Who would be to blame?

Luckydog69

Whilst driving yesterday afternoon I had a near miss with another motor vehicle. This is how it panned out ... I was travelling along doing approx 50 - 55 mph on a national secondary route, road surface dry and visibility perfect. I was a good safe distance behind the car in front ( which was also travelling within the speed limit, as he/she
had been in front of me for some time), this car in front indicated to turn right in advance of the junction he/she was turning into,giving me ample time and warning to adjust my speed etc.
When I checked my rear view mirror I noticed a very very fast car
approaching behind me ( BMW 640), he in turn decided to overtake me ( even tho my brakelights would have been on as I was slowing down).
When he was about level with me he noticed two things..1) The car in front of me was now virtually at a standstill waiting to turn right.
2) There was an approaching oncoming car!. He decided to take evasive action, namely hitting the anchors and steering his car into the ever decreasing gap between me
and the now stationary right turning car in front of me. He just got in on time to avoid a head on with the oncoming car.
I had to brake hard in order not to rear end him and thankfully the road was dry and avoided any contact with him.
I exchanged the obligatory flash of lights, beep of horn etc to him for been a dick. My question is: Had I ran into the rear of him who would have been responsible in the eyes of insurance companies?
Conventional wisdom will usually tell you that the driver
in the back is always at fault.Thankfully I avoided an accident but am interested in what others think. Thanks in advance for any input.

CiniO

He would be responsible.

That's of course assuming you could prove your version f.e. with a dashcam.

Crumbs868

CiniO wrote: »

He would be responsible.

That's of course assuming you could prove your version f.e. with a dashcam.

Not that black and white

CiniO

Crumbs868 wrote: »

Not that black and white

A car overtakes you, fits into small gap between yourself and car in front and slams on the brakes because car in front is stopped.
What is not black and white?
IMO it couldn't be blacker or whiter.

kirving

The BMW would be at fault, but it would be difficult to prove unfortunately. Not that you should have to, but what I do in those situations on backroads is indicate myself as well while I'm braking, to prevent the car behind me from overtaking, and then cancel the indication and carry straight on when the car has made the move.

ofcork

Put on the hazards if necessary to warn traffic behind.

DraganGTD

That would be very hard to prove without a dash cam imo.

Luckydog69

Thanks for all the feedback, judging by it I would say had the accident happened it would be his word against mine without any dash cam evidence. I wonder when will car manufactures start fitting dash cams as standard or even optional equipment... or even when will it become law that you need such a device fitted?

Rubberchikken

these kind of drivers are why i spent 70 euro on a dash cam. maybe in time it'll be an optional extra in car or an added bonus but for the time being they're money well spent.
glad nothing happened. driver sounds like an ass.

CiniO

Luckydog69 wrote: »

Thanks for all the feedback, judging by it I would say had the accident happened it would be his word against mine without any dash cam evidence. I wonder when will car manufactures start fitting dash cams as standard or even optional equipment... or even when will it become law that you need such a device fitted?

Probably not soon, considering there's already some countries in Europe where using dashcam is illegal. Another few, where it's legal to use them, it's illegal to publish recordings or try to use them as evidence.

Bio Mech

Crumbs868 wrote: »

Not that black and white

I think it is really.

Overtaking without it being clear, dangerous swerve, carelessness. 640s fault 100% IMO

Nekarsulm

Bio Mech wrote: »

I think it is really.

Overtaking without it being clear, dangerous swerve, carelessness. 640s fault 100% IMO

But you would have been held responsible. As you ran into the back of a stationary car.
And as he was an obvious Dick, he would probably have suffered whiplash.

CiniO

Nekarsulm wrote: »

But you would have been held responsible. As you ran into the back of a stationary car.

No you wouldn't.

Nekarsulm

CiniO wrote: »

No you wouldn't.

So the Gardaí arrive at the scene, and find the nose of your car is buried in the boot of a BMW.
You tell your story, the BMW driver says he was waiting for the foremost car (now departed from the scene) to turn out of the way, and he is staggering around complaining about his neck, who will be believed?

68 lost souls

I would be hopeful that the car Turning right would act as a witness

Sterling Archer

Without a dashcam or independent eye witnesses, it would be your word against the BMW drivers, and at best it would end up 60/40 against you.. sadly there is now way to prove it, it's for this reason i have a dashcam, although even that didn't help me with a recent incident

CiniO

Nekarsulm wrote: »

So the Gardaí arrive at the scene, and find the nose of your car is buried in the boot of a BMW.
You tell your story, the BMW driver says he was waiting for the foremost car (now departed from the scene) to turn out of the way, and he is staggering around complaining about his neck, who will be believed?

Me, when I show a dashcam video to the gard.

Sterling Archer

CiniO wrote: »

Me, when I show a dashcam video to the gard.

Ya ciniO, but it's a hypothetical situation, lets assume for a moment that you aren't the all knowing CiniO, and you don't have a dashcam

CiniO

Shane_ef wrote: »

Ya ciniO, but it's a hypothetical situation, lets assume for a moment that you aren't the all knowing CiniO, and you don't have a dashcam

I was replying to Nekarsulm who stipulated that in such kind of accident you would be responsible.

So the answer is - no, in that kind of accident you wouldn't be responsible.

Only concern is how would judge know what happened and who is he going to believe. But if he believes in what actually happened, then you are not responsible.


You can not tell that you are at fault in certain kind of accident, just because it might be hard to prove what actually happened.

Nekarsulm

I was in almost the same situation once. car ahead turning right, no room to pass on left so stopped to wait. (stream of traffic oncoming) Car behind also stops, and as we are waiting, a scream of brakes, and a young lassie in an Almera ploughs into the car behind me. Pushes her up into the boot of my car. The car me behind was a Jap Import Corolla, and the boot was just crumpled up level to the back pillars, and the nose of the car was also crushed. I was in a W124 260 Mercedes, and the entire boot was deformed downwards about 2 inches.
Almera girl's insurance arrived at my house 3 days later and was very anxious to do a deal. The Merc was only worth 1000 before the crash, and they agreed 2500, and I keep the car.
Almera girl is eventually brought to court on a charge of reckless driving, I was notified of court date but told my presence was not required.
Decided to go anyway, and luckily I did, because Almeria girl's solicitor had the Judge convinced that I was to blame! I stood up to interrupt, and was told to sit down. Guard taking the case then woke up and explained the situation to the Judge, who eventually understood what had happened.
Almeria girl was found guilty of reckless driving, but not fined, nor even had points put on her licence. last I saw, she and her extended family were heading over the road to a posh-ish restaurant to celebrate...L

joe912

Shane_ef wrote: »

Ya ciniO, but it's a hypothetical situation, lets assume for a moment that you aren't the all knowing CiniO, and you don't have a dashcam

well there would be witnesses the car in front the oncoming cars. most of whom would probably be only to happy to testify against a dcik in a bmw