I'm being shafted
Discussion
A car 40 yds in front is stopped in the road indicating left for a side turn. As I aproach, slowing all the time, I "mirror, signal, manouver" and go past doing about 20 mph then WHAM! a car coming out the same turn does me in the nearside from wheel to wheel...£2.5k +vat. The guy says sorry...did'nt see you...my fault etc. I'm driving home on 3rd party insurance after just buying the car for my wife. I phone his ins.company and after a week of stalling they are saying I turned into him! The dent in the side of my 8 month old Astra is 6 inches deep, the door skin is punctured and the window will not close! How violently did I turn the wheel to do that?
Someone tell me what to do please.
Someone tell me what to do please.
puggit said:Though possibly you could be held partly to blame as you were overtaking when aproaching a junction, contrary to HC rule 143.
If you were on the main road and the other cars were turning in/out of a side road (as indicated by white lines on the road) then IMHO the blame lies with the car coming from the side road.
overtaking at a junction - you are likely to go down for some liability. See cases of Clarke -v- Winchurch and Powell -v- Moody, the latter goes down for 80% of the blame.
in fairness both these cases are motorcyclists overtaking but the same principal applies. He shouldnt have pulled out unsighted but by the same taken you will be criticised for the overtaking at a junction.
in fairness both these cases are motorcyclists overtaking but the same principal applies. He shouldnt have pulled out unsighted but by the same taken you will be criticised for the overtaking at a junction.
andrew54 said:
If you were on the main road and the other cars were turning in/out of a side road (as indicated by white lines on the road) then IMHO the blame lies with the car coming from the side road.
Though possibly you could be held partly to blame as you were overtaking when aproaching a junction, contrary to HC rule 143.
exactly - and whilst a Courts dont often refer to the highway code, this is a well recognised fact
so you were overtaking a stationary vehicle then? you were still overtaking though yes? - not being rude just trying to picture the scene
why had the car stopped? you first post suggested he had slowed down for a left hand turn. If he was slowing down for a turn then you could be found partly to blame. If he had pulled over and stopped you have more chance of being in the clear.
why had the car stopped? you first post suggested he had slowed down for a left hand turn. If he was slowing down for a turn then you could be found partly to blame. If he had pulled over and stopped you have more chance of being in the clear.
He was at give way lines so he shouldnt have pulled out till it was clear,so he is in the wrong.
Big lesson i learnt years ago and while it wont help you now it might help someone else on here in the case of an accident, where you feel its not your fault get as MANY witness's as you can,even if the other party admit its their fault at the time,its amazing that after a time of reflection how people change their tune.B*****ds!!
Big lesson i learnt years ago and while it wont help you now it might help someone else on here in the case of an accident, where you feel its not your fault get as MANY witness's as you can,even if the other party admit its their fault at the time,its amazing that after a time of reflection how people change their tune.B*****ds!!
ZR1427 said:
He was at give way lines so he shouldnt have pulled out till it was clear,so he is in the wrong.
not the case. If he is flashed out and the vehicle behind the one letting him out is postionned on the correct side of the road in line with the one flashing him then he is unlikely to be found wholly responsibe.
It sounds to me as if the guy in front of you was coming to a stop to allow this chap to pull out when you overtook. I would expect the court to find you partly responsible. Probably not want to hear, but just my professional opinion.
mmmmmm - might be worth running to a hearing - if its damage only claim and less than £5k then it'll be small claims track. Dont suppose you have any legal expenses cover that will fund it? - might be through your motor insurance, household policy, credit cards etc.
you may escape liability due to the fact it was a 10 second period of being stationary. Did you get the details of the bloke in front of you as a witness?
you may escape liability due to the fact it was a 10 second period of being stationary. Did you get the details of the bloke in front of you as a witness?
it depends what the third party says - if he doesnt admit to the 10 second gap then you could go down for up to 50% IMO. If he does, you may get 100% in your favour or anything between 2/3/1/3 and 100.
small claims court is much more of a lottery than "proper" fast track cases and judges far more likely to allow 100% awards where in larger cases they might not.
best of luck with it. If you pursue it yourself through the small claims court and need any advice on the legal process at any stage, feel free to mail me.
small claims court is much more of a lottery than "proper" fast track cases and judges far more likely to allow 100% awards where in larger cases they might not.
best of luck with it. If you pursue it yourself through the small claims court and need any advice on the legal process at any stage, feel free to mail me.
V6GTO said:
He had stopped. The guy who hit me said the car had flashed to let him out so he did. There is no law or guidance that I know of that says I have to stop if a car is stopped in the road in front of me.
I agree with you.
If I was in your position I would be going to court for damage and costs. If a vehicle is stationary it has to be overtaken - carefully but overtaken nevertheless. Additionally 'flashing' means warning. It does not mean anything else. Every driving manual says that.
I would sue for as much as you can get and be ruthless about extracting the cash.
In all honesty though I would recommend you learn from this - if you have an accident and you're over 50% confident that you're in the right (such as this case) I would call the Police. Their record is fact.
Once the Police have the relevent details on record, and have judged who is at fault (and in this case it would be obvious) they give you the option of pressing charges. I would press charges no matter how trivial. We had a 17 year old drive into our car and her insurer messed us around. We sent solicitors letters etc and they stalled and stalled. At the time the Police had been called and they offerred to prosecute. I didn't want to because the accident was just a door, tyre and front wing, no big deal and certainly not worth blighting a driving record with. I was wrong. If she accepted a minor charge such as driving without due care etc the insurers would have to accept she was at fault and therefore have to pay up.
It may seem ruthless, and it probably is, but so is refusing to pay up two and a half grand to you when it wasn't your fault.
shnozz said:
He was at give way lines so he shouldnt have pulled out till it was clear,so he is in the wrong.
not the case. If he is flashed out and the vehicle behind the one letting him out is postionned on the correct side of the road in line with the one flashing him then he is unlikely to be found wholly responsibe.
It sounds to me as if the guy in front of you was coming to a stop to allow this chap to pull out when you overtook. I would expect the court to find you partly responsible. Probably not want to hear, but just my professional opinion.
Hmm i hear what your saying but surely its the drivers duty that is coming out of a side road to make sure the main road is clear in both directions.
This Flashing malarky annoys me sometimes!!to me its dangerous as some drivers,once flashed just pull out regardless of whats coming in the other direction and are sometimes in collision with a vehicle in the other direction.
For the driver behind the flashing vehicle,not only do you have to anticipate the flasher in front but also the car thats been flashed,it sometimes amounts to a whole lot of confusion and manouvres of all vehicles would of probably been quicker if the car had not flashed...and safer.
V6GTO said:
1 - from behind there is no way I could see the flash.
2 - being flashed was being told " I will wait for you "....not " go now because I have the power to grant you rigt of way over all other vehicals and I can overrule all traffic laws ", and more fool anyone who would believe it.
Ive been in the situation where ive overtaken 'Flasher' ,thinking that they had pulled over,and only been aware of whats going on once going past flashers car,, and the numpty gives it loads of head shaking,, GGRRRR,how the f**k can i see you flashing!
Did the other driver hit you square in the side with his front??
V6GTO said:The "official line" should be that the vehicle flashing was giving a visual WARNING of (their) approach. This was a WARNING to the motorist being flashed. If that motorist decided to ignore the WARNING, then on their head should fall the consequences.
2 - being flashed was being told " I will wait for you "....not " go now because I have the power to grant you rigt of way over all other vehicals and I can overrule all traffic laws ", and more fool anyone who would believe it.
Regardless of the use of headlamp flashes to mean: (a)"After you Claude, no after you Cedric."; (b) "Thanks."; (c) "Look out, there's a [hand sign indicates] ahead!"; (d) "Hi Fred/Freda."; (e) "Come on for Gawd's sake.", the "official use" is for giving warning of approach (i.e. as a substitute for the horn) - Streaky
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff