Yet another "I crashed my car, who's to blame" thread.

David09

This morning, on the way to Dublin, I got a call from my mother that her car had been involved in an accident.
She had been driving along a narrow country road where there was a bend to the right. Just as she was taking this bend, a jeep came skidding down the hill towards her, slamming into the front of her car, writing it off.

So.... What is the verdict???

drunkmonkey

Was she stationary when the jeep hit? Not sure if it makes any difference but would assume it does.

Yakuza

First things first; I hope no one was injured.

Is there a solid white line on the road, or is it a boreen? Was she hit while on her side of the road? If so, sounds like an open and shut case; was the jeep driver's fault. More information is needed, though.

Divorce Referendum

If it was a narrow country road I am presuming there was no white line on it. This could make things 50:50 from the insurance companies point of view but get your mam to fight her case as it seems she isnt at fault here.

David09

No white line. Muddy back road. She kept in to her own side as tight as possible but the jeep came skidding down the hill into her.

No injuries either, thank god. She's just a little shook.

The driver also tried to reverse away and drive off only another car came behind.

David09

I hope your Mum is ok and recovers from that ordeal, 'twould take it out of you, I had a tiny tip years ago and was a tad shaken and it was a tiny tiny tiny tip.

If the Jeep was skidding and the road was too narrow for both cars to pass it was going too fast to stop in the distance that he saw to be clear (whatever that full speel is), if there was room for both of them he's doubly wrong.

Attempting to drive off is further detail not to be forgotten about especially with a witness.

Was only wondering last week were you still about btw.

bubbuz

Divorce Referendum wrote: »

If it was a narrow country road I am presuming there was no white line on it. This could make things 50:50 from the insurance companies point of view but get your mam to fight her case as it seems she isnt at fault here.

Have to agree, if it was a narrow country lane with no line markings then its a knock for knock in the eyes of the insurance company's, the only thing that may help your mums case is if the car that had approached behind the jeep could do a witness statement saying stating that the jeep driver was driving like a lunatic.
I had a similar experience years ago back in the UK during a very bad winter, me the wife and kids heading home along a narrow country road in our ol nissan sunny ( a mighty car ) when a 17 ton council snow plough came sliding down the hill and ploughed into us head on ( I was also stationary and as far over as possible ). Verdict in the eyes of the insurance company was knock for knock. Was gutted as I was only 3rd party on my loyal old sunny which was written off.
Hope your mum gets over her ordeal o.k.

db330

unless your mother was stopped it is gonna 50:50, proving weather or not she was stopped it is another thing, so seems like it could just be 50:50

CiniO

David09 wrote: »

This morning, on the way to Dublin, I got a call from my mother that her car had been involved in an accident.
She had been driving along a narrow country road where there was a bend to the right. Just as she was taking this bend, a jeep came skidding down the hill towards her, slamming into the front of her car, writing it off.

So.... What is the verdict???

Which part of the jeep hit your mother's car?
Was it front of the jeep or side of the jeep?

MickySticks

Did you talk to the driver of the car that was coming behind the jeep, maybe they can help you with your case.

David09

CiniO wrote: »

David09 wrote: »

This morning, on the way to Dublin, I got a call from my mother that her car had been involved in an accident.
She had been driving along a narrow country road where there was a bend to the right. Just as she was taking this bend, a jeep came skidding down the hill towards her, slamming into the front of her car, writing it off.

So.... What is the verdict???

Which part of the jeep hit your mother's car?
Was it front of the jeep or side of the jeep?

The right hand front of the jeep hit the car, just where the bullbar attaches.


@ r.j., yeah, I'm still here. In a busy period with college at the moment so not much time to be online.
I know exactly what you mean about the shock of it. It's like you see the accident as it happens but are powerless to avoid it except cringe and wait for what seems like slow motion before the inevitable bang.


There is not much chance of the other witness being unbiased, seeing as it was his partner who was following in the car behind.

David09

MickySticks wrote: »

Did you talk to the driver of the car that was coming behind the jeep, maybe they can help you with your case.

It was yer man's partner in the car behind.

I've a sneaking suspicion that the jeep might not have been insured. Tax and nct were expired and the driver said that he was driving it on 3rd party cover. Asking him who owned the jeep, he replied that it was his. Info from a reliable computer operator source tells me that its in someone else's name.

lostboy

why was he skidding? and where the guards called?

bubbuz

David09 wrote: »

It was yer man's partner in the car behind.

I've a sneaking suspicion that the jeep might not have been insured. Tax and nct were expired and the driver said that he was driving it on 3rd party cover. Asking him who owned the jeep, he replied that it was his. Info from a reliable computer operator source tells me that its in someone else's name.

The jeep was therefore illegally on the road, in my eyes your mother had a legal right to use the road the jeep driver did not, must be something in your mothers favor there surely.

mathepac

If you have information that the other car was on the road illegally (no tax, no NCT (private or commercial tax disc?) and no insurance), then you need to contact the MIBI immediately (as well as the cops - did your mother call them?).

As it seems the driver was uninsured, your mother needs to inform her own insurance, contact the insurance company named on the jeep's insurance disc, establish that the driver was not insured and then lodge a claim with the MIBI.

The guards must also be notified as he could very well face prosecution on multiple charges.

From MIBI site "If you have been the victim of a road traffic accident where the alleged offending vehicle is unidentified or where it is believed that the vehicle was uninsured ... "

Hope your mother recovers from the shock and will not have any lasting consequences.

HTH

CiniO

David09 wrote: »

The right hand front of the jeep hit the car, just where the bullbar attaches.

So I assume that only skid you were telling about, was just braking as he surely was braking to avoid head-on crash. I can't really see how would this put full blame on his side. Only exception would be if someone would check his brake traces and calculate the speed he was doing, but was it done? And even if it was, usually those roads have 80km/h speed limit, so it's very unlikely he was over it.

bubbuz wrote: »

The jeep was therefore illegally on the road, in my eyes your mother had a legal right to use the road the jeep driver did not, must be something in your mothers favor there surely.

No, unfortunately it wouldn't. Lack of required paperwork can't determine who is to blame for causing an accident.

If he indeed didn't have tax, NCT and insurance, he should be obviously responsible for those offences, but they can't determine about who was to blame.

If 2 vehicles collided on a narrow unmarked road, most likely it will be 50/50.

dilallio

Before you try and decide who is responsible or what the share of responsibility is, you mum needs to do the following:

Inform her insurance company.

Notify the Gardai

The insurance company will investigate and decide the share of responsibility. Make sure she lets them know that the jeep's tax & NCT were out of date and there is a suspicion that the driver wasn't insured. If the jeep's NCT is out of date, there may be issues with its roadworthiness which could be a cause of the accident.

The Gardai are responsible for determining if the other driver had an up to date licence / insurance / NCT. When she calls them, tell her to ask for the name of the Garda - the insurance company will require this information. Better if she calls in herself in person rather than phoning.

db330

When the accident happened why weren't the gardi called straight away???

As regards the no tax and insurance issue, why do you believe it didn't have any???
And it is more than likely a commercial so it doesn't need NCT just a DOE before it can be taxed.

But like said above on a small country road, unless you can prove your mother was stopped it will be 50:50 (unless he was over 80kmph)

voojeq

its pretty obvious its the lad in the jeep fault, he lost control and hit your mums car, simple

CiniO

voojeq wrote: »

its pretty obvious its the lad in the jeep fault, he lost control and hit your mums car, simple

No. It's not simple.
Who said he lost control?

Henry Ford III

I'm slightly puzzled on the insurance side of things.

After the impact the Gardai were called, and presumably they took everbody's details. I also assume the 2 drivers involved swapped insurance details.

If the other side didn't/couldn't provide them why didn't they Gardai act on that?

Henry Ford III

Henry Ford III wrote: »

..........

After the impact the Gardai were called..........

I'm not sure they were...

voojeq

whenever there is a problem at who's to blame on traffic accident, you call the gards

whenever there is a suspicion that one of accident users didnt have insurance, you call the gards

its pretty much common sense all this

CiniO

voojeq wrote: »

whenever there is a problem at who's to blame on traffic accident, you call the gards

whenever there is a suspicion that one of accident users didnt have insurance, you call the gards

its pretty much common sense all this

Heh, this is indeed a common sense for me, but again (the same as in the thread about indicating) it seems to be different to reality.

When there is a problem who is to blame on traffic accident, there is no point in ringing garda, as they won't be of any help - they can't decide who is to blame.

Is that stupid - yes. Is that how it works in Ireland - yes.

Henry Ford III

RoverJames wrote: »

I'm not sure they were...

Big mistake if they weren't, particularly as the other vehicle attempted to drive off.

Jimdagym

CiniO wrote: »

Heh, this is indeed a common sense for me, but again (the same as in the thread about indicating) it seems to be different to reality.

When there is a problem who is to blame on traffic accident, there is no point in ringing garda, as they won't be of any help - they can't decide who is to blame.

Is that stupid - yes. Is that how it works in Ireland - yes.

You are right, they won't apportion blame, but they will check for valid insurance.

Henry Ford III

CiniO wrote: »

Heh, this is indeed a common sense for me, but again (the same as in the thread about indicating) it seems to be different to reality.

When there is a problem who is to blame on traffic accident, there is no point in ringing garda, as they won't be of any help - they can't decide who is to blame.

Is that stupid - yes. Is that how it works in Ireland - yes.

The Gardai are only interested when someone is injured, or when there was some illegality involved.

They are not after event kerbside judges of fault in a civil matter - that's a good thing btw.

Can a cop dispense an on the spot judgement of liability in Poland?

voojeq

Yes sorry was thinking its pretty much the same here like in Poland, in my country its the Police who makes decision at who's to blame

sorry for misleading info in previous post then

djimi

Did your mother get any pictures of the scene of the accident? Assuming it ends up her word against his then any proof at all will come in handy. If he skidded into her then you need to go find proof of this (get pictures of the skidmarks).

Was it a blind bend that your mother was approaching? If so then the fact that he skidded into her shows that he was driving too fast to cope with the conditions (on a narrow road a blind bend should be taken at crawling pace). It sounds like its pretty clearly his fault, but you need to go document every scrap of evidence that you can find at the scene to prove this. Skidmarks pointing towards your mothers side of the road and an accident spot that is on her side of the road should give her a strong case I would have thought.

djimi

Henry Ford III wrote: »

The Gardai are only interested when someone is injured, or when there was some illegality involved.

They are not after event kerbside judges of fault in a civil matter - that's a good thing btw.

The Gardai cannot decide blame but they will document the scene fully and their evidence will be taken into account when it comes to deciding who was at fault.

CiniO

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Can a cop dispense an on the spot judgement of liability in Poland?

Yes. But you don't have to agree with him, in which case thing goes to court.

In short what happens, if there is an accident, you can call the cops, and they will come over, interview all drivers involved, check traces (like broken glass, tyre marks, etc), maybe talk to any witnesses if the are any, and decide who is to blame (who caused accident). They also issue a fine and penalty points for a driver who was at fault, which in my opinion makes sense, as if f.e. speeding is a offence for which you get penalized, why crashing into other road used wouldn't be an offence.

Obviously driver who was decided to be at fault by cops, might not accept that face, and refuse to accept a fine, and then case goes to court, where information gathered by cops is used as an evidence. However it happends quite seldom that people don't accept the blame, unless it's obvious that cops are missing something or making a wrong judgement.

What I like about this solution the most, is that all the evidence is being gathered by cops so often is easy to say who was to blame. In Irish system, when everyone just reports what happened to insurance companies, there is way more possibilities for misinterpretation. Someone could have been driving at 160km/h but it can't be proven until brake traces will be checked.
Also what I like is fact of issuing penalty points for person who caused accident.
In Ireland driver A might be accident free for 30 years, and just get flashed for speeding few times and loose the licence, while driver B, might be never speeding, but crashing into other road users every week, but will never loose licence.
In Poland if you crash to often, you will loose your licence, which makes sense IMHO.

CiniO

djimi wrote: »

The Gardai cannot decide blame but they will document the scene fully and their evidence will be taken into account when it comes to deciding who was at fault.

Will they?
I've read on this forum many many times, that they won't.

djimi

CiniO wrote: »

Will they?
I've read on this forum many many times, that they won't.

If they are there then they will because either parties insurance company can call on them for evidence of the scene. My sister had a crash a few years ago that the insurance wanted to blame on her until they spoke to the Garda who was at the scene whos evidence made it very clear that she was in no way at fault.

Ive had a couple of incidents which required the Gardai to be called, as well as seeing other family members and friends have accidents, and the Gardai have always documented the scene and given evidence to the insurance when called upon. Its the main reason I think anyone would be crazy not to call the Gardai when they have a crash. They are also brilliant at assisting the parties involved in getting each others relevant details and taking statements to get their sides of the story in writing.

Just to be clear, when I say they will document the scene I dont mean they call out the CSI and go through it with a fine toothcomb; more that they will take statements of the parties involved and witnesses, and make some notes of what they see of the vehicles, their position on the road, anything relevant etc.

CiniO

djimi wrote: »

If they are there then they will because either parties insurance company can call on them for evidence of the scene. My sister had a crash a few years ago that the insurance wanted to blame on her until they spoke to the Garda who was at the scene whos evidence made it very clear that she was in no way at fault.

Ive had a couple of incidents which required the Gardai to be called, as well as seeing other family members and friends have accidents, and the Gardai have always documented the scene and given evidence to the insurance when called upon. Its the main reason I think anyone would be crazy not to call the Gardai when they have a crash. They are also brilliant at assisting the parties involved in getting each others relevant details and taking statements to get their sides of the story in writing.

Just to be clear, when I say they will document the scene I dont mean they call out the CSI and go through it with a fine toothcomb; more that they will take statements of the parties involved and witnesses, and make some notes of what they see of the vehicles, their position on the road, anything relevant etc.

That's all really what's needed.
It's actually great to hear that news.

djimi

CiniO wrote: »

They also issue a fine and penalty points for a driver who was at fault, which in my opinion makes sense, as if f.e. speeding is a offence for which you get penalized, why crashing into other road used wouldn't be an offence.
.
.
.

Also what I like is fact of issuing penalty points for person who caused accident.
In Ireland driver A might be accident free for 30 years, and just get flashed for speeding few times and loose the licence, while driver B, might be never speeding, but crashing into other road users every week, but will never loose licence.
In Poland if you crash to often, you will loose your licence, which makes sense IMHO.

To put it bluntly, **** happens sometimes and its not always someones fault. Even in the case where one party is more at fault the other party isnt always blameless. Its a nice idea in theory to issue points/fine to someone at fault for an accident, but Im not sure that its right just to issue penalties for every accident that happens. If the driver at fault is guilty of an offense such as speeding/dangerous driving/drunk driving etc then they can and will be punished seperately if its proven.

Plus, as with every accident that leads to an insurance claim, the party at fault is penalized heavily by their insurance company anyway, which in a lot of cases is a harder penalty than a couple of points and a small fine...

CiniO

djimi wrote: »

Its a nice idea in theory to issue points/fine to someone at fault for an accident, but Im not sure that its right just to issue penalties for every accident that happens.

Maybe I didn't mention it, but in Poland it's up to policeman to decide the amount of penalty and penalty points to issue for person who caused an accident (within some set limits). Surely someone who cracked someone's bumper while reversing on the parking, won't be penalised the same as someone who ran through red light and destroyed 3 cars.

If the driver at fault is guilty of an offense such as speeding/dangerous driving/drunk driving etc then they can and will be punished seperately if its proven.

That's good, but IMHO causing the accident should be an offense itself.
Like f.e. someone speeding on an empty road is not doing a harm to anyone but deserved a fine. So why someone who causes an accident, not be fined, as by crashing into someone he/she definitely did harm to someone else.

Plus, as with every accident that leads to an insurance claim, the party at fault is penalized heavily by their insurance company anyway, which in a lot of cases is a harder penalty than a couple of points and a small fine...

Generally yes, but if someone is very rich, and don't care how much he/she pays for insurance, he can actually crash every day, and still drive.
While if penalty points were issued for every crash, after few of them, he would loose his licence, which should be the case.

David09

Right. A little update. It's been a long day (/yawn).


As posters suspected, the guards weren't called. My mother asked the other party to call them as she hadn't a phone. They replied that they hadn't their no. She told them to dial 999. They said they couldn't get through. (yeah, right, lame excuse). When I arrived, I didn't bother ringing them as they would only take forever to come out, but also just instruct both parties to exchange details and clear up the road. However, in hindsight, not calling them was a bad mistake on my part.
This morning, first thing I phoned the garda in Leighlinbridge and told him the story. He logged the details and told me to try sort it out with the other party myself. If negotiations fail to come back to him. He also added that he was finishing up work for the day and would be going on holidays for a week and would therefore be unavailable. :eek::mad::mad:
Later today, I received a call from my mother's insurance company. Liberty group, formerly of Quinn Direct fame. They were less than helpful, almost to the point of being insulting. They advised off the record that the car was "worth only a few hundred quid" and to take any offer that comes out of it. Yeah right... :eek::mad::mad: I have a figure in mind of €1500. I think it is a rational and realistic price that the car is worth. Two ford dealers have confirmed this and after a quick check on revenue site it lists a similar car at a value of €2000 for vrt purposes. So far we have mitigated our losses. We towed the car home on a rope, elimanating any expensive towing fees and have not chosen to hire a replacement car either. €1500 is a reasonable price in my own opinion.
Anyway, I then contacted the insurance company who the jeep was insured with. They informed me that the policy was active, but the driver was not insured or named on the policy. I then contacted the main garda station in Carlow to find out if they could tell me who the registered owner was, only to receive an "arms folded" response of "nothing we can do, go see the investigating garda"... ....who is off duty for a week..


So far, my mother has and remains to be at the loss of transport in that she has no other car to drive. Attempts to contact the jeep driver have so far failed.

mathepac

I know it was probably hard to take in amidst all the off-topic nonsense, but this post http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77483316&postcount=16
of mine details your next steps with the MIBI. You now have confirmation that the driver appears to be uninsured so fill out the initial form from the website. If you need help feel free to PM me; it'll save the post disappearing in another cloud of "why Poland is great and Ireland is rubbish".

Now that you have spoken to two Guards to no avail, write to the local Superintendent by name via registered post asking why your request for a follow-up investigation to an uninsured driver in an RTA has been ignored and asking for his help. Also contact your local TD about the matter. Do not let this go-boy get away scot-free with uninsured driving just because our public servants are lax and lazy - the old story, lots of law, zero enforcement.

David09

Attached are two screenshots of google maps. The first is the road my mother travelled before crashing. The road is uphill and has a right hand bend. She had just negotiated the bend before the sight of the skidding jeep greeted her.

Second screenshot is the road from the other side of the bend. The jeep skidded down this decline before striking the car as it came towards it, around the bend. The jeep had a straight run downhill where it gather speed, but the car was travelling uphill and had slowed down to take the bend.

David09

mathepac wrote: »

I know it was probably hard to take in amidst all the off-topic nonsense, but this post http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=77483316&postcount=16
of mine details your next steps with the MIBI........

Thanks for the link.

Damien360

And this is why we get so frustrated with the gardai. If the investigating garda could'nt be bothered when he returns from his holidays then the while thing will end right there.

Mycroft H

Another reason why I'm using the dash cam. It could have come out useful in this situation.

CiniO

mathepac wrote: »

it'll save the post disappearing in another cloud of "why Poland is great and Ireland is rubbish".

Just in case, to protect myself against any blame - I never said anything like above.

djimi

Damien360 wrote: »

And this is why we get so frustrated with the gardai. If the investigating garda could'nt be bothered when he returns from his holidays then the while thing will end right there.

The Garda would most likely have taken down the details and they would be on record at the station, but cosidering they were not called to and present at the scene of the accident, Im not sure what they have on record amounts to much more than a call logging the fact that the accident took place, and a one sided account of the accident.

OP when you spoke to the Garda did you ask him for the contact details of a colleague that you can speak to in case the first Garda is not available?

Gumbo

OP, why dont you simply call the other insurabce company, give them the policy number and initiate a claim. Tha t will get things moving.

David09

David09 wrote: »

..............
Anyway, I then contacted the insurance company who the jeep was insured with. They informed me that the policy was active, but the driver was not insured or named on the policy..............

Was the jeep a commercial or passenger model?
3rd part extension is usually only on passenger vehicles, if the driver claims they were covered on a 3rd party extension and the yoke is commercial I'd be thinking they were actually uninsured.

David09

RoverJames wrote: »

Was the jeep a commercial or passenger model?
3rd part extension is usually only on passenger vehicles, if the driver claims they were covered on a 3rd party extension and the yoke is commercial I'd be thinking they were actually uninsured.

Your thoughts are spot-on. I eventually got through to the other party today. He claims that the accident was 50/50 and that repairs to his jeep are going to cost the wrong side of 2k. That's a steaming pile of b.s.

Anyway, he gave me the insurance details of his private car. When contacted, they told me that they won't cover him to drive the jeep. He wasn't covered on the jeep's insurance policy, so it looks like we'll be dealing with MIBI.

:mad::mad:

johnos1984

David09 wrote: »

Anyway, he gave me the insurance details of his private car. When contacted, they told me that they won't cover him to drive the jeep. He wasn't covered on the jeep's insurance policy, so it looks like we'll be dealing with MIBI.

:mad::mad:

Naturally as the Jeep would have commercial insurance and the car wouldn't.

A lot of people don't realise you can't drive a commercial even if you have third party extension on your car policy

Mycroft H

****ty luck. How quick are MIBI on paying out?

David09

johnos1984 wrote: »

Naturally as the Jeep would have commercial insurance and the car wouldn't.

A lot of people don't realise you can't drive a commercial even if you have third party extension on your car policy

The jeep was a private passenger model, but even so, he wasn't covered to drive a 4x4.