Crash - whose fault?

[hairykrishna]

Had an accident tonight. Only fairly minor; coming together of front wings at a couple of miles an hour.
It was here; http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a... heading North.

I was heading straight on and was in the right hand lane. As I was exiting the roundabout a woman in the left hand lane turned right across the front of me. No room to avoid her and my PS front wing hit her DS front wing. I'm pretty sure it was her fault; she was lost and (I think) paying more attention to what her sat nav said than the road. She was intending to go all the way round the roundabout and head back in the direction we had come from
She was adamant it was my fault although not too clear on why. She was quite emotional so rather than argue I just said that I disagreed, we could call our insurance companies and let them assign blame.

What are peoples thoughts? Her fault? My fault? 50:50? Straight forward/or pain in the arse insurance job?

[davepoth]

Front wing to front wing makes it sound like her fault; she must have been level with you to hit you there. So long as you can show you were in the right turn lane and wanted to turn right (i.e. that's the way to your house) rather than you were trying to get into the left lane, then you should be OK. Expect a fight though.

[SmoothCriminal]

Clearly her fault retarded women driver going all the way around in the nearside lane.

Probably go 50/50 and i'd imagine it will take quite a while for insurance to sort it out between themselves.

[hairykrishna]

My only worry was that strictly speaking I should have been in the left lane, I suppose, as the straight on exit is the first available one. It's a busy dual carriageway though and both lanes are normally full of straight on traffic; the only other exit is to return in the direction you came from.

[SmoothCriminal]

hairykrishna said:

My only worry was that strictly speaking I should have been in the left lane, I suppose, as the straight on exit is the first available one. It's a busy dual carriageway though and both lanes are normally full of straight on traffic; the only other exit is to return in the direction you came from.

When the exit has 2 lanes like that it's perfectly fine to use the right hand lane, as you can see on google maps most people do it cos the roads worn like that.

[Somnophore]

Doesn't matter where you were going or whether you were in the correct lane or not, you were proceeding in lane and she cut into your path, her fault, whether you can prove it without decent witnesses if she denies it who knows chances are gonna end up 50/50 best case if she disputes and you have no witnesses backing you

[Gad-Westy]

I would say 100% other parties fault however a friend had a similar accident and it ended up going 50/50 after extensive arguments. Good luck. Maybe worth speaking to Anniesdad of Europa consultants. They were brilliant when I had a non-fault accident.

[Syndrome]

Both equaly wrong in my book, I'd guess at a 50:50 in this case. I would have said the right hand lane was for the 2nd exit (all the way round) if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time. I'd also say it wasn't wise to go past the first exit in the left hand lane, unless she was clearly indicating that she intended to carry on past the first exit. Without actual arrow markings in the lanes it all a bit down to common sense, which seems to have been a bit lacking, in this case.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 08:49

[Bonefish Blues]

The insurers will without doubt go 50-50 as it's not worth contesting.

Had something not dissimilar, but went through Helphire. Took their insurance and dug my heels in, including indicating I would attend court. They ultimately backed down and admitted liability.

[touching cloth]

Syndrome said:

Both equaly wrong in my book, I'd guess at a 50:50 in this case. I would have said the right hand lane was for the 2nd exit (all the way round) if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time. I'd also say it wasn't wise to go past the first exit in the left hand lane, unless she was clearly indicating that she intended to carry on past the first exit. Without actual arrow markings in the lanes it all a bit down to common sense, which seems to have been a bit lacking, in this case.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 08:49

Sorry, are you suggesting the right hand lane when approaching that roundabout from the South, should only ever be used by people who are effectively turning back to go the same way they came from? Nothing wrong with going straight on in the right hand lane as long as you remain in the same right hand lane on exit (which it sounds like he was).

[edo]

100% her. And don't take any 50/50 ste. Tell your insurance company the full story with diagrams and explain that if it doest go 100% in your favour you will instruct an accident management company.

[zebra]

Roundabout accident _ will be 50/50

[Roan]

Deja-vu:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

All roundabout accidents are destined to go 50:50 unless there are independent witnesses, according to everyone I've spoken to.

[Syndrome]

touching cloth said:

Syndrome said:

Both equaly wrong in my book, I'd guess at a 50:50 in this case. I would have said the right hand lane was for the 2nd exit (all the way round) if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time. I'd also say it wasn't wise to go past the first exit in the left hand lane, unless she was clearly indicating that she intended to carry on past the first exit. Without actual arrow markings in the lanes it all a bit down to common sense, which seems to have been a bit lacking, in this case.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 08:49

Sorry, are you suggesting the right hand lane when approaching that roundabout from the South, should only ever be used by people who are effectively turning back to go the same way they came from? Nothing wrong with going straight on in the right hand lane as long as you remain in the same right hand lane on exit (which it sounds like he was).

Not quite, I purposely added the qualifier "if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time". I personaly would have hung right back (or more likely not been so impatient and stayed behind her in the left lane) and waited to see what the driver in the left hand lane was going to do and not assumed she was definately taking the first exit.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 09:21

[motco]

Roan said:

Deja-vu:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

All roundabout accidents are destined to go 50:50 unless there are independent witnesses, according to everyone I've spoken to.

I had one with a Securicor cash-in-transit van that pulled out across my path on a r/bt. I won, although a) they lied, but b) did have an independent witness. Photographs certainly help.

[Andrew_M]

Gad-Westy said:

I would say 100% other parties fault however a friend had a similar accident and it ended up going 50/50 after extensive arguments. Good luck. Maybe worth speaking to Anniesdad of Europa consultants. They were brilliant when I had a non-fault accident.

I too had the same incident, it went my way in the end, took 16 months though. Remember to use FACT only when stating your case.

[Craphouserat]

Roan said:

Deja-vu:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

All roundabout accidents are destined to go 50:50 unless there are independent witnesses, according to everyone I've spoken to.

Nope - had an accident with a Canadian tourist in 2006 at a roundabout. As I virtually got to my exit guy in the left hand lane of the exit i just passed came straight through,despite traffic in other lane stopped for me. Rammed me at around 20 mph, hit rear passenger side, I was nearly off roundabout. Police called as a lot of damage and he just wanted to go. Both people were around 70 - I asked his insurance details, was a hire car so he handed me the leaflet he had - he denied all responsibility - despite telling me he wanted to go all the way round in the left hand lane and traffic that in other lane next to him (the one he wanted to be in) giving way. His wife told him it was his fault ! She was in tears, I reassured her everything was fine and apologised for being a tad angry when I got out of my motor! Police arrived helped get both cars off busy roundabout - breathtested both drivers. Copper who tested me said it was obvious from damage to my car and position on road it was Canadian guys fault.

Insurance companies argued for a while - offered 50:50. I refused, was then passed to solicitors acting for my company. Took around 18 months, but I got all costs covered in the end - hire car costs the lot. Now have courtesy car on my insurance !

So long story short - you might get 100% not always 50:50, but you will get offered that If you can't be arsed waiting for approx 18 months then take it.

This happened to me whilst splitting from my wife - hence the extra bit angry when I got out of my motor and approached the old Canadians - both sat in car with doors locked! He only said it wasn't his fault because the hire car leaflet said inside - don't admit any liability if involved in accident, old bugger was reading that (and praying!) as I approached their car. I apologised for this anger whilst waiting for coppers.

[mgtony]

Syndrome said:

touching cloth said:

Syndrome said:

Both equaly wrong in my book, I'd guess at a 50:50 in this case. I would have said the right hand lane was for the 2nd exit (all the way round) if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time. I'd also say it wasn't wise to go past the first exit in the left hand lane, unless she was clearly indicating that she intended to carry on past the first exit. Without actual arrow markings in the lanes it all a bit down to common sense, which seems to have been a bit lacking, in this case.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 08:49

Sorry, are you suggesting the right hand lane when approaching that roundabout from the South, should only ever be used by people who are effectively turning back to go the same way they came from? Nothing wrong with going straight on in the right hand lane as long as you remain in the same right hand lane on exit (which it sounds like he was).

Not quite, I purposely added the qualifier "if there was anything in the left hand lane at the time". I personaly would have hung right back (or more likely not been so impatient and stayed behind her in the left lane) and waited to see what the driver in the left hand lane was going to do and not assumed she was definately taking the first exit.

Edited by Syndrome on Thursday 21st January 09:21

He did not presume she was turning left.Being in the left lane she could have turned left, or gone straight on in the left hand lane. What he wouldn't have expected is her to want to go all the way around the roundabout in the left hand lane.
He was perfectly entitled to go straight on.

[BOR]

I'd say the OP is 100% at fault here.

You can't assume someone in lane one is going to take the first exit.

My commiserations, I made a similar mistake many years ago.

[motco]

BOR said:

I'd say the OP is 100% at fault here.

You can't assume someone in lane one is going to take the first exit.

My commiserations, I made a similar mistake many years ago.

Really?