Car accident hit on the side while turning right

Nitramyelood · 19-06-2013 2:11pm #1

Hi
Last week on a main road i was turning right i had my indicator light on as i manovered this guy overtaking me hit my car at the front wheel.
Big shock -Guards were called and he said first he thought it was the hazards light on then he said he thought i was turning left!
I imagined he would accept liability (damage circa 2K) now the insurance company informed me that he is not accepteing liability
Can any one tell me my options and if i have any chance of getting his insurance company to pay for the damage
Thanks

T-Maxx · 19-06-2013 2:16pm

Will probably end up 50/50. You turned without making sure it's safe, he overtook without making sure it's safe.

dilallio · 19-06-2013 2:27pm

What did the guards say?

djimi · 19-06-2013 2:28pm

It sounds very much like you attempted the manoeuvre when it was not clear to do so (ie when someone was in the process of overtaking you). Im not sure that you are going to win this one to be honest.

Yawns · 19-06-2013 2:30pm

50/50? My arse. Contest it op.

Other guy overtook you while you were turning right. His fault.

Richard tea · 19-06-2013 2:31pm

You will be lucky to get 50/50. I was in a similar situation a number of years back when the guy in front decided to do a U turn. Thank christ I had witness

djimi · 19-06-2013 2:32pm

Yawns wrote: »

50/50? My arse. Contest it op.

Other guy overtook you while you were turning right. His fault.

Or, the OP turned right while being overtaken. The argument can be made for either/both parties to have the blame in this one.

Yawns · 19-06-2013 2:37pm

djimi wrote: »

Or, the OP turned right while being overtaken. The argument can be made for either/both parties to have the blame in this one.

The other driver admitted to the guards that he thought the OP was turning left or had hazards on. He was behind the OP at that stage I'm guessing. I'd certainly be confident that an insurance company would settle in the OP's favour.

tin79 · 19-06-2013 2:40pm

djimi wrote: »

Or, the OP turned right while being overtaken. The argument can be made for either/both parties to have the blame in this one.

Your logic completely baffles me at times.

AugustusMinimus · 19-06-2013 2:41pm

djimi wrote: »

Or, the OP turned right while being overtaken. The argument can be made for either/both parties to have the blame in this one.

I'd be interested in knowing the following.

1. OP, why were you turning right, was it on a junction ?
2. What were the road markings ?

If it was a junction, IIRC, it's illegal to overtake at a junction.

BTW, the other motorist already admitted he thought the OP had his hazards on so clearly the OP wasn't turning right without warning or after the other driver attempted the overtake.

19-06-2013 2:44pm

The person came from behind and overtook him while he was indicating right, how on earth can people attribute any blame to the op, madness. It should be 100% in favour of the op.

Denis322 · 19-06-2013 2:51pm

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

I'd be interested in knowing the following.

1. OP, why were you turning right, was it on a junction ?
2. What were the road markings ?

If it was a junction, IIRC, it's illegal to overtake at a junction.

BTW, the other motorist already admitted he thought the OP had his hazards on so clearly the OP wasn't turning right without warning or after the other driver attempted the overtake.

I would imagine it was to turn right onto a minor road or perhaps into a house and th OP was stopped waiting for the right moment.

To the OP, bad decision to turn without checking mirrors and blindspot, though I always though it was just to avoid the hassle of an accident occuring because of someone elses stupidity?

Green Diesel · 19-06-2013 2:53pm

It could be ambiguous if the car overtaking was already manoeuvring to overtake before OP indicated to turn right (for instance if there was a queue of cars being overtaken).

But I'd err on the side of OP. Always a good idea to check your mirrors before making the turn though (I've seen a few near misses with motorbikes)

AugustusMinimus · 19-06-2013 2:55pm

Denis322 wrote: »

I would imagine it was to turn right onto a minor road or perhaps into a house and th OP was stopped waiting for the right moment.

Illegal to overtake on a stretch of road where there's a junction.

djimi · 19-06-2013 3:00pm

Madisyn Proud Moped wrote: »

The person came from behind and overtook him while he was indicating right, how on earth can people attribute any blame to the op, madness. It should be 100% in favour of the op.

Because you always look behind you and make sure that it is clear to go before attempting to turn in any direction. Maybe Im being unfair to the OP here but I suspect that had they done so they would have seen this guy attempting to overtake him. Unless the OP can prove that they were most of the way into their manoeuvre when the car started to overtake, Im not sure if they are going to be able to get away without taking at least part of the blame.

BGozIE · 19-06-2013 3:01pm

Yawns wrote: »

50/50? My arse. Contest it op.

Other guy overtook you while you were turning right. His fault.

I would be inclined to agree with this. But then I thought about the situation, when turning right your supposed to be aware of your surroundings, so also checking your mirrors (particularly your driver side mirror etc).

I would imagine if he contested, a crash/claims investigator will be issued to inspect the car damage. If the damage on his car is on the front, it suggests he over took, mid way through your right turn, and he hit you. If the damage is on the side of his car, it suggests he was in the middle of his maneuver as you turned (ie. he was already nearly beyond you).

The second scenario seems unlikely as he would be in plain view of you as far as I can see. But as its contested it will be investigated, I can assure you.

PS As "AugustusMinimus"said, I also think it may be illegal to overtake at a junction.

knotknowbody · 19-06-2013 3:05pm

Yawns wrote: »

50/50? My arse. Contest it op.

Other guy overtook you while you were turning right. His fault.

I'd agree, he should not of overtaken you if you were indicating, even if you weren't indicating he should have been aware of the possibility of you turning right, if he was paying the proper amount of attention he would have known that there was a road to the right, and that as you are travelling slowly you were possibly taking it.

What are the road markings like at the junction, is there a continuous white line on the approaches to the junction. Is it legal to overtake in the immediate vicinity of a junction, I remember someone telling me it wasn't but could never looked for/found any legislation.

The overtaker has a responsibility to ensure the manoeuvre is safe, that includes anticipating what the target car is likely to do, attempting to understand why they are travelling slowly, interpreting any signals they may be displaying, ensuring the road is clear of oncoming traffic, ensuring no obstacles are likely to impinge on their projected path during the overtake. In this case it seem to me that the overtaker failed on a number of the above.

Was the overtaker signalling his intent to overtake, if he wasn't then I fail to see how the OP could bare any responsibility, if the OP was signalling and checked mirrors before commencing the manoeuvre, then there was little more they could do.

TGi666 · 19-06-2013 3:12pm

Mate of mine had a similar thing happen with 2 witnesses in the car and outcome was 50/50

seamus · 19-06-2013 3:13pm

Madisyn Proud Moped wrote: »

The person came from behind and overtook him while he was indicating right, how on earth can people attribute any blame to the op, madness. It should be 100% in favour of the op.

Because what seems like common sense - the guy overtaking was a complete moron - often doesn't play out like that in the courts.

If the other driver contests, it has to be brought back to the bare facts and the law. If you are being overtaken and you turn right, that's your fault - that's failure to yield*. Indicators do not confer a right of way, only an intention. The other driver for his part could be said to have overtaken without ensuring the way was clear.

This is why people say 50/50.

Go back to the scene and see if there's anything which is relevant - did he overtake on a solid white line, etc. Pass all of the info you have onto your insurance company and let them deal with it.

*If you want a clearer example of this, imagine you're sitting in a line of traffic, waiting for ages, you say, "screw this", indicate, then swing right to make a U-turn, T-boning the motorcyclist who was overtaking you but you didn't see because you didn't look. Who's at fault? You are.

19-06-2013 3:18pm

djimi wrote: »

Because you always look behind you and make sure that it is clear to go before attempting to turn in any direction. Maybe Im being unfair to the OP here but I suspect that had they done so they would have seen this guy attempting to overtake him. Unless the OP can prove that they were most of the way into their manoeuvre when the car started to overtake, Im not sure if they are going to be able to get away without taking at least part of the blame.

How do you know he didn't check his mirror? Also you can't be staring in your mirror as you make a maneuver. You check mirror and then check for oncoming traffic and move off. Very easy for someone to pull out to over take in this situation and not be seen.

Assuming the op is telling the truth and he did have his indicator on to turn right I think the person overtaking should be 100% to blame regardless of the op checking his mirrors or not.

People in motors really make me wonder at times finding anyway possible to get an angle on something to give blame where there should be none.

AugustusMinimus · 19-06-2013 3:19pm

seamus wrote: »

*If you want a clearer example of this, imagine you're sitting in a line of traffic, waiting for ages, you say, "screw this", indicate, then swing right to make a U-turn, T-boning the motorcyclist who was overtaking you but you didn't see because you didn't look. Who's at fault? You are.

The other person originally admitted he thought the OP's hazards were on and that's why he went to overtake.

While the court may find the OP as being 50% liable, I would attribute much less of the blame to the OP given the information he has provided us.

Appears to me that the other driver misidentified (or ignored) the indicator and recklessly went to overtake when the car in front was turning right.

19-06-2013 3:36pm

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

The other person originally admitted he thought the OP's hazards were on and that's why he went to overtake.

While the court may find the OP as being 50% liable, I would attribute much less of the blame to the OP given the information he has provided us.

Appears to me that the other driver misidentified (or ignored) the indicator and recklessly went to overtake when the car in front was turning right.

With the other party saying he (through poor observation) mistook an indicator of hazards I can't see why the court would rule 50% in his favour, he is essentially admitting its his fault. If they do well I'd question the ability of the judge.

AugustusMinimus · 19-06-2013 3:37pm

OP, do you have any witnesses to the other driver admitting he thought you had hazards on ?

cpoh1 · 19-06-2013 3:46pm

A friend was in the exact same situaiton as this - it went against him. Motorbike hit him as he was turning right into his estate. Jist of it was you crossed onto the other side of the road without due care and attention to your surroundings. A bit like an overtaking manouver, the person coming from behind has right of way.

ba_barabus · 19-06-2013 3:47pm

OP what car do you drive?

Certain cars will turn the hazards on if you brake hard. It's just a possibility to help explain it.

Nitramyelood · 19-06-2013 3:58pm

Hi All
Thanks for your comments
Just to clarify
it was on the main road and i was turning right into a minor road (broken white lines)
I checked my mirrors and saw the car behind me and put on my indicators-no problem there i slowed down checked my mirrors again saw him there again and proceded to turn right- then checked them again and the guy was trying to overtake i then swerved back to try and avoid him and he smashed into me
No sure what i did wrong!

AugustusMinimus · 19-06-2013 4:08pm

OP, others may clarify this but I believe it is illegal to overtake at a junction, even if the road markings allow it.

If this is the case it is certainly a factor which would go against the other driver.

19-06-2013 4:09pm

cpoh1 wrote: »

A friend was in the exact same situaiton as this - it went against him. Motorbike hit him as he was turning right into his estate. Jist of it was you crossed onto the other side of the road without due care and attention to your surroundings. A bit like an overtaking manouver, the person coming from behind has right of way.

I just cant understand that ruling. The person behind also crossed the white line, they were not showing due care for their surrounding and it all went on in front of them so much easier to observe so the fault should lie with them.

Next thing we will hear is getting rear ended is somehow the driver in fronts fault.

Obviously if you pull out to overtake in front of someone overtaking you then you are at fault but when someone is obviously slowing down for a junction and indicating etc then I would give 100% of the blame to the person coming from behind.

cpoh1 · 19-06-2013 4:35pm

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

OP, others may clarify this but I believe it is illegal to overtake at a junction, even if the road markings allow it.

If this is the case it is certainly a factor which would go against the other driver.

Its in the rules of the road which is a guidance document only. No reference in RTA so irrelevant in reality.

Madisyn Proud Moped wrote: »

I just cant understand that ruling. The person behind also crossed the white line, they were not showing due care for their surrounding and it all went on in front of them so much easier to observe so the fault should lie with them.

Next thing we will hear is getting rear ended is somehow the driver in fronts fault.

Obviously if you pull out to overtake in front of someone overtaking you then you are at fault but when someone is obviously slowing down for a junction and indicating etc then I would give 100% of the blame to the person coming from behind.

You must give way to cars to your right, only cross the broken white line if it is safe to do so. Its the insurance companies who made the call. Gardai wont care or get involved unless there is someone injured.

19-06-2013 4:41pm

cpoh1 wrote: »

You must give way to cars to your right, only cross the broken white line if it is safe to do so. Its the insurance companies who made the call. Gardai wont care or get involved unless there is someone injured.

So I indicate to turn right, check my mirror and see a car behind me (on my side of the road and rightly make the assumption they know I'm turning) I then proceed to turn and suddenly they swing out to overtake and hit me and it can somehow be blamed on me?

This is what it sounds like happened in the op's situation and I would give 100% of the blame to the person behind.

Henry Ford III · 19-06-2013 8:27pm

If I'm turning right and indicating accordingly, I shouldn't even need to check in my rear or door mirrors. Traffic can either pass me on my left if there's room, or else stop.

That's how I'd see it anyhow.

Gumbo · 19-06-2013 8:34pm

My mate was in this situation a few years back. Except he was the over taker and on a bike, insurance ruled against him. He didn't contest tbh, silly thing to do and I hope the OP wins this as its not his fault IMHO.

arleitiss · 19-06-2013 9:17pm

Makes me think what kind of retard overtakes on right when somebody is turning right..

T-Maxx · 20-06-2013 8:31am

I often see people indicating and not turning, or turning without indicating. I've also seen people indicating left and turning right, and vice-versa. (And I'm not only referring to roundabout behaviour here!)

And then you get those who think the place they're looking for is on the one side and indicate to turn accordingly, but then at the last minute realize it's actually and the other side, change indicator, and turn. (Definitely done this myself.)

Oh yes and how about those who start indicating sort of at the same time as they're starting to turn.

Don't even get me started on indicating mannerisms...:mad:

Anyway, according to the OP:

"first he thought it was the hazards light on then he said he thought i was turning left!"

Is it possible that the OP was partly at fault here? Of course it is.

R.O.R · 20-06-2013 9:24am

We need a google maps image of the road layout to give a more informed opinion.

Almost had a similar incident last week when a complete f**ktard in her MPV decided to turn right from the driving lane, rather than using right turn lane. I went in to the right turn lane and passed her, as did the car behind, so we both made the gap in traffic.

Met the same f**tard a few weeks before that and ended up hanging back while she completed the ridiculous manouver.

coolisin · 20-06-2013 9:50am

cpoh1 wrote: »

the person coming from behind has right of way.

What?? In my mind this is wrong, turning right across around somebody decides too overtake I need to give this person right of way even though they are clearly being an idiot.

While I'm not going to turn into them deliberately I will always check my mirrors blind spots ensure it's clear.

OP I hope this goes in your favour, sounds crazy that it may not.

H3llR4iser · 20-06-2013 10:32am

R.O.R wrote: »

... decided to turn right from the driving lane, rather than using right turn lane...

That's what I am thinking - this could be a crucial, missing piece of information: positioning on the road at the time of turning.

Provided he's not blatantly lying, the crashing driver's statement about initially thinking hazard lights were on, and then believing the car in front would turn left, seem to indicate the OP kept full on the left and then tried to dive right from there.

How did it go OP? Did you get as close to the broken line as possible before turning, or did you stay full left, maybe even went a big further left than normal for some reason (e.g. the side road you were entering was so narrow you need to have the car fully straight to go through)? It can make quite a difference when it comes to culpability...

20-06-2013 10:39am

I remember when learning to drive, I was stopped indicating right, about to turn, one last look in the mirror to see some insane person overtaking!
It happens and you really need to do last min checks

ffocused · 20-06-2013 6:26pm

I hit a car turning right years ago that pulled out into main road in front of me & then turned right straight away. (On a staggered t junction)
Guy gave me no other option, either I shunted his rear end or try passing.
Insurance companies logic found me 100% to blame!

meathstevie · 20-06-2013 6:50pm

If the OP's version of events is correct than there isn't really any interpretation than that the driver of the overtaking vehicle is 100% liable.

djimi · 20-06-2013 7:18pm

meathstevie wrote: »

If the OP's version of events is correct than there isn't really any interpretation than that the driver of the overtaking vehicle is 100% liable.

There has already been several people in this thread who have said that in this same scenario they have been found partially or fully liable as the car who was turning. Logically it might not make sense, but it seems insurance companies sees there being blame on both sides.

CiniO · 20-06-2013 11:20pm

Madisyn Proud Moped wrote: »

The person came from behind and overtook him while he was indicating right, how on earth can people attribute any blame to the op, madness. It should be 100% in favour of the op.

How do you know what happened first?
Maybe OP started indicating right when other car was half way through manouver of overtaking.

wonski · 21-06-2013 12:20am

That is why I always move as far to the right as possible, so there is no doubt what I am about to do. Indicate accordingly, too
I can't really understand some accidents - how one decides to overtake when you indicate right, and slow down???

Hope you get sorted op.

cpoh1 · 21-06-2013 8:03am

Lads it really depends on who started their manouver first. If a car is in the process of over taking 3-4 cars and the car up fron decides to take a right turn without looking for the car in the process of the overtaking manouver they are at fault simple as that.

If a car has already commited to a turn (not simply signalled/indicated) is in the process of turning and they are overtaken then the car overtaking is at fault.

Indicators are not a right of way. You have to give way to cars on your right hand side and only cross the broken white line when it is safe to do so.

Yawns · 21-06-2013 8:11am

Oh ffs the same rule your bashing op with also applies to the overtaking car. Must only cross when it's safe to do so and the road ahead is clear. The overtaking car admitted to the guards that he saw the lights and either mistook them for hazards or turning left. In order to see any of the lights on the left side of the OP's car, he would have had to have been behind them. Otherwise he could magically see through the car to see the lights on the left side.

I was in a very similiar position to the OP that one day as I was turning and someone decided to overtake me. I had slowed, indicated & checked etc and at the last second the guy behind decided to floor it and try go around. I tried to straighten up like what the OP said he tried and lucky for me I managed to avoid it. If I hadn't avoided being hit, I'd have contested and been quite confident of the other party being found 100% liable.

cpoh1 · 21-06-2013 8:15am

Henry Ford III wrote: »

If I'm turning right and indicating accordingly, I shouldn't even need to check in my rear or door mirrors. Traffic can either pass me on my left if there's room, or else stop.

That's how I'd see it anyhow.

What if you were looking to overtake somebody? Would you look in your mirrors then to check for someone coming up from behind? A person over taking from behind has right of way. At the end of the day in both instances you are crossing onto the other side of the road - except there is already a car there.

Not trying to start a boards tit for tat but you need to look at it from the other angle.

cpoh1 · 21-06-2013 8:29am

Yawns wrote: »

Oh ffs the same rule your bashing op with also applies to the overtaking car. Must only cross when it's safe to do so and the road ahead is clear. The overtaking car admitted to the guards that he saw the lights and either mistook them for hazards or turning left. In order to see any of the lights on the left side of the OP's car, he would have had to have been behind them. Otherwise he could magically see through the car to see the lights on the left side.

I was in a very similiar position to the OP that one day as I was turning and someone decided to overtake me. I had slowed, indicated & checked etc and at the last second the guy behind decided to floor it and try go around. I tried to straighten up like what the OP said he tried and lucky for me I managed to avoid it. If I hadn't avoided being hit, I'd have contested and been quite confident of the other party being found 100% liable.

Like I said its all about timing, if the other car is in the process of overtaking and you decide to make your turn then you may be considered at fault. Just because you indicate you dont have right of way. There is a car to your right that you need to give way to.

This is not clear cut, it will boil down to the type of road you are on and they traffic circumstances. Its not cut and dry. Whatever about the manners and poor driving skills of the overtaking car its not a simple case.

Yawns · 21-06-2013 8:34am

The onus is also on the driver of the overtaking car to ensure the way ahead is clear of any vehicles, pedestrians and objects in order to complete his maneuver. He can't simply pull out and overtake. If a car ahead of you on the road starts to indicate and slow down, then you do not overtake. Indicators do not give a right of way but they do signal your intention. Simply pulling out and flooring it doesn't give you a right of way either. The simple fact that he told the guards he saw the lights will go against him. If he was unsure of what the OP was doing, he should have slowed down and came to a halt if necessary.

Henry Ford III · 21-06-2013 8:56am

cpoh1 wrote: »

What if you were looking to overtake somebody? Would you look in your mirrors then to check for someone coming up from behind? A person over taking from behind has right of way. At the end of the day in both instances you are crossing onto the other side of the road - except there is already a car there.

Not trying to start a boards tit for tat but you need to look at it from the other angle.

Two entirely different scenarios.

If you are indicating to turn right following traffic should not try to overtake you.

If you want to overtake someone, and see someone is already overtaking traffic behind you, the thing to do is cancel your manouvre.

seamus · 21-06-2013 9:07am

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Two entirely different scenarios.

If you are indicating to turn right following traffic should not try to overtake you.

If you want to overtake someone, and see someone is already overtaking traffic behind you, the thing to do is cancel your manouvre.

They're actually not entirely different scenarios. In both cases you plan on changing your road position by turning right, which requires you to ensure that your way is clear, ahead and behind.

It's one of those annoying "what ifs" that have no real answer, it depends on each individual. What if someone turns right while you're overtaking them, but they haven't indicated? Your fault? Of course not.

cpoh1 · 21-06-2013 9:30am

Yawns wrote: »

The onus is also on the driver of the overtaking car to ensure the way ahead is clear of any vehicles, pedestrians and objects in order to complete his maneuver. He can't simply pull out and overtake. If a car ahead of you on the road starts to indicate and slow down, then you do not overtake. Indicators do not give a right of way but they do signal your intention. Simply pulling out and flooring it doesn't give you a right of way either. The simple fact that he told the guards he saw the lights will go against him. If he was unsure of what the OP was doing, he should have slowed down and came to a halt if necessary.

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Two entirely different scenarios.

If you are indicating to turn right following traffic should not try to overtake you.

If you want to overtake someone, and see someone is already overtaking traffic behind you, the thing to do is cancel your manouvre.

Lads this is all perfect common sense stuff and I agree with it but the legal surroundings are more complicated.

If you pull out into the path of an overtaking car whether you are turning right or overtaking then chances are you will be founmd liable even if its a stupid thing to do by the overtaking car. You should always check your mirrors and give way if necessary. Its a tick in the driving test not to do so when turning right if im not mistaken?

Situations that might bring it in your favour are if you have committed to the turn before the overtake has started or if you are in a built up urban area which is not suitable for overtaking. It'll come down to the insurance companies whim as my mate fell foul of.

Car accident hit on the side while turning right

Comments