Whos to blame? Minor RTA.

[CapriV6S]

Was witness to minor RTA this morning.

Sitting behind Land Rover towing a trailer waiting to pull out of junction onto busy main road.

Woman in Fiat comes round bend (slight left from her point of view) with indicator flashing, indicating to turn into the side road we were on.

Land Rover spots gap in busy traffic and pulls out to turn right. Fiat doesn't turn into side road after all and hits trailer side-on at about maybe 25mph. Some broken bits of car and trailer but no-one hurt. Situation a bit heated.

Left my mobile number with both parties in case statement is required.

[covboy]

100% Land Rover

Never move out until they have actually completed the turn !

[s_zigmond]

Correct. I was always taught to ignore indicators and not go till the car was turning.

[Hackney]

covboy said:

100% Land Rover

Never move out until they have actually completed the turn !

This

[CapriV6S]

That's exactly what I thought too. I mean, you wouldn't pull out in front of a motorbike indicating left would you.

Land Rover driver was having none of it though.

[Pixelpeep]

s_zigmond said:

Correct. I was always taught to ignore indicators and not go till the car was turning.

this.

indicator could have been left on from a previous maneuver, driver could change their mind, put it on by accident etc etc etc.

[Dwight VanDriver]

75% Landrover - relying too much on signal

25% woman - misleading signal.

dvd

[covboy]

Dwight VanDriver said:

75% Landrover - relying too much on signal

25% woman - misleading signal.

dvd

Stirrer

[CapriV6S]

Personally would have ignored her indicator and waited to see her slow down and turn-in.

It's same situation if someone flashes headlamps when you're at a junction - is it to allow you to exit from side-road or to allow another oncoming car to turn into side-road? Or both? Or did they mean to use their windscreen washers and hit the the headlamp-flasher by mistake?

[DaveH23]

Whilst I agree 100% fault of the landrover what would of happened if she hit the back and not the side of the trailor?

I was always told if you go in to the back of somebody you are 99.99% always to blame but I completely disagree with this due to so many factors such as the OP's scenario.

[RtdRacer]

Dwight VanDriver said:

75% Landrover - relying too much on signal

25% woman - misleading signal.

dvd

AH, but in this case, with an independent witness that confirms the indicator was on, I think that changes things.

If it was my Landie, I'd be pushing for at least 50/50. Without the OP, he has no chance, but in this case? She *was* indicating - is she therefore blameless. No, I don't think so at all.

[covboy]

Don't know if this is still current

"Highway code Rule 146 You should … not assume … that a vehicle coming from the right and signalling left will actually turn. Wait and make sure."

[HustleRussell]

RtdRacer said:

AH, but in this case, with an independent witness that confirms the indicator was on, I think that changes things.

If it was my Landie, I'd be pushing for at least 50/50. Without the OP, he has no chance, but in this case? She *was* indicating - is she therefore blameless. No, I don't think so at all.

You'd fail. 100% Land Rover's fault.

[CapriV6S]

Land Rover was turning right, Fiat hit tail-end of trailer side-on. Land Rover driver did seem to be genuinely careful-driver-type just goin about his daily business and was bit upset about the whole thing. He was arguing that she should not have been signalling to turn into the side road. She was shouting and screeching and had to be calmed down.

Edited by CapriV6S on Wednesday 29th August 15:32

[motco]

I think there is precedent for the vehicle giving the misleading signal to be prosecuted for without due care. You'd need a lawyer with a long memory though, I seem to recall it was a good few years ago. Personally I look for more indication than a flashing light before I move off. Turning the wheel...

[ZOLLAR]

motco said:

I think there is precedent for the vehicle giving the misleading signal to be prosecuted for without due care. You'd need a lawyer with a long memory though, I seem to recall it was a good few years ago. Personally I look for more indication than a flashing light before I move off. Turning the wheel...

Wadsworth v Gillespie (1978)?



liability would be apportioned two thirds against the defendant and one third against the plaintiff


Noger more likely to confirm the correct case (think I'm right though)

Edited by ZOLLAR on Wednesday 29th August 16:00

[onesickpuppy]

ZOLLAR said:

liability would be apportioned two thirds against the defendant and one third against the plaintiff

I may be showing my ignorance, but which is which in this case?

[ZOLLAR]

onesickpuppy said:

ZOLLAR said:

liability would be apportioned two thirds against the defendant and one third against the plaintiff

I may be showing my ignorance, but which is which in this case?

Red is plaintiff
Green is defendant

[CapriV6S]

Thanks for posts. Both parties have my contact details for copies of the same unbiased statement-of-fact from my point of view at the time. Will see what happens.


Personal opinion which I'd come to before the post above -
2/3 liability to Land Rover despite him being a careful bloke, easy mistake to make tho,

1/3 liability to Fiat driver who was competent enough to drive a car but was unaware that her indicator was still flashing. Doh!

[Norse_mann]

As other replies have said, a bit of blame on both sides. More so to the Landy as he should have waited until the other car had committed to turning left, anywhere between 60% and 90%.