Accident

[Eyersey1234]

Earlier on there was an accident on a crossroads near me, an ambulance on its way to an emergency call had gone through the lights on red when a car drove into the side of it. In a situation like this who is deemed to be liable?

[eybic]

My guess is the Ambulance as they should only proceed if clear.

[papa3]

If the oncoming car had right of way then the ambulance driver will be at fault.

All the blue lights permit is approaching red lights and stop signs as a "Give way" and to pass on the wrong side of a keep left sign iirc.

[TooMany2cvs]

Eyersey1234 said:

Earlier on there was an accident on a crossroads near me, an ambulance on its way to an emergency call had gone through the lights on red when a car drove into the side of it. In a situation like this who is deemed to be liable?

The car drove into the SIDE of the ambulance?

What speed limit are we talking about?

[Eyersey1234]

It's a 30mph speed limit. The ambulance was committed to going through even though technically the car had right of way and the car for whatever reason didn't stop and drove into the side of the ambulance setting off both driver and passenger airbags in the car.

[ZOLLAR]

Liability isn't an area I deal with so hopefully some of the other Insurance bods or legal eagles can post it but I'm fairly sure there is a significant case law regarding a young lady, it isn't particularly straight cut, I believe it was 70/30 in favour of the ambulance.

It's a great big van with flashing lights and the car driver still has a duty to check the way is clear.

more than happy to be corrected on that one.

[solo2]

This happened to a previous colleague.

The accident was deemed his fault even though he had right of way.

[TooMany2cvs]

Eyersey1234 said:

It's a 30mph speed limit. The ambulance was committed to going through even though technically the car had right of way and the car for whatever reason didn't stop and drove into the side of the ambulance setting off both driver and passenger airbags in the car.

That sounds like a very large dose of very easily-avoided wuckfittery on the car driver's part, then, and they're the ones going to end up with the tab.

More to the point, though, I do hope whatever the ambulance was dealing with was sorted.

[anniesdad]

ZOLLAR said:

Liability isn't an area I deal with so hopefully some of the other Insurance bods or legal eagles can post it but I'm fairly sure there is a significant case law regarding a young lady, it isn't particularly straight cut, I believe it was 70/30 in favour of the ambulance.

It's a great big van with flashing lights and the car driver still has a duty to check the way is clear.

more than happy to be corrected on that one.

Yeah pretty sure there is case law on a similar set of circumstances where liability was split between both parties, I can't for the life of me remember what the split was but 70/30 in favour of the ambulance would sound about right to me.

edited: http://swarb.co.uk/griffin-v-mersey-regional-ambul... - 60/40 in favour of the ambulance driver

Edited by anniesdad on Friday 24th November 15:00

[Helicopter123]

How the fk did they manage to hit an ambulance with the lights and siren on?

[donkmeister]

Helicopter123 said:

How the fk did they manage to hit an ambulance with the lights and siren on?

Probably using the same observational skills that cause so many people to sit in a traffic jam oblivious to the gigantic red truck, right behind them with blue lights, sirens and bullhorn that is trying to carve a path down the middle to go and sort out the reason that these people are sat in a traffic jam in the first place.

I.e. a lot of people do not pay anywhere enough attention to what is going on around them when they are driving, and that's before you even get onto the subject of showing some bloody compassion to the people that the emergency services are going to help.