When the Other Driver Lies — Navigating Disputed Liability Claims

Summary

When the Other Driver Lies — Navigating Disputed Liability Claims discusses how to handle disputed liability claims when the other driver lies about the accident. Host Jon Clemence opens the conversation by asking Jordan how to deal with situations where the at-fault driver gives a completely different version of events. Jordan explains that this scenario is unfortunately common, with at-fault drivers often changing their story after initially admitting fault. For instance, a driver might say they weren’t paying attention at the scene but later claim to have had the green light when the police arrive. This type of discrepancy can lead to confusion and make the claims process more challenging, as the at-fault party may attempt to avoid responsibility or protect their insurance rates.

Jon asks if these inconsistencies are always intentional lies or if they could be due to people misremembering events. Jordan elaborates that not all variations in stories are malicious. The well-known Japanese film Rashomon demonstrates how different people can witness the same event and recall it differently. While some people may genuinely misremember details, others may intentionally “reframe” the event to make themselves seem less responsible. This psychological phenomenon, which is part of self-preservation, can complicate a case when the at-fault driver distorts the facts to reduce their liability.

When dealing with genuinely disputed liability, Jordan explains that attorneys go beyond the drivers’ accounts and search for external evidence. This could include witness statements, business surveillance footage, dash cam recordings, or even in-vehicle cameras like those found in Tesla vehicles. Sometimes, such footage can be crucial in verifying what actually happened, especially in cases where both drivers might have a different perception of the situation, such as a close call at an intersection.

Jon asks whether people can collect this evidence on their own or if they need an attorney’s help. Jordan acknowledges that while it’s possible for individuals to gather evidence themselves, it’s often challenging, particularly for injured parties who may be too overwhelmed by the situation. This is why it’s critical to contact an attorney early. Attorneys like Jordan send investigators to canvass local businesses for video footage, which can be pivotal in supporting a client’s version of events. He shares an example where his team quickly secured valuable footage from a nearby business camera, proving that the other driver was at fault in a disputed intersection crash.

Jordan also highlights the importance of acting quickly, as surveillance footage can be erased or overwritten after a few days, depending on the system used. In some cases, attorneys may even need to approach companies like Ring to request footage from doorbell cameras, which have become increasingly useful in accident cases. These types of cameras often capture incidents like cars backing out of driveways, and Jordan’s firm has successfully used this footage to prove fault in some cases.

The discussion then shifts to the tools Jordan uses when representing clients in contested cases. He emphasizes the importance of thorough documentation, noting that clients should write down their version of events as soon as possible to keep the details fresh. Jordan also points out that any interaction with the insurance company is likely recorded, so it’s crucial for clients to have an attorney early on to ensure their side is protected. Body camera footage from officers can also play a significant role in exposing discrepancies between what was said at the scene and what is later claimed.

Jon closes by asking Jordan what to do when someone suspects the other driver is dishonest. Jordan advises clients to avoid apologizing, as even a simple apology can be twisted into an admission of fault. Instead, documenting everything—taking photos and recording video/audio—is crucial for supporting their claim. If a person is injured and unable to gather evidence themselves, a friend or family member can step in.

Finally, Jordan recalls a case where social media posts contradicted a defendant’s testimony, helping them win the case by impeaching the other driver’s credibility. This underscores the growing importance of social media in legal investigations. Jordan’s takeaway is that facts ultimately drive the case, and discrepancies or lies can often be exposed through diligent investigation and evidence gathering.

The episode ends with Jon thanking Jordan and reminding listeners to connect with him for further assistance. The show encourages viewers to like, subscribe, and leave reviews.