Witnesses are great, but if there are none available, and no admission of guilt by either party, then ICBC analyses data by whatever is available to them. This can mean making a judgement based on the intersection or position of both cars at the location, the origin and direction of travel, and the type of damage on both vehicles. This is a good reason drivers should now carry a cheap digital camera in their glove compartment, possibly one that can capture video data as well. Newer cell phones can do this. Record the information from the other driver this way. Drivers that are at fault will usually provide excellent "voir dire" information that can be used against them at a later date.Cock Throppled said:First QM, then you - who's gonna be the third one? Hope you have witnesses, witnesses, witnesses. Your word means nothing if she decides to duck responsibility by lying. Happened to me. Woman ran a stop sign and hit me almost head on. She claimed I was speeding and she had stopped and the collision happened because I wasn't paying attention. Luckily for me I had two witnesses that saw her run the sign. She didn't suffer any penalty for lying, so it's woth it for people to lie and maybe get away with it.
If there is any dispute at the scene, or the possibility of one later, call the police, and "tell them someone was injured". This is the only sure way they will attend. When they get there, tell them you "thought there was". You'll then have their attention, firetruck, ambulance and all. But they will then act as a deterrent for fabricated facts, and provide you with that all-important police file number.






