A couple of months ago my daughter was driving along a main road doing around 45mph in her works van (parts delivery driver on a national speed limit road) when a cyclist shot out of a T junction and hit her van on the front wing and the cyclists head came through the windscreen, now the cyclist was female, 20yrs old no helmet and was listening to her Ipod.
She was in a bad way and an ambulance was called and she was taken to a hospital,
my daughter was with the police and gave her version of the incident and the police agreed after looking at the damage to her van and skid marks etc.
Now this really shook my daughter up and she was off work for 10 days,
Even now she has no blame laid to her at all, now her company gave her £13 a day while off work, (which is life)
but what is really pissing me off is they are insisting my daughter pays for the damage to the van
even though it was a non fault accident, so i asked my daughter to take it higher up to the area manager, to which he replied "its company policy to keep our insurance down" now does that sound fair, because i am questioning my moral judement here, am i that far behind the times that this is the norm nowadays
She was in a bad way and an ambulance was called and she was taken to a hospital,
my daughter was with the police and gave her version of the incident and the police agreed after looking at the damage to her van and skid marks etc.
Now this really shook my daughter up and she was off work for 10 days,
Even now she has no blame laid to her at all, now her company gave her £13 a day while off work, (which is life)

but what is really pissing me off is they are insisting my daughter pays for the damage to the van

