Car crash

pollocks

HI I just had a bad crash on Friday and I hope I'm in the right, opinions please!
So I was travelling to work just driving out of town doing 60 kph in a 60 zone and a car traveling in the opposite direction was indicating to turn right. So I was breaking incase he pulled out when he did I jumped on the breaks but still t-boned him. Cars in ****e..
Guards and ambulance called all ok just taken to hospital for checks. Witness was behind the other driver told the guards "I can't believe he chanced it, the other guy had no chance of stopping " So basically I crashed into him but there was no way of avoiding him...

Nino Brown

You're totally in the right, how could you possibly be in the wrong?

Mikros

100% in the right. Other guy pulled out in front of you when he should be yielding to oncoming traffic.

pollocks

Nino Brown wrote: »

You're totally in the right, how could you possibly be in the wrong?

Yeah I was thinking the same but I started reading a few posts here that got me a bit unsure!! Just the fact I hit him

CiniO

pollocks wrote: »

Yeah I was thinking the same but I started reading a few posts here that got me a bit unsure!! Just the fact I hit him

You didn't hit him.
He hit you - with the side of his car

No Pants

Have you informed your insurance company?

JohnDx

As long as you have that witness who saw everything you should be ok, but if the other driver saids he/she was'nt at fault, then it could come down to both insurance companies sorting it out between them.

pollocks

I rang my insurance company yesterday but the claims department is closed until Tuesday. They took some details and will ring me back on Tuesday

kravmaga

Hi Op, hope you are both okay. Get the name, collar number of the Garda who attended. Give a statement and ask the Garda if the witness driving behind the other driver has given a statement. Sounds like the other driver may be prosecuted for careless and inconsiderate driving. Did you take photos of the vehicles final positions on the road after the crash. Would be handy for insurance company report.

MAJJ

Hope your ok, sounds like an awful frightening thing. Not your fault at all and nothing you could have done to avoid it. Witness we be key to this, so as advised check if guards have their statement. I wish you the best with all ghost.

pollocks

kravmaga wrote: »

Hi Op, hope you are both okay. Get the name, collar number of the Garda who attended. Give a statement and ask the Garda if the witness driving behind the other driver has given a statement. Sounds like the other driver may be prosecuted for careless and inconsiderate driving. Did you take photos of the vehicles final positions on the road after the crash. Would be handy for insurance company report.

I'm afraid I didn't get a chance to take any photos or details I was put on a board and neck brace and off to hospital just gave my version to the guard and breathalyzed. I just got the witnesses phone number

timmy4u2

You have a very good chance of being regarded as being blameless.
However there are a few considerations here.
Do not rely on the fact that you were driving precisely on the speed limit limit.

The nature, condition and use of the roadway plus the amount of traffic that was therein or could reasonably expected to be therein has to be taken into consideration.

The fact that the speed limit in the area showed a limit of 60kph does not mean that it is safe to drive at the upper limit or indeed legally correct to drive at the upper limit.

You also state that you commenced to brake as you were afraid that the other car may cross your path.
You need to explain why you thought the other car may cross your path, and having come to that conclusion why you were still unable to stop without causing considerable damage to both cars.
Remember the other car was not proceeding against you so therefore did not shorten the distance between the two cars nor did it contribute to the force of the accident.

The fact that injuries were disclosed(and this is borne out by the administration of an breathalyser test) means that it has to be investigated so I assume that both drivers received an oral warning of intention to prosecute.
You say the witness stated that they could not "believe he chanced it, the other driver had no chancecof stopping"
You have to establish in what circumstances that statement was made. He could be saying the other car was travelling at such a great speed that it was clear to him that you could not stop.
All of the above is not a frightner but just what has to be considered.
In the end of the day the question to be answered is"if the other driver and you had taken everything into consideration would the accident have happened"
Hope it works out for you.

pollocks

kravmaga wrote: »

Hi Op, hope you are both okay. Get the name, collar number of the Garda who attended. Give a statement and ask the Garda if the witness driving behind the other driver has given a statement. Sounds like the other driver may be prosecuted for careless and inconsiderate driving. Did you take photos of the vehicles final positions on the road after the crash. Would be handy for insurance company report.

I'm afraid I didn't get a chance to take any photos or details I was put on a board and neck brace and off to hospital just gave my version to the guard and breathalyzed. I just got the witnesses phone number

coolbeans

You seem to be in the right however your braking could have been seen as implicit " Go ahead" from his pov therefore if you're unlucky a small amount of the blame may be apportioned to you. This is a technicality and unlikely to arise but braking like that isn't a good idea generally. It's unexpected by traffic behind you and may have given the wrong message to the offending driver. Just worth bearing in mind in future.
When I cycle for example I'd never slow down as you did as I don't want him taking a chance and cutting across me as happened to you. Communication is an important and overlooked part of driving.

Lmklad

timmy4u2 wrote: »

The fact that injuries were disclosed(and this is borne out by the administration of an breathalyser test) means that it has to be investigated so I assume that both drivers received an oral warning of intention to prosecute.

Couple of things on this contribution. Firstly the oral warning is no longer used and has not been in use since 2001. Secondly, the OP is to be congratulated on using initiative on slowing down. This does not in anyway lessen the wrongness of the other vehicle. The other driver pulled across the path of an on coming vehicle and therefore is completely at fault. Finally the breathalyzer is now used at ALL road traffic collisions, it is not an indication of intention to prosecute but merely standard procedure since the introduction of the last Road Traffic Act.

MugMugs

Hi OP, there's a bit of unnecessary scare mongering along with some good advice up above.

Long and short of it, he crossed your path. There's no disputing the evidence and that of a Garda report in the unlikely event that the third party even tries to dispute liability.

Look after yourself and let your insurer deal with the mess and don't be stressing yourself with the should haves and what ifs

i57dwun4yb1pt8

coolbeans wrote: »

You seem to be in the right however your braking could have been seen as implicit " Go ahead" from his pov therefore if you're unlucky a small amount of the blame may be apportioned to you. This is a technicality and unlikely to arise but braking like that isn't a good idea generally. It's unexpected by traffic behind you and may have given the wrong message to the offending driver. Just worth bearing in mind in future.
When I cycle for example I'd never slow down as you did as I don't want him taking a chance and cutting across me as happened to you. Communication is an important and overlooked part of driving.

absolute rubbish

coolbeans

DaDumTish wrote: »

absolute rubbish

How is it? Address each point please then I'll take you apart.

colm_mcm

coolbeans wrote: »

You seem to be in the right however your braking could have been seen as implicit " Go ahead" from his pov therefore if you're unlucky a small amount of the blame may be apportioned to you. This is a technicality and unlikely to arise but braking like that isn't a good idea generally. It's unexpected by traffic behind you and may have given the wrong message to the offending driver. Just worth bearing in mind in future.
When I cycle for example I'd never slow down as you did as I don't want him taking a chance and cutting across me as happened to you. Communication is an important and overlooked part of driving.

Far as I know, you can flash your lights, gesture for him to take the turn, put a big sign up - but the other person is still in the wrong.

djimi

coolbeans wrote: »

How is it? Address each point please then I'll take you apart.

Its extremely unlikely that someone slowing down would ever been seen as a signal to "go ahead", unless it was a case of slowing down to a near standstill. Even still, regardless of what the OP was doing, they are still on the main road and they still have right of way; the other car has no right to pull out unless they have very good reason to believe that they can (ie the other car stops to let them out).

coolbeans

It's true, I prefaced the point with the other guy is in the wrong however it's easy to see how the offender would think " I'll have a go" at the OPs's hesitation. I've seen it on bikes both motor and pedal powered and done a defensive driving course where you're taught to proceed without hesitation for fear of giving the wrong message. The same principles apply. if it was a serious incident precedent is there in law that such actions can be taken as a failure to proceedwhich has effected the scale of insurance payout. Obviously, it goes without saying that cutting across the op was the overwhelming cause of the collision but it's an interesting point imo.

djimi

Its an interesting point in theory, but I would thought that the other party would need to have a witness who would be willing to back up their claim that the OP slowed down sufficiently so as to give off the impression that they were allowing them out, and chances are if they slowed up that much then they would have been able to stop in time. I just dont see it happen in the vast majority of cases, and if the other party did chance their arm then they would most likely be quickly told where to go with themselves. All the evidence points to them pulling out into traffic when they did not have right of way, and they would need significant evidence to have any hope of proving that they are not at fault.

greasepalm

glad your not more seriously hurt and it does seem to me that he is in the wrong,might i add your tax insurance and nct are valid and your car was in a safe state to drive on road,with an accident like that car would get towed away and tyres and brakes and other things checked to be above the limit.
its just a sign of the times now we see cars with bald tyres and brakes worn out.

Stavros Murphy

I await it turning to be the OPs fault in some way or the other. It's been hinted already...

Noccy_Mondy

colm_mcm wrote: »

Far as I know, you can flash your lights, gesture for him to take the turn, put a big sign up - but the other person is still in the wrong.

This has nothing to do with the OP's case, but there's scammers going around that will do just that; flash their lights to let you cross and then continue on and intentionally crash into you as you turn in front of them, all in the hope of getting an insurance payout/compensation, whatever. Sounds mad, but it has happened and is happening!

ebbsy

Get a solicitor.

djimi

ebbsy wrote: »

Get a solicitor.

Why? Should be no need for that unless it gets very messy. Insurance companies will sort it out.

Larry Wildman

coolbeans wrote: »

How is it? Address each point please then I'll take you apart.

So the OP slowed because he had a feeling that some gobsh1te would turn across him.

And that's exactly what happened, yet somehow you see that as potential grounds for blaming the OP.

Utter nonsense.

What should the OP have done...ploughed ahead at full speed and risked his life?

We've all been driving, seen someone, said / thought "that clown is going to pull out" and then seen them do it.

bmwguy

Noccy_Mondy wrote: »

This has nothing to do with the OP's case, but there's scammers going around that will do just that; flash their lights to let you cross and then continue on and intentionally crash into you as you turn in front of them, all in the hope of getting an insurance payout/compensation, whatever. Sounds mad, but it has happened and is happening!

Its known as flash for cash in some countries.

Stern

Larry Wildman wrote: »

So the OP slowed because he had a feeling that some gobsh1te would turn across him.

And that's exactly what happened, yet somehow you see that as potential grounds for blaming the OP.

Utter nonsense.

What should the OP have done...ploughed ahead at full speed and risked his life?

We've all been driving, seen someone, said / thought "that clown is going to pull out" and then seen them do it.

I don't think coolbeans was saying that the OP is possibly going to be blamed for this, he was just giving his opinion about the general situation that might have occurred (obviously we don't have a video replay so we can discuss all we like). I agree that if you slow down before somebody who is turning off, you MAY give off the impression that you are going to let them in.

However, you should add to that a flash of the lights and/or a hand gesture. The OP didn't mention either of these, he only said he was slowing down as a precaution. He may not have lived to post if he hadn't done that.

Either way we all agree the other driver is in the wrong, based off the OPs description. I hope they all don't have any lasting injury from it.

greasepalm

i would also slow down foot off accelerator pedal coming up to junctions and better to be cautious than dead,maybe other car thought he was in first gear and would have time to pull out of way and found out was in second gear and oops bang? its happened to me pulling away from lights not gone down to first gear.

coolisin

Stavros Murphy wrote: »

I await it turning to be the OPs fault in some way or the other. It's been hinted already...

Well that already has happened.

Very frustrating to read these types of threads lately.

coolbeans

Larry Wildman wrote: »

So the OP slowed because he had a feeling that some gobsh1te would turn across him.

And that's exactly what happened, yet somehow you see that as potential grounds for blaming the OP.

Utter nonsense.

What should the OP have done...ploughed ahead at full speed and risked his life?

We've all been driving, seen someone, said / thought "that clown is going to pull out" and then seen them do it.

Try reading the post instead of replying to what you think I said

Larry Wildman

coolbeans wrote: »

your braking could have been seen as implicit " Go ahead" from his pov therefore if you're unlucky a small amount of the blame may be apportioned to you...braking like that isn't a good idea generally. It's unexpected by traffic behind you and may have given the wrong message to the offending driver.

Coolbeans, your post clearly seeks to apportion some blame to the OP.

That's plain wrong.

Supergurrier

Be careful he will take you apart (like warm bread most likely)

Rubberchikken

OP cannot see how you could have done anything other than what you did.
The onus has to be on the car attempting to cross over the road to wait until the road is clear and it's safe to do so.

Otherwise what would be the point of yielding to traffic that has the right of way as you obviously did.

imo and it's just that, a speed limit is just a speed limit, not a target. The condition of the road, weather, where the road is etc must be all taken into account, so you doing 60 in a 60 makes no difference.

Hopefully everything works out for you.

pollocks

Just got a letter from axa today they accept full liability. So I have to see what kind of figure they come up with for my car now.

whomitconcerns

pollocks wrote: »

Just got a letter from axa today they accept full liability. So I have to see what kind of figure they come up with for my car now.

Erm...no....Its whatever figure you give them! Not what they give you. Your claiming off the other partys insurance! Go get your quotes and dont let them come at you with a number

pollocks

whomitconcerns wrote: »

Erm...no....Its whatever figure you give them! Not what they give you. Your claiming off the other partys insurance! Go get your quotes and dont let them come at you with a number

Yeah I know what I'll be fighting for !! Have to ring them tomorrow and see what the story is.

Ardennes1944

Good luck I had a tough time getting a somewhat respectable price for my car after a crash last winter, fight tooth and nail!

seagull

Remember that if it's going to be repaired, they'll generally give you about 10% of the repair value as compensation for the depreciation in value to your car due to the crash.

Given that you had to be carried away on a bodyboard, axa are probably more concerned over potential medical claims than haggling over the value of the car.

pollocks

The car is a write off it was a 09 2.2 civic es gt hard to get here with that spec, it had the panoramic roof auto headlights and auto wipers

Stheno

pollocks wrote: »

The car is a write off it was a 09 2.2 civic es gt hard to get here with that spec, it had the panoramic roof auto headlights and auto wipers

You may well not get the full value of it then as the assessors/claims handlers may not have that spec on their books and will base it on a lower spec