advice on accident

liz72

Hi all,i was involved in a collision with a moped.The moped was on my side of road over the white lines.I was just about to pull off when he hit my car.I have two witnesses who claim he was at fault.However he is saying it was my fault.No word yet from either insurance company.This seems to be dragging out.Can anyone give me advice.:mad:

Gumbo

liz72 wrote: »

Hi all,i was involved in a collision with a moped.The moped was on my side of road over the white lines.I was just about to pull off when he hit my car.I have two witnesses who claim he was at fault.However he is saying it was my fault.No word yet from either insurance company.This seems to be dragging out.Can anyone give me advice.:mad:

when your moving from a stationary or parked position, you must give right of way to all traffic already moving on the road iirc

were you parked in a spot?
were you stopped in traffic?

any other details.
also how far was the moped over the white lines?

liz72

kceire wrote: »

when your moving from a stationary or parked position, you must give right of way to all traffic already moving on the road iirc

were you parked in a spot?
were you stopped in traffic?

any other details.
also how far was the moped over the white lines?

I had come out of a turn and the traffic was stopped right and left to let me out.I was out on to my side of road about to pull off when he came behind the car to my right over white box and hit me.

Lumen

If you were not moving, it's his fault.

If you were moving, it's probably still his fault.

When I was taught to ride a scooter, my instructor warned against use of the "wrong side". He said "if you have an accident, you'll need to give a bloody good reason why you were there, and will be presumed at fault".

In this case, there probably no good reason, other than "wanted to get home quickly".

liz72

Lumen wrote: »

If you were not moving, it's his fault.

If you were moving, it's probably still his fault.

When I was taught to ride a scooter, my instructor warned against use of the "wrong side". He said "if you have an accident, you'll need to give a bloody good reason why you were there, and will be presumed at fault".

In this case, there probably no good reason, other than "wanted to get home quickly".

Yeah hopefully it goes in my favour just concerned about this right of way theory.Also he is claiming me for injuries,but no ambulance was called he was standing up and was grand.

Del2005

liz72 wrote: »

I had come out of a turn and the traffic was stopped right and left to let me out.I was out on to my side of road about to pull off when he came behind the car to my right over white box and hit me.

The moped was overtaking traffic and you pulled out in front of him, it's up to you too make sure the road is clear. What if it was a child running across the road? I'd maybe go 70/30 against you, as he was across the white line but he still was on the road and you pulled across him.

liz72 wrote: »

Yeah hopefully it goes in my favour just concerned about this right of way theory.Also he is claiming me for injuries,but no ambulance was called he was standing up and was grand.

Some injuries take time to appear and if you get knocked off a bike at any speed it'll hurt, but you'll be pumped up on adrenalin when the crash happens but when you get home or next day you'll feel the pain.

liz72

Del2005 wrote: »

The moped was overtaking traffic and you pulled out in front of him, it's up to you too make sure the road is clear. What if it was a child running across the road? I'd maybe go 70/30 against you, as he was across the white line but he still was on the road and you pulled across him.



Some injuries take time to appear and if you get knocked off a bike at any speed it'll hurt, but you'll be pumped up on adrenalin when the crash happens but when you get home or next day you'll feel the pain.

I didnt pull out i was already out and traffic was stopped so he should not have been overtaking anyone.

mvpr

Had he crossed a continuous white line onto the side of the road you intended pulling out onto?

What exactly is he claiming from you? Damages to his bike, personal injuries or both?

Berty

If he was travelling down the the wrong side of the road then he is breaking the law.

You should have looked but cannot be held responsible for people breaching the rules of the road.

What did the Gardai say? Presumably you called them.

jaycen

quirke_folder wrote: »

If he was travelling down the the wrong side of the road then he is breaking the law.

You should have looked but cannot be held responsible for people breaching the rules of the road.

What did the Gardai say? Presumably you called them.

Wrong, filtering through slowmoving or stationary traffic is legal.

If the poster was stationary it's the rider's fault, if the poster pulled out and was hit it's theirs.

jimmycrackcorm

Two independent witnesses say it was the mopeds fault especially being over the white line. I'd make sure to have their details.

liz72

My witness said he was over white box with lines.The guards said that even though he hit me on wrong side of road it could go 50:50.So basically even though i didnt cause that accident i will probably end up losing,just one of those things.:(

miceal

liz72 wrote: »

My witness said he was over white box with lines.The guards said that even though he hit me on wrong side of road it could go 50:50.So basically even though i didnt cause that accident i will probably end up losing,just one of those things.:(

What kind of white line was on the road?

Was he filtering himself though traffic that was not moving?

Hate Mopeds in traffic i would side with you. I was in Dublin few months back and some guy on a moped was filtering through traffic and hit my car and drove off without even looking, dented my car too. :mad:


I wish you luck and hope it works out in your favor.

Keith C

The moped was drving in the middle of the road in between 2 lines of stopped traffic (presume rush hour??), you were edging out as traffic was stopped both sides to let you out.
Moped hit front side of your car?
If thats the case unfortunatly the claim will go against you as it was not clear for you to pull out.
It sucks but the whole pullin out when safe to do so blah blah blah will go against you.
Let us know how you get on anyway.

liz72

miceal wrote: »

What kind of white line was on the road?

Was he filtering himself though traffic that was not moving?

Hate Mopeds in traffic i would side with you. I was in Dublin few months back and some guy on a moped was filtering through traffic and hit my car and drove off without even looking, dented my car too. :mad:


I wish you luck and hope it works out in your favor.

Yeah the traffic was stopped,apparently he was driving fairly fast,the other witness said he nearly landed on her bonnet,lucky for her unlucky for me.The dent is fairly big on my bonnet its just so annoying having to drive around like that when i know i didnt cause it.
Thanks.

Steve

liz72 wrote: »

I had come out of a turn and the traffic was stopped right and left to let me out.I was out on to my side of road about to pull off when he came behind the car to my right over white box and hit me.

I'm a bit confused by this. Were you turning left or right?

If you were turning left then you also must have gone to the wrong side of the road for him/her to hit you.

If you were turning right then the blame will be proportional mostly with the moped driver as they were breaking several laws - dangerous overtaking, overtaking near a junction, driving without due care etc. If a driver who stopped to let you out gave any signal that might be interpreted as "come on, it's clear" then they may also share the blame.

Keith C

liz72 wrote: »

when i know i didnt cause it.
Thanks.

Ah come on thats a silly statment, that could easily have been a cyclist, just because cars have stopped doesnt mean its 100% safe to pull out.

Steve

Keith C wrote: »

Ah come on thats a silly statment, that could easily have been a cyclist, just because cars have stopped doesnt mean its 100% safe to pull out.

True, just because cars are stopped doesn't mean you are free to blindly overtake them near a junction at a speed that you can't stop in time to avoid a collision either.

I don't get the people totally on the side of the moped here...

Mr. Presentable

SteveC wrote: »

I'm a bit confused by this. Were you turning left or right?

If you were turning left then you also must have gone to the wrong side of the road for him/her to hit you.

If you were turning right then the blame will be proportional mostly with the moped driver as they were breaking several laws - dangerous overtaking, overtaking near a junction, driving without due care etc. If a driver who stopped to let you out gave any signal that might be interpreted as "come on, it's clear" then they may also share the blame.

Must have been turning right if traffic both left and right had to stop

Steve

nipplenuts wrote: »

Must have been turning right if traffic both left and right had to stop

Ah, well spotted. I misread it as "traffic was stopped" as in just plain stopped.

liz72

SteveC wrote: »

I'm a bit confused by this. Were you turning left or right?

If you were turning left then you also must have gone to the wrong side of the road for him/her to hit you.

If you were turning right then the blame will be proportional mostly with the moped driver as they were breaking several laws - dangerous overtaking, overtaking near a junction, driving without due care etc. If a driver who stopped to let you out gave any signal that might be interpreted as "come on, it's clear" then they may also share the blame.

Yeah i was turning right,traffic was stopped on right first to let me out i inched my way out looking left and right , the car on the left outside lane stopped to let me go, i was on my side to go just hiting the centre to turn and he speeded up threw the traffic basically he came from nowhere and crashed straight into the middle front of my bonnet!

Lumen

I'm not clear on one important point.

Were you stationary when he hit you? If so, for how long were you stationary?

liz72

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not clear on one important point.

Were you stationary when he hit you? If so, for how long were you stationary?

I was just about to pull off,he came from nowhere at speed,it happened within a couple of seconds.

tv3

liz72 wrote: »

I was just about to pull off,he came from nowhere at speed,it happened within a couple of seconds.

Well then you were at fault as it should of being clear !
If he was travelling at speed on a bike he would of being injured on the scene...so doesnt add up !

liz72

tv3 wrote: »

Well then you were at fault as it should of being clear !
If he was travelling at speed on a bike he would of being injured on the scene...so doesnt add up !

It was clear as i said before he was going in and out of cars and nearly went on to a womans bonnet,if i hit him he would have been knocked back on his head and the bike would have went under the car,not at the curb side on my side of road.

Steve

liz72 wrote: »

Yeah i was turning right,traffic was stopped on right first to let me out i inched my way out looking left and right , the car on the left outside lane stopped to let me go, i was on my side to go just hiting the centre to turn and he speeded up threw the traffic basically he came from nowhere and crashed straight into the middle front of my bonnet!

liz72 wrote: »

I was just about to pull off,he came from nowhere at speed,it happened within a couple of seconds.

If you saw that he speeded up then you saw him, If he 'came from nowhere' then you didn't see him, which is it?

Again, were you moving when the collision happened, yes or no?

Steve

liz72 wrote: »

It was clear as i said before he was going in and out of cars and nearly went on to a womans bonnet,if i hit him he would have been knocked back on his head and the bike would have went under the car,not at the curb side on my side of road.

Hang on, are you now saying the bike was at the kerb on your side?

liz72

SteveC wrote: »

If you saw that he speeded up then you saw him, If he 'came from nowhere' then you didn't see him, which is it?

Again, were you moving when the collision happened, yes or no?

According to witnesses he was going fairly fast,i was on my side of road about o pull off when he crashed in to me,it is obvious he came behind the car because i didnt se him till he hit my car.:mad:

liz72

SteveC wrote: »

Hang on, are you now saying the bike was at the kerb on your side?

Yes the bike was on the kerb on my side,on left side of road.

tv3

liz72 wrote: »

According to witnesses he was going fairly fast,i was on my side of road about o pull off when he crashed in to me,it is obvious he came behind the car because i didnt se him till he hit my car.:mad:

Fairly fast...
I honestly think you are at fault and should just take responsibilty instead of trying to make a better story.sorry;)

liz72

tv3 wrote: »

Fairly fast...
I honestly think you are at fault and should just take responsibilty instead of trying to make a better story.sorry;)

Im not trying to make a better story,i have two witnesses to back me up.

Thanks for your advice.

Steve

liz72 wrote: »

Yes the bike was on the kerb on my side,on left side of road.

How did it end up there from being on the wrong side of the road coming from the right?

tv3

liz72 wrote: »

Im not trying to make a better story,i have two witnesses to back me up.

Thanks for your advice.

How many does he have??

Steve

tv3 wrote: »

Fairly fast...
I honestly think you are at fault and should just take responsibilty instead of trying to make a better story.sorry;)

You're not helping and IMO verging on trolling, give the guy a break and lets get some facts before condemning.

tv3

SteveC wrote: »

You're not helping and IMO verging on trolling, give the guy a break and lets get some facts before condemning.

I have read 33 posts so i think that is plenty thank you !

liz72

SteveC wrote: »

How did it end up there from being on the wrong side of the road coming from the right?

Because he was over the white lines on my side.

liz72

tv3 wrote: »

How many does he have??

He has no witnesses.

miju

liz72 wrote: »

but no ambulance was called he was standing up and was grand.

Just on this point. Many years ago I had a bad moped accident (went right over the handlebars head on at 40kmh) I got up immediatly and let rip at the woman who's fault the accident was I was pacing around / with arms flailing etc perfectly fine. About an hour later when the shock etc wore off / swelling started I found myself in very severe pain and unable to walk correctly at all when I got home.

Even though ambulance was called for me either I ended up not being able to walk for 1 month afterwards and suffered severe leg pains for a couple of years to boot.

liz72

miju wrote: »

Just on this point. Many years ago I had a bad moped accident I got immediatly and let rip at the woman who's fault the accident was. About an hour later when the shock etc wore off / swelling started I found myself in very severe pain and unable to walk correctly at all when I got home.

No ambulance was called for me either. Doesn't mean I wasn't able to walk for 1 month afterwards and suffered severe leg pains for a couple of years to boot.

I really sympathise with you,but my car wasnt even driving when he hit me,i was just letting off clutch ready to go when his bike hit the front of my car and slid over he fell on my bonnet.Just another point my 4 year old daughter was in car very frightening for her too,if he had of been speeding he could have went through my windscreen.He put her life at risk just because of skipping traffic and rushing home.

Steve

liz72 wrote: »

Because he was over the white lines on my side.

I'm still trying to picture what happened:

You were pulling out of a side road intending to turn right.

You said he came from the right on the wrong side of the road so:

Before:

======================
[traffic]         <-[moped] 
----------------------------
         you    [traffic][traffic]
=====        ============
      |        |
      |        |

After:
======================
[traffic]         
----------------------------
         you    [traffic][traffic]
=====        ============
      |        |[moped] 
      |        |

Is that what you are saying?

bikki

From what i can gather the moped was in the oncoming traffic to her,

Cars stopped to let her turn across the oncoming lane.

The moped shot down the outside over taking the stopped traffic and she pulled out in front of him, sending him over her bonnet.

There for its her fault for not noticing him. Or she assumed he would stop when he seen her pulling out?

ergonomics

liz72 wrote: »

I really sympathise with you,but my car wasnt even driving when he hit me

My friend was driving on his motorbike when a woman went to turn right across him. He slowed down but she saw him and stopped, still on her side of the road. Another car hit her from behind and, as her wheels were turned, she went out in front of my friend. Her car ended up stationary on my friends side of the road but he hit her at about 40km/h. He was fine at the scene but the next day when he got up he could barely move his legs, as with the poster above, and it was a long time before he was right again.

So what I'm trying to say is it doesn't matter if the car was moving or not, the moped driver is still likely to have injuries.

TBH, this whole description of the accident seems a bit vague/all over the place. Nobody who has replied seems to understand 100% what happened and so I get the feeling something is being left out, or we aren't getting the whole story. Could you draw an image in paint or to explain what happened maybe?

Seth Brundle

OP you claim that you were not moving at the time of the impact. How long had you been stationary prior to the impact? Will the witnesses back that up?
Did you see the moped at any point prior to the impact?

x in the city

There is way to much confusion and conflicting reports here on what seems a serious enough incident,

I have attached a (crap) drawing on what seems to be the case at hand, rubbish as it is drawn but seems to clear things up.

the main things here are

was the OP, stopped when the moped hit him on the bonnet of his car, if so then it surely is the moped at fault for loony driving.

or

was the OP still manouvering his car into the line of traffic...when the moped was on top of him.

if its the latter then he could be at fault for not looking and blahh di blahhhhhhh di blahhh

mvpr

Was the motorcyclist travelling over chevrons in the centre of the road or passing over broken white lines?

Saw a case recently where a plaintiff lost their case because the judge figured if he hadnt been driving where he wasnt supposed to be leading up to the accident, the accident would never have happened.

liz72

mvpr wrote: »

Was the motorcyclist travelling over chevrons in the centre of the road or passing over broken white lines?

Saw a case recently where a plaintiff lost their case because the judge figured if he hadnt been driving where he wasnt supposed to be leading up to the accident, the accident would never have happened.

Thanks someone gets me now!

Lumen

The OP has stated that she was not moving when the moped hit her, but waiting to turn. We cannot challenge that assertion without talking to the witnesses, so as I see it, it's a given for the purposes of this discussion.

Therefore the moped hit a stationary vehicle, at speed, on the wrong side of the road.

It's a basic principle of safe driving/riding that you must exercise great care when moving into road space which may bring you into conflict with other road users. The scooterist was not exercising sufficient care, or he would not have hit her. Even if she had turned across him, this is a completely foreseeable situation, and he should have been able to stop.

I filter every time I ride, and it must be done slowly and with care. I even slow down when I'm passing junctions on the left with cars waiting to join - you're less visible on two wheels, and have to allow for other people's errors.

So from this account (and it's only one side obviously) I say the scooterist is substantially at fault. You can't ride like that and expect to live for very long.