicle, and, except as to vehicles
registered prior to January 1, 1930, they shall be located directly
above or in advance of the front axle of the vehicle. The headlamps
and every light source in any headlamp unit shall be located at a
height of not more than 54 inches nor less than 22 inches.
(b) A motor vehicle, other than a motorcycle, shall be operated
during darkness, or inclement weather, or both, with at least two
lighted headlamps that comply with subdivision (a).​

But, no matter the situation with the headlights, as far as the police would have been concerned the headlights could NOT have been the PRIMARY collision factor though the lack of headlights could have been an ASSOCIATED factor. I am guessing that the insurance company was operating under a similar assumption that the headlight situation cannot cause the collision, only an unsafe turning movement - even if reasonable - could have caused it.

Unless it was pitch black outside and there was no illumination of street lights or something nearby, chances are that your claim of no headlights will not save the OP here.

I doubt the insurance company to do more of an investigation. In fact, there really is not much more that they CAN do. Unless the scene was recorded in some way by the police in a report and/or photos, they cannot realistically go back after the fact and try to measure skid marks. And an analysis of impact damage can be quite expensive and still would not likely be conclusive as to fault ... at least not so conclusive as to change fault from the OP to the other driver.

Matt, you may have no good option here. If your company raises your rates you can always seek quotes from some other companies and switch to a new insurer.

 

[ecmst12]

The other driver had the right of way - the duty to ensure safety before making a U turn is squarely on the driver making the turn. If the other driver admits to having his lights off, that may put a small percentage of the fault onto him, but the majority still goes to you. You can't simply rely on headlights to determine if there are any cars coming, especially when it's not even fully dark yet.

 

[ecmst12]

By the way, your insurance company is not in the business of paying out claims that their insured is NOT clearly liable for. Your premiums are not enough to make that worth it for them. They only pay when it is clear that you are at fault and they have a duty to protect you and your assets by paying the claim.

 

[Zigner]

Well, maybe ...

280. "Darkness" is any time from one-half hour after sunset to
one-half hour before sunrise and any other time when visibility is
not sufficient to render clearly discernible any person or vehicle on
the highway at a distance of 1,000 feet.​

I worded my response very carefully. As I said (and as is proved by your citation of the law), it is not a legal requirement for headlights to be on simply because it is "just after sunset"​