Who's at fault in this accident..... :0)
- Thread starter baldbrummie
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
NickWelford
So many tools, so little to show
Is it your right of way? That doesn't guarantee anything but it's a big indicator of who should be giving way to whom. Of course, if the SUV is already there then you shouldn't run into it.
M P Hales
Established Member
Red car has right of way
Cars at junction MUST give way to vehicles on carriageway
M
Cars at junction MUST give way to vehicles on carriageway
M
adidat
I will not buy anymore tools...
Some may suggest the *** of the driver would prove who is at fault!! :lol: :lol:
Adidat
Adidat
RobinBHM
Established Member
That reminds me, its time I bought a dash cam, any recommendations?
The other driver can only try and claim you were travelling too fast, which clearly isnt true as there is only minor damage even though the road looks a bit wet.
You can look forward to your compensation claim cold calls!
The other driver can only try and claim you were travelling too fast, which clearly isnt true as there is only minor damage even though the road looks a bit wet.
You can look forward to your compensation claim cold calls!
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Yes - you can invalidate your insurance by apologising.Rorschach":s43jsjlu said:
RobinBHM
Established Member
Rorschach":2ffjknjs said:
Cheers Ill look into a miVue.
RickN
Established Member
Highway code Rule 172
"The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road."
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10(1),16(1) & 25
I know this one very well, as I was once a victim of the" sorry mate i didn't see you" brigade. My Anti car missile wrote his car off.... he almost wrote me off... myopic self abuser that he was. 8)
"The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road."
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10(1),16(1) & 25
I know this one very well, as I was once a victim of the" sorry mate i didn't see you" brigade. My Anti car missile wrote his car off.... he almost wrote me off... myopic self abuser that he was. 8)
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
I had one of them. Five minutes after the "accident" the guy didn't even know he'd mown me down. I was doing about 2mph on an open road in sunshine. Even then I was glad of witnesses. £2.700 insurance - I did come out of it rather well - passenger foot plates, braided lines, engine bars, resprayed tank, new front mudguard, power commander, K&N, iridium plugs. The owner of the main agent said the money would be spent just the same if he did as the insurance company had specified, so as I'd had the inconvenience why shouldn't I gain - the cost was the same. (for one they'd allowed a new tank - £1200 ... I had it sprayed for £100 
)
)
AJB Temple
Finely figured
Like it or not bear in mind that the other road user will have a perspective and their insurers will contend the following with your insurer in their deliberations ( I am not being accusatory or judgmental, just pointing out how insurers think):
You are required to be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear - yet you hit the car
You failed to take account of the wet road conditions and could not stop in time
You were going too fast for the conditions and circumstances
You failed to recognise the emerging vehicle hazard and/or were inattentive to it
Your actions or behaviour caused the SUV driver to believe that you would give way
Insurers or SUV will struggle to pin the blame on you but they will probably seek contributory blame and go for knock for knock I expect. It will help you a lot if you have an independent witness or can gather some CCTV of the incident.
My general advice (not advice - just thoughts! I don't do advice. ) (legal background - don't practice now) is if you have an accident of any kind where you are not at fault or minimally at fault, then you have definitely been injured. You hit your head on the side window, bashed your knee, crocked your back, fear whiplash because your neck hurts etc, and you are shocked. Police therefore MUST be called as a person has been injured. Don't move the car, don't get out and start walking about taking photos (your passenger can if you have one). Do not get into any discussion whatsoever with the other person. Having police presence helps no end in insurance claims. and getting access to CCTV. (As a sideline I am an examiner on advanced motorcycle tests, which I do on a charitable basis, and have seen more accidents than I care to think about).
You are required to be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear - yet you hit the car
You failed to take account of the wet road conditions and could not stop in time
You were going too fast for the conditions and circumstances
You failed to recognise the emerging vehicle hazard and/or were inattentive to it
Your actions or behaviour caused the SUV driver to believe that you would give way
Insurers or SUV will struggle to pin the blame on you but they will probably seek contributory blame and go for knock for knock I expect. It will help you a lot if you have an independent witness or can gather some CCTV of the incident.
My general advice (not advice - just thoughts! I don't do advice. ) (legal background - don't practice now) is if you have an accident of any kind where you are not at fault or minimally at fault, then you have definitely been injured. You hit your head on the side window, bashed your knee, crocked your back, fear whiplash because your neck hurts etc, and you are shocked. Police therefore MUST be called as a person has been injured. Don't move the car, don't get out and start walking about taking photos (your passenger can if you have one). Do not get into any discussion whatsoever with the other person. Having police presence helps no end in insurance claims. and getting access to CCTV. (As a sideline I am an examiner on advanced motorcycle tests, which I do on a charitable basis, and have seen more accidents than I care to think about).
Its impossible to say who is to blame from those photos without more info. We don't know how fast you were going or the speed limit of the road, whether your lights were on before the accident, whether you were distracted, whether other vehicles were involved that did not collide, whether the fabled black cat made an appearance....
I'm not for one minute suggesting you are to blame, just saying there is too much other info to take into account thats not conveyed in a photo or too to make an informed decision. The give way junction is only part of it.
Mark
I'm not for one minute suggesting you are to blame, just saying there is too much other info to take into account thats not conveyed in a photo or too to make an informed decision. The give way junction is only part of it.
Mark
Driver of Pajero has moved into path of oncoming vehicle ignoring the give way markings.
Driver of red vehicle was aware of hazard to the left and was either braking or was reducing speed in consideration of said hazard. Low impact speed is considerd due to, what appears to be, low level of damage to both vehicles and their post collision position.
Whether Pajero driver considers they had an indication to joi
n the carriageway is imaterial, as it was obviously not safe or correct to do so. The decision to join the carriageway rests wth the Pajero driver and them alone.
This officer would consider possibly charging driver of Pajero with CD10 [ I had to look it up, Due Care and Attention].
Fairplay my old man's been retired nearly 20 years but I thnk he's still got it.
Driver of red vehicle was aware of hazard to the left and was either braking or was reducing speed in consideration of said hazard. Low impact speed is considerd due to, what appears to be, low level of damage to both vehicles and their post collision position.
Whether Pajero driver considers they had an indication to joi
n the carriageway is imaterial, as it was obviously not safe or correct to do so. The decision to join the carriageway rests wth the Pajero driver and them alone.
This officer would consider possibly charging driver of Pajero with CD10 [ I had to look it up, Due Care and Attention].
Fairplay my old man's been retired nearly 20 years but I thnk he's still got it.
DiscoStu
Established Member
From the photos it looks like the Pajero is at fault. At the end of the day it looks like nobody was hurt so don't stress about it, let the insurance companies sort it out.
With regards to dashcams - I have a cheap £50 HD one but it's not the best. If you want one where you can read number plates etc then I'd suggest a Blackvue. A few mates with them and they are excellent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With regards to dashcams - I have a cheap £50 HD one but it's not the best. If you want one where you can read number plates etc then I'd suggest a Blackvue. A few mates with them and they are excellent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Phil Pascoe
Established Member
Well, we know what "Pajero" is Spanish for, don't we? :lol:
Similar threads
