Following the occurrence of an accident, the insurance company of the responsible driver will not provide the victim with any compensation, unless that same victim can show that the company’s policy holder was truly at-fault.
Sources of evidence
• Pictures of damage to the involved vehicles
• Pictures of the victims’ injuries
• A photograph that shows the position of the damaged vehicles
• Pictures of debris on the road
• A photograph of road signs or traffic signals at the scene of the collision
• A photograph of tire marks at the same scene
• Statements from witnesses
• Statement from a reconstruction expert
• Items collected from the site of the collision
What to keep in mind when collecting evidentiary material?
It is not always necessary to have all of the types of evidence listed above. Sometimes, just one piece of evidence can reveal the identity of the driver that caused the accident. For instance, one of two involved vehicles might have a large dent on the driver’s side.
A driver could not maneuver a vehicle in a way that would cause production of such a dent. Another motorist would need to ram into the car’s side, in order to cause such damage. Hence, Personal Injury Lawyer in Dartmouth knows that an insurance company could rule out one of the 2 involved drivers.
How a controversy might arise?
It could be that more than one driver caused a given accident. In that case, the insurance company for each of the drivers would have the job of showing that the other company’s policyholder was at least partly to blame.
Someone might get into a minor accident, and then keep driving. If that driver with a damaged vehicle then got involved in another collision, it would become difficult to determine which of the negligent motorists caused any given portion of the rather extensive damage.
An incident in a parking lot might give rise to a controversy. Two drivers might back into each other. If no one saw the collision, the driver named at fault would probably be the one that did the best job of convincing the insurance company that he or she had not been moving the car, when it got hit. The above story illustrates the extent to which one driver might have an unfair advantage. For example, an older and more experienced driver might be able to convince a beginning driver that he or she collided with an automobile that had come to rest.
If a moving vehicle hits one that has remained in place, then the driver of the moving vehicle has demonstrated the actions of an at-fault motorist. Thus, an older motorist might find it easy to place the blame on a younger motorist, one that has much less experience.