Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
2 3
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

CapriV6S

Original Poster:

421 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

1,341 posts

43 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
100% Land Rover

Never move out until they have actually completed the turn !

s_zigmond

344 posts

55 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
Correct. I was always taught to ignore indicators and not go till the car was turning.

Hackney

1,738 posts

77 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
covboy said:
100% Land Rover

Never move out until they have actually completed the turn !
This

CapriV6S

Original Poster:

421 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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.
Advertisement

Pixelpeep

821 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

6,387 posts

113 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
75% Landrover - relying too much on signal

25% woman - misleading signal.

dvd

covboy

1,341 posts

43 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
Dwight VanDriver said:
75% Landrover - relying too much on signal

25% woman - misleading signal.

dvd
Stirrer biggrin

CapriV6S

Original Poster:

421 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

949 posts

39 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

1,274 posts

70 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

1,341 posts

43 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

4,114 posts

29 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

Original Poster:

421 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

4,745 posts

115 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

16,227 posts

42 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

2,094 posts

26 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

16,227 posts

42 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

Original Poster:

421 posts

11 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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

47 posts

73 months

[news] 
Wednesday 29th August 2012 quote quote all
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%.



2 3
Reply to Topic