Car crash .whose fault?

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 8:29pm #1

I had a car crash on Saturday just going into the main entrance of RDS.There are new road marks which are very confusing. Road marks are showing only one lane and bicycle lane on the opposite side.So to enter the Rds gate i had to turn right. The driver on the opposite lane let me go,so i turned right,as i said the road marks only showing one lane.so i stopped to let go some pedestrians (and there was a little curb ,had to drive slowly to enter the gates).then taxi driver just flied into us from nowhere.I didn't expect him to drive there at all(because of one lane on the opposite side).he had to drive on bicycle lane to pass the cars who let me go.Bus lane starting only after the entrance of RDS.Couldn't find any witnesses.But Garda came.The taxi driver was able to drive.I didn't .my car had to be towed out.I had my mother and my child in a car.and I am careful driver,especially id i have passengers.
So ,i rang insurance company,on sat but they said they will contact me on monday. So the didn't take any information what happened from me.
I got phone call from them this Monday morning(this morning).they already made decision -my fault. They didn't contact garda.they just made a decision this morning without asking me what happened and looking at pictures i took. The man from insurance company was very rude saying:"It is your fault,doesnt matter who crashed into who,you have to take the liability ,u have to pay a taxi man for the damage.he had right of way,u shouldn't be there''.Me and taxi driver insured with the same company.2011-10-09 15.37.38.jpg

P.s the entrance is just straight after that yellow AA sign on green column.

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 8:30pm

2011-10-09 15.38.05.jpg

Zaph · 10-10-2011 8:43pm

Moved from Feedback

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 8:52pm

I'm afraid it is 100% your fault. You should have waited until your path was clear before turning right.

Nissan doctor · 10-10-2011 8:58pm

I think its your fault unfortunately. That section of road has always been 2 lanes, and, although there may currently be no lane separation lines before the bus lane, the arrows at the start of the bus lane are directing normal traffic from an inside lane to the outside lane.

Its true also that just because someone stopped to let you across doesn't change the fact that you are still solely responsible for looking for other oncoming vehicles. Aside from the taxi, there could have been cyclists or very commonly, a motorcycle coming down beside the car that stopped to let you across and if you didn't see a taxi coming, your certainly wouldn't have seen anything on 2 wheels and that could have ended much worse then just some damaged cars.

With regards to the insurance company, if both parties are with the same company then the company has no interest in fighting any case as they have to pay either way. Once they are dealing with a situation where one party is a professional driver who hit a car which cut across his lane, there is nothing to argue from their point of view.

Lesson learned perhaps.

CiniO · 10-10-2011 8:59pm

It doesn't look like single lane for me.
There's easily a space for two rows of cars to drive parallely, and in the end where bus lane starts, there's an arrow to merge.
I can't see taxi driver doing anything wrong.

The fact that some driver stopped and let you go, doesn't entitle you to go.
You have to be sure it's safe to do so, and nothing else is coming.

If I was going everytime some random driver let's me go, I would be dead long time ago.

I am careful driver,especially id i have passengers.

Surely this time you were not careful enough.

10-10-2011 9:01pm

Are Quinn Direct your insurers?

You were definitely at fault unfortunately.

Hope you're all ok.

Tails142 · 10-10-2011 9:02pm

I can't tell from the photos where the entrance to the RDS is but did you break a solid white line to turn right?

Reloc8 · 10-10-2011 9:03pm

Agree your fault OP.

That cycle lane is broken lines - he was doing nothing wrong driving where he was. Looks to me like you might actually have broken a solid white line to make your turn.

The fact that he seemed to you to 'come out of nowhere' indicates that you didn't establish that your way was clear prior to turning right.

To be honest the account of stopping to let pedestrians go would at least imply that the right turn was badly timed all round.

I'm glad that it seems nobody was badly injured.

wonski · 10-10-2011 9:03pm

Unfortunately for You, if You were crossing the road, then in fact taxi driver had right of way. Insurance company, on the other hand, did not seem to be very helpful, I hope it has nothing to do with the fact that damage to the taxi was minor (so they dont have to pay much from Your policy (means Your money).
I do accept that some people want to be nice and let You in, but, after gaining some experience on roads, I stopped being nice, and if possible refuse to be let in into minor road. Some people flash their lights, and you think it is safe to go, but sometimes it isn't.
Hope You didn't suffer to much from accident, and get back on road quickly.
BTW If the taxi man could drive away, maybe the damage wasn't too bad, so you won't loose to much. If it is 300-500E, I would rather pay it up, than lose my NCB.

flyingsnail · 10-10-2011 9:04pm

Looks like its your fault, you moved into the path of a car that had the right of way. Also is the entrance before or after the lights? If it is before it also looks like you crossed a double white line or hatching

Mr. Presentable · 10-10-2011 9:05pm

Tails142 wrote: »

I can't tell from the photos where the entrance to the RDS is but did you break a solid white line to turn right?

You can see the break in the line on both the bus lane and the centre for traffic turning right into RDS

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 9:12pm

you can cross a continuous line for access

http://www.rulesoftheroad.ie/rules-for-driving/traffic-signs-road-markings/road-markings.html

wonski · 10-10-2011 9:18pm

Lads, doesn't matter solid white line or broken one - failing to give right of way is discussed here. Driver that stopped to let OP cross the road is to take 20% of blame. If he didn't stopped, nothing would happen there.

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 9:21pm

wonski wrote: »

Driver that stopped to let OP cross the road is to take 20% of blame. If he didn't stopped, nothing would happen there.

Why would he take any of the blame? The OP's decision to cross the opposite carriageway into the path of the taxi is what caused the collision.

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 9:23pm

OP, was your car stationary when the taxi hit you?

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:25pm

Thanks to all for replies ,helpful. All are ok,no injuries .and that is all matters . anyway i will claim from my insurance as my car might be write off. Unfortunately i did break solid line.
P.s I wouldn't say taxi drivers are professional drivers-they put a lot of people in danger on the road.
And i actually looked left if it is clear and it was ,so that is why i turned.
but insurance company saying that i hit his car,they don't want to see any pict, or to tell me what happened to tham.thay are saying it doesn't matter

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:27pm

car stationary -does that mean i stopped? yes,i stopped

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 9:29pm

katerina621 wrote: »

car stationary -does that mean i stopped? yes,i stopped

I mean was your car stopped when the taxi hit you? My understanding of your post is that the front of his car went into the side of yours as you were stopped to let pedestrians pass?

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:32pm

yes,exactly.my car was stopped when taxi hit us.yes he went into passenger side and wing of the car

dougie-lampkin · 10-10-2011 9:33pm

katerina621 wrote: »

so i stopped to let go some pedestrians (and there was a little curb ,had to drive slowly to enter the gates).then taxi driver just flied into us from nowhere

So the taxi undertook the car that let you off and then hit the side of your car while you were stopped? This is a little different to a simple right of way problem. If you were stopped then it could be said you had right of way. If there was a car (illegally) parked in the bus lane the taxi couldn't plough into it because he had "right of way". Because you were stopped and the taxi hit you side on, he should have been able to stop in time. Could go 50/50 because of this IMO.

katerina621 wrote: »

but insurance company saying that i hit his car,they don't want to see any pict, or to tell me what happened to tham.thay are saying it doesn't matter

When one or both insurance companies send out their assessor to view both cars it'll be patently obvious that you were hit from the side, assuming your side of the story is correct.

CiniO · 10-10-2011 9:34pm

katerina621 wrote: »

Unfortunately i did break solid line.

It doesn't matter. You were fully allowed to do it.
Here's appropriate quote from http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html

Centre of Roadway Lines

25. (1) Where traffic sign number RRM 001 [continuous white line] has been provided on a roadway or where two such traffic signs are provided in parallel, a driver shall not cross that sign or signs.

(2) Where traffic sign number RRM 002 [broken white line] has been provided on a roadway, a driver shall not cross that line, save where it can be crossed without danger to other traffic or pedestrians.

(3) Where traffic sign number RRM 001 and traffic sign number RRM 002 have been provided in parallel and traffic sign RRM 001 is nearer, a driver shall not cross such line, and where traffic sign number RRM 002 is nearer, a driver shall not cross the line save where it can be crossed without danger to other traffic or pedestrians.

(4) Nothing in this article shall so operate as to prevent a driver from driving across a roadway, along the centre of which the traffic signs referred to have been provided, for the purpose of entering or leaving land or premises adjoining the right hand side of that roadway.

P.s I wouldn't say taxi drivers are professional drivers-they put a lot of people in danger on the road.

Professional driver is someone whose work is driving.
It isn't said anywhere, that professional drivers have good drivers.

And i actually looked left if it is clear and it was ,so that is why i turned.

Obviously it wasn't clear, as taxi driver didn't come from outerspace.
You must have not looked properly.

but insurance company saying that i hit his car

Did they use the exact words?
I'd say taxi driver hit you, but fault was yours as you didn't give him his right of way. (unless there were some special circumstances which would change the matter - f.e. taxi driver was driving with very high speed, or maybe he saw you and hit you on purpose).

,they don't want to see any pict, or to tell me what happened to tham.thay are saying it doesn't matter

Tell them anyway.
Write a document explaining the situation, paste some pictures in it, and request an answer in writing explaining who was liable.
When you get an answer, and don't like it, you can always go to court against your insurer.
If you are sure of your argument - really do it.

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 9:37pm

katerina621 wrote: »

Thanks to all for replies ,helpful. All are ok,no injuries .and that is all matters . anyway i will claim from my insurance as my car might be write off. Unfortunately i did break solid line.
P.s I wouldn't say taxi drivers are professional drivers-they put a lot of people in danger on the road.
And i actually looked left if it is clear and it was ,so that is why i turned.
but insurance company saying that i hit his car,they don't want to see any pict, or to tell me what happened to tham.thay are saying it doesn't matter

You're allowed to cross a solid white line if you're turning right into a property, so that's not an issue. The problem is that you crossed the opposite carriageway without ensuring that your way was clear (this includes the pedestrians on the opposite footpath). I think the real lesson here is never to go just because someone lets you go - always make sure that it really is safe to go first. I hope it all works out for you.

CiniO · 10-10-2011 9:38pm

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

So the taxi undertook the car that let you off and then hit the side of your car while you were stopped? This is a little different to a simple right of way problem. If you were stopped then it could be said you had right of way. If there was a car (illegally) parked in the bus lane the taxi couldn't plough into it because he had "right of way". Because you were stopped and the taxi hit you side on, he should have been able to stop in time. Could go 50/50 because of this IMO.

Depending on how far was it?
If he was within speed limit, and OP emerged for him from the middle of nowhere, there was not much he could do probably.

From where and when was he breaking, and were there any braking marks?

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:41pm

so what some people saying here is if some car in front of me stopped to turn right, i just go straight into them as i have right of way. What i do is i always stop,or use left lane if it safe to do so avoid this car

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:43pm

nobody going to investigate the breaking marks, they simply not willing to listen to me

dev100 · 10-10-2011 9:44pm

Taxi drivers professional drivers thats a loose term

anyway Its a strange one Id be disputing this myself from what op was saying she had stopped even though crossing other side of side of the road to access RDS and taxi man ran into you
? If im right in saying that? Are motorists not supposed to be in control of their vehicle at all times? Ie to be able to stop if their is an obstruction ahead?

Contact a solicitor for proper legal advice

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 9:45pm

katerina621 wrote: »

so what some people saying here is if some car in front of me stopped to turn right, i just go straight into them as i have right of way. What i do is i always stop,or use left lane if it safe to do so avoid this car

what I was getting at was that the taxi driver should (depending on the circumstances of course) have seen you stopped in front of him and braked/stopped, if he was half asleep or on the phone, or if he had been behind the car that was letting you cross over then decided to swing out from behind them, then that makes things less straightforward than what your insurance company seem to think

is it Quinn Direct btw? they like to settle as quickly as possible and as cheaply (for them) as possible!

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 9:46pm

katerina621 wrote: »

nobody going to investigate the breaking marks, they simply not willing to listen to me

http://www.financialombudsman.ie/making-a-complaint/

10-10-2011 9:47pm

dev100 wrote: »

Are motorists not supposed to be in control of their vehicle at all times? Ie to be able to stop if their is an obstruction ahead?

Not if the obstruction just lands in front of you without warning, effectively cutting your stopping distance.

wonski · 10-10-2011 9:47pm

Anan1 wrote: »

Why would he take any of the blame? The OP's decision to cross the opposite carriageway into the path of the taxi is what caused the collision.

I put it there to highlight how dangerous is to let someone in without thinking. 100% blame on that driver, as he stopped for no reason.
Just saying- if he didn't stop, OP wouldn't go there.
Katerina made mistake, and she, not the other driver, will pay. Next time she will think twice before some "experienced driver" flash his lights.
I believe the taxi was on the left of the flasing "excellent driver" so she could not see him straight away.

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:49pm

it is right.i am going to insurance head office (claim department),at least to be heard.as I actually didn't tell them what happened,they don't want to hear it,they say

10-10-2011 9:50pm

katerina621 wrote: »

it is right.i am going to insurance head office (claim department),at least to be heard.as I actually didn't tell them what happened,they don't want to hear it,they say

Would really like to know if it's Quinn Direct!

dev100 · 10-10-2011 9:51pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Not if the obstruction just lands in front of you without warning, effectively cutting your stopping distance.

Not being smart but try that if you driving around a blind corner and a car or a lorry is stopped due to any reason and run into back of them your comment wont wash with the guards or in any court

CiniO · 10-10-2011 9:52pm

dev100 wrote: »

Are motorists not supposed to be in control of their vehicle at all times? Ie to be able to stop if their is an obstruction ahead?

Of course they are.
But if obstruction comes there in the last moment, there might be to late.
If OP wanted to turn right, and stayed stopped there before the kerb letting pedestrians for 10 seconds, then obviously taxi driver should have seen him.
If OP went there, stopped to let pedestrians go, and then straight on there was boom - hmm. Then it looks like taxi driver encountered an abstruction that just suddenly appeared in front of him. So he could do nothing.

10-10-2011 9:54pm

dev100 wrote: »

Not being smart but try that if you driving around a blind corner and a car or a lorry is stopped due to any reason and run into back of them your comment wont wash with the guards or in any court

If you come round a blind corner and smash into the back of something that is you not driving with due care, not allowing the correct stopping distance for the piece of road you can see.

Very very different to driving along and a car suddenly comes from other side of the road and stops in your path.

Very different indeed.

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:57pm

i am actually never trusted flushing lights letting u go,this wasn't a case also. this is just the road marks which confused me.i am not driving in this area all the time,so i have no idea that from one lane cars making two lanes .So now,I know.It is a lesson.
Never trust cars with turning left indicator some of them just keep driving straight!!!! never trust anybody Roundabouts
Nobody hurt,that is important

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 9:58pm

dev100 wrote: »

Not being smart but try that if you driving around a blind corner and a car or a lorry is stopped due to any reason and run into back of them your comment wont wash with the guards or in any court

The OP started their turn right, encountered the pedestrians and then had to stop, blocking the opposite carriageway. No offence to the OP but 'then taxi driver just flied into us from nowhere' pretty much sums it up.:)

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 9:58pm

it isn't Quinn Direct

CiniO · 10-10-2011 9:59pm

dev100 wrote: »

Not being smart but try that if you driving around a blind corner and a car or a lorry is stopped due to any reason and run into back of them your comment wont wash with the guards or in any court

But on a blind bend you can't see what's there, so you should allow for anything.

On a straight road, you can see there's nothing so you go.
And then suddenly something lands just in front of you. If it's too close you can't do anything.

dev100 · 10-10-2011 9:59pm

Anan1 wrote: »

The OP started their turn right, encountered the pedestrians and then had to stop, blocking the opposite carriageway. No offence to the OP but 'then taxi driver just flied into us from nowhere' pretty much sums it up.:)

He could have been speeding who knows:)

dev100 · 10-10-2011 10:00pm

katerina621 wrote: »

it isn't Quinn Direct

Did the guards do a report or anything?

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 10:05pm

saying "flying" means he drove fast.
P.S. as u see English isn't my native language.And it is kinda hard for me to explain the situation correct. That's why it would be so hard for me to proof i am right in any case.As people start catching any wrong words i used

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 10:07pm

i tried to ring them,but the 2 guards were off,they said to ring tomorrow.So will give them a ring tomorrow.
P.s. insurance company made a decision before contacting guards

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 10:07pm

How long were you stopped before he hit you? I know it's probably hard to tell because of shock etc., but was it 1 second, 10 seconds or whatever?

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 10:07pm

dev100 wrote: »

He could have been speeding who knows:)

It's possible. Given that the OP has already effectively told us that they started their turn right without checking for pedestrians on the opposite path, though, I think it's more likely a case of poor observation/planning.

10-10-2011 10:08pm

Guards don't need to be involved at all if there were no injuries.

Can I ask at what point you saw the taxi before he hit you?

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 10:10pm

katerina621 wrote: »

saying "flying" means he drove fast.
P.S. as u see English isn't my native language.And it is kinda hard for me to explain the situation correct. That's why it would be so hard for me to proof i am right in any case.As people start catching any wrong words i used

Sorry, I didn't mean that as a go at your English. What I meant is that the taxi didn't 'come from nowhere', you just didn't see him. Most likely because the car who let you cross in the first place was blocking your view. And 'flying' is fine in English.:)

katerina621 · 10-10-2011 10:18pm

it is really hard to say,but it wasn't 1 sec,2 sec.was more but less than 10.

Anan1 · 10-10-2011 10:22pm

katerina621 wrote: »

it is really hard to say,but it wasn't 1 sec,2 sec.was more but less than 10.

If it was more than a second or two then IMO the taxi should have had time to stop. I had been under the impression that you had just stopped when the taxi hit you. Whether that will translate into the taxi bearing some of the responsibility, though, I don't know. I can't even think how you could prove it, TBH.

Absurdum · 10-10-2011 10:24pm

so is it possible that he was driving behind the car that was stopped to let you go, decided he didn't want to be held up and passed that car on the left without paying attention or noticing that there was a car there (you)

see terrible MS Paint illustration:

Car crash .whose fault?

Comments