[Drivingforfun]

Just a pure curiosity-motivated question

I have an avoidable but "lesser-of-two-evils" collision where I am the only vehicle involved, involving an inanimate object, as a result of intentionally avoiding a worse accident that would not have been considered my fault...

Would this collision be considered my fault, even if by some miracle the other driver stopped and admitted indirect liability?

Thanks in advance!

[TC1474]

Originally Posted by Drivingforfun

Just a pure curiosity-motivated question

I have an avoidable but "lesser-of-two-evils" collision where I am the only vehicle involved, involving an inanimate object, as a result of intentionally avoiding a worse accident that would not have been considered my fault...

Would this collision be considered my fault, even if by some miracle the other driver stopped and admitted indirect liability?

Thanks in advance!

Unless you can prove that a third party was involved, then yes, you will be deemed liable.

The actual law states

An accident is deemed to have occurred if owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on a road, injury or damage is caused to a third party.

A third party can be deemed as being involved or the cause of a crash without having actually been impacted, but...... You have to be able to prove it, whether that is through dash cam footage or some other evidence.

Without evidence, liability will fall on your shoulders I am afraid.

[Rolebama]

As far as I am aware insurers insist on insured not admitting liability. So, hypothetically, I would be of the opinion that your insurer would be liable for all costs.
FWIW: I had a spurious claim against me a few years ago. It was alleged that I had deliberately rammed another vehicle. I asked my insurer if I was really insured to Ram other vehicles or objects. The answer from them was a very emphatic YES.