Car crash - Whos in the wrong?

munkifisht

I just had my first crash today, no one was injured but of course I am totally unsure of who was in the right.

What happened was I was following this car on the road and he started to pull to the right hand side. He didn't use his indicators and pulled all the way over to the other side of the road over the white line. I assumed he was parking on that side of the road and proceeded to drive past on the left, then he pulled in to his driveway on the left (still didn't use indicators). I did my best to avoid a collision but the two cars struck.


There were no witnesses to the crash, but my car was hit on the front wheel and he hit and broke his left light cluster. His car was then pushed about 20° and my car was scraped all the way down the side. I really not sure if I'm in the right, but as he wasn't indicating, and he was on the other side of hte road, and as my car was hit behind the light I am hoping that I was in the right.

drunkmonkey

Indicator means nothing it's only a sign of intent. You shouldn't have passed until it was safe to do so.
It sounds do that he pulled out on you, puts him in the wrong I think unless he wasn't actually off the road then it's your fault.

corktina

well, with no witnessess he will no doubt say he WAS indicating putting you up a gumtree. Probably best you can hope for is negotaiting with him to pay 50/50

CiniO

You are saying that car in front of you moved through the white line to the right side of road for no reason, and then you started overtaking him on his left side?

I'd say you were both guys at wrong.

Dilbert75

In any case the only thing an indicator tells you for certain is that the bulb works. This is one of those cases where he who hesitates is generally the one who doesn't lose. He shouldn't have driven like that but neither should the OP. Best case without witnesses to testify to either side is 50/50.

polod

Tough one i was going to say you OP as you have to be able to stop your car, if you went into the back of him, but them remember you said he turned into you.

munkifisht

Doesn't seem like it's good news so.

I quite far behind him when he started to make the move. He had almost slowed down to a stop on the other side and then swung in. If he had have slammed on the brakes and stopped dead I would have avoided the crash. What does OP mean by the way?

squod

munkifisht wrote: »

Doesn't seem like it's good news so.

I quite far behind him when he started to make the move. He had almost slowed down to a stop on the other side and then swung in. If he had have slammed on the brakes and stopped dead I would have avoided the crash. What does OP mean by the way?

Original post(er.)

MugMugs

He left his lane and came back.

He crossed your path IMO and the damage would support that.

Fighting Irish

Stay back away from cars in front in future

Reloc8

If you're asking who caused this accident, on your account, he did, for not checking his mirror/blindspot before executing his turn in (he probably moved out right to make the turn into his drive easier).

If you're asking where both of your insurers will draw the line, 50-50, because he is almost certain to dispute your version of not using indicators, and also of how far over to the right he moved.

munkifisht

In terms of not assuming anything on the road, lesson learnt. Yep, I feel a bit dim cos normally I'm a pretty good road user and have never even had so much as a scratch up til now. In terms of how far across he moved, it was all the way, he was almost touching the curb on the other side of the road.

I had to call him because I need to get his insurance details and in terms of whos accepting the blame, it's neither of us. He claims to have used his indicator, but did admit that he went on the other side of the road so unless my insurance company want to back me up there's not going to be much I can do.

Evaex

It's a style of driving I hate. Gob$hites who think they are driving a tractor and trailer pulling out right before moving back into the left. OP, did this accident happen to take place in some hell-infested, back water, hillbilly town?

munkifisht

Evaex wrote: »

It's a style of driving I hate. Gob$hites who think they are driving a tractor and trailer pulling out right before moving back into the left. OP, did this accident happen to take place in some hell-infested, back water, hillbilly town?

Hahaha, Nope, happened in a totally cosmopolitan area, with street lamps and everything, but I know exactly what you mean, and that's exactly the driving style we're talking about.

sean.casaidhe

You say you were hit on the right forward wing by the left front of his car?

Then he's in the wrong.
1) You didn't hit him from behind, he hit you from the side.
2) You were progressing in the correct lane in a normal careful manner with no traffic to the front of you.
3) You didn't feel that you were in a position where you could safely stop to establish the intentions of the driver in front of you, who had moved over into the opposite lane.
4) The other driver came in from the side, getting into the path of an oncoming vehicle.
5) Whether he was indicating or not doesn't matter, as he wasn't in the correct lane.

I'd refuse to let the insurance settle for 50/50 (and impact your no-claims).

Gophur

sean.casaidhe wrote: »

..........
I'd refuse to let the insurance settle for 50/50 (and impact your no-claims).

50/50, 10/90, 90/10 it doesn't matter a whole pile, your insurance will be affected.

OP, you have some share of blame in this incident. It's at times like this we find out why we have insurance.

biko

Fecking "bus" drivers, does my head in.

It's a tricky one OP, but really - the insurance company assessor's opinion is the only one that matters.
You should have hanged back until you saw him actually leave the road, he could have been drunk/sleeping etc.

Next time give them a blast with the horn and a couple of full beam flicks.

Nissan doctor

Christmas wish list: DASH CAM!

I'd say they'll call it 50 50 to be honest

jimmycrackcorm

The other guy pulled across from the other side of the road on to your side. He's in the wrong and whether or not he was trying to park in his driveway is irrelevant. He should have stayed on his own side.

Blazer

sean.casaidhe wrote: »

You say you were hit on the right forward wing by the left front of his car?

Then he's in the wrong.
1) You didn't hit him from behind, he hit you from the side.
2) You were progressing in the correct lane in a normal careful manner with no traffic to the front of you.
3) You didn't feel that you were in a position where you could safely stop to establish the intentions of the driver in front of you, who had moved over into the opposite lane.
4) The other driver came in from the side, getting into the path of an oncoming vehicle.
5) Whether he was indicating or not doesn't matter, as he wasn't in the correct lane.

I'd refuse to let the insurance settle for 50/50 (and impact your no-claims).

Completely agree...he was completely on the wrong side of the road and you were in the right side (left side ) ..
You could argue you should have hung back but in the eyes of the law he left his side of the road and turned the car into you.

So am I right in saying that the other driver left the lane he was travelling in, moved all the way to the opposite side of the road so that he was now facing oncoming traffic and then pulled straight back over to turn left without indicating? am I missing something here or is this it?

If as above then I can't see how the OP could be at fault, he was driving behind a car who completely left the lane, the OP then continued on in the same lane and was hit on the driver side by a car coming from the opposite side of the road.

The other car left the lane, therefore traffic now in the lane should have right of way.

Not sure how the insurance company will deal with it but I would be fighting it to the end. (unless of course I have the whole thing backwards!)

SimonF

as the damage is to the side of your car you have a chance. if you where along side him when he swung into your lane and the damage proves this the insurance company should fight your side as it was his fault.
If the damage was more to the front or corner it'd be harder to prove fault of the other driver and I doubt they'd hold their hands up either.

ebbsy

Somebody pulled into the right as my Mrs was passing and pulled out again, hitting the Mrs in the side. Judge said it was not the Mrs fault, even if you are in front you have have due care for whats behind you as well.

Did this guy have due care for the OP???

Boskowski

I would like to say that its totally clear cut as it was absolute muppetry by the other driver (which it was).

However, it seems that such behaviour is almost the norm and it sounds a bit you were too close to it all. Having said that I would certainly feel in the right pinning it on the other guy entirely.

Henry Ford III

Tough call this one, and as usual all sorts of differing opinions are being offered. Based on what we've been told (no indication and passing to the left a bit early) I can perhaps see some degree of fault on both sides.

Expect the T.P. to say he was indicating left O.P. and if he does your case unfortunately looks pretty weak imho.

Just my 2c worth.

slimjimmc

sean.casaidhe wrote: »

You say you were hit on the right forward wing by the left front of his car?

Then he's in the wrong.
1) You didn't hit him from behind, he hit you from the side.
2) You were progressing in the correct lane in a normal careful manner with no traffic to the front of you.
3) You didn't feel that you were in a position where you could safely stop to establish the intentions of the driver in front of you, who had moved over into the opposite lane.
4) The other driver came in from the side, getting into the path of an oncoming vehicle.
5) Whether he was indicating or not doesn't matter, as he wasn't in the correct lane.

I'd refuse to let the insurance settle for 50/50 (and impact your no-claims).

Pts 2 and 3 are certainly subjective.
An insurer could equally argue that:
2. - a careful driver would pay attention to his surroundings not just the the lane ahead and would react defensively when a driver makes an unpredictable manoeuvre such as slowing down and crossing the line without indicating.
3. - why did you put yourself in the position of not being able to stop safely. A careful driver would leave plenty of room to stop.

ianobrien

slimjimmc wrote: »

Pts 2 and 3 are certainly subjective.
An insurer could equally argue that:
2. - a careful driver would pay attention to his surroundings not just the the lane ahead and would react defensively when a driver makes an unpredictable manoeuvre such as slowing down and crossing the line without indicating.
3. - why did you put yourself in the position of not being able to stop safely. A careful driver would leave plenty of room to stop.

Your points, while valid if the other car was half-in-half both lanes and the OP "dived" in, do not matter if the other car went totally into the other lane. If the other car went totally into the other lane, then he changed lanes without due care and attention and is at fault.

This has been proven in court where a car decided to turn right off a major road and never checked to see if the other lane was free in both directions. A family member was overtaking at the time and after the smash, won the case 100%. Even though the family member was heading down the lane the wrong way (overtaking), they were in posession of the lane and the other car caused the accidednt by not looking before turning right.

wee truck big driver

Evaex wrote: »

It's a style of driving I hate. Gob$hites who think they are driving a tractor and trailer pulling out right before moving back into the left. OP, did this accident happen to take place in some hell-infested, back water, hillbilly town?

W.T.F.

wee truck big driver

if it was me i would be looking to get my car fixed. go to a solictor he who dares wins and all that