Other driver pranged barrier while overtaking.
Discussion
MB140 said:
A1VDY said:
driver67 said:
LosingGrip said:
Try and get the details of the bus. They won't provide it to you the CCTV, but if you phone and ask if they can make sure it's saved whilst your insurance company get in touch 
.
Be interesting to see his goes.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. The guy crashed into a barrier.. Be interesting to see his goes.
Move on. Nothing to do with the OP or his wife surely?
Dougie.
No contact with op or bus.
If the other driver wants to overtake like a tw5t and smash his car up Inc council / highway property its entirely up to him.
Tell him to fu5k right off...
ktards like you, that must have obtained a licence with your breakfast cereal that are the greatest danger on the road, not people doing 5 mph over the limit. Edited by MB140 on Tuesday 21st January 18:58
ktards like you who need a whoosh parrot. I've driven for 30 years never had a claim or accident of any kind and that includes driving in over 17 countries with a 40/44 ton artic.
Two sp 30's though.. 👍
PF62 said:
Don't be stupid - the 4x4 driver simply fked up their overtake and stuffed it into the armco when they panicked.
Other stuff does not matter
No ...he took avoiding action after being forced to. As there was an overtaking car the other driver should not of pulled out.ked up their overtake and stuffed it into the armco when they panicked.Other stuff does not matter
A1VDY said:
No mate, it's fktards like you who need a whoosh parrot.
I've driven for 30 years never had a claim or accident of any kind and that includes driving in over 17 countries with a 40/44 ton artic.
Two sp 30's though.. ??
Good for me then, if I pull out on your HGV and you crash because you have nowhere else to go it is good to know it is YOUR fault.ktards like you who need a whoosh parrot. I've driven for 30 years never had a claim or accident of any kind and that includes driving in over 17 countries with a 40/44 ton artic.
Two sp 30's though.. ??
Edited by Dont like rolls on Tuesday 21st January 20:13
CABC said:
Norfolk B-roads said:
Considering this is a motoring forum, there's a ridiculous amount of nonsense in these comments.
There's nothing 50:50 about it. There's no room for opinion. Busses, indicators, blindspots, what-ifs... it's all completely inconsequential. If somebody is overtaking you, you cannot start your own overtake.
The 4x4 failing to see the situation unfolding might be seen as a failure to avoid an accident, but that's not the same as causing one.
Lack of evidence or witnesses might make it 50:50 from an insurance perspective, which is even more worrying than some of the comments here, because that could happen to any of us.
If I was OPs wife, I'd be happy to take the insurance premium hike, and be glad it's not 9 points for Due Care.
you sound like a dangerous driver and someone quick to blame everyone else.There's nothing 50:50 about it. There's no room for opinion. Busses, indicators, blindspots, what-ifs... it's all completely inconsequential. If somebody is overtaking you, you cannot start your own overtake.
The 4x4 failing to see the situation unfolding might be seen as a failure to avoid an accident, but that's not the same as causing one.
Lack of evidence or witnesses might make it 50:50 from an insurance perspective, which is even more worrying than some of the comments here, because that could happen to any of us.
If I was OPs wife, I'd be happy to take the insurance premium hike, and be glad it's not 9 points for Due Care.
nobody here actually knows what happened but we're all busy on the keyboards with what we have.
as a driving god, if i were behind another car and a bus in front of that car pulled in, i'd be waiting until both of us had cleared the bus before any manoeuvre.
The good thing about blame in these situations is we have a handy guide, the Highway Code to gives us clues as to where blame lies, and a law full of nice endorsable offences to deal with those who drive in a manner contrary to the HC.
As a fellow driving god (ain't we all?
), I'd have waited too, I'd like to think. It's hypothetical. But 4x4's failure to anticipate the incident did not in any way cause it. Contribute? Maybe, we're into to semantics there. But thankfully the law doesn't transfer blame for the actions of others onto those who happened to be nearby but failed to duck in time.Based on the information provided (and we've all been given the same limited info with which to work) OPs wife was the cause, breaking the rules of the road (Highway Code 162 - "Before overtaking you should make sure... road users are not beginning to overtake you"), and I speculate also the law by driving without due care and attention, evidenced by changing lanes, or maybe not giving way, or one of the other plentiful CD10-CD30 criteria.
4x4 showed poor anticipation, but that's not (in this case) an endorsable offence.
If anyone can explain to me what rules of the road, or laws, 4x4 broke, I'll happily change my mind. Or perhaps reference any cases where the overtaker has been been blamed and/or prosecuted when somebody pulls out in front of them.
100% OP's wife's fault.
Edited by Norfolk B-roads on Tuesday 21st January 20:50
I hate to ask something sensible, but is there a police officer, crime scene investigator or insurance expert who could answer with some confidence and experience.
I’m not a driving god or an expert in this, I could give an answer though. Like a lot of other unqualified people likely are.
I’m not a driving god or an expert in this, I could give an answer though. Like a lot of other unqualified people likely are.
As has been mentioned earlier, cars don't just appear 'out of nowhere'.
The mantra: "mirror, signal, manoeuvre" is far too simplistic: good driving demands constant observation and anticipation. Far more frequent use must be made of the mirror, to maintain as full an awareness of other traffic as possible. I suggest that the OP's wife was not doing so.
Also, many drivers make an exaggerated course change when overtaking parked obstacles - usually through poor anticipation and a reluctance to take up a parallel course early enough.
The mantra: "mirror, signal, manoeuvre" is far too simplistic: good driving demands constant observation and anticipation. Far more frequent use must be made of the mirror, to maintain as full an awareness of other traffic as possible. I suggest that the OP's wife was not doing so.
Also, many drivers make an exaggerated course change when overtaking parked obstacles - usually through poor anticipation and a reluctance to take up a parallel course early enough.
Flumpo said:
I hate to ask something sensible, but is there a police officer, crime scene investigator or insurance expert who could answer with some confidence and experience.
I’m not a driving god or an expert in this, I could give an answer though. Like a lot of other unqualified people likely are.
What the fu...I’m not a driving god or an expert in this, I could give an answer though. Like a lot of other unqualified people likely are.
GET HIM, LADS!
A1VDY said:
MB140 said:
A1VDY said:
driver67 said:
LosingGrip said:
Try and get the details of the bus. They won't provide it to you the CCTV, but if you phone and ask if they can make sure it's saved whilst your insurance company get in touch .
Be interesting to see his goes.
Seems pretty straightforward to me. The guy crashed into a barrier.. Be interesting to see his goes.
Move on. Nothing to do with the OP or his wife surely?
Dougie.
No contact with op or bus.
If the other driver wants to overtake like a tw5t and smash his car up Inc council / highway property its entirely up to him.
Tell him to fu5k right off...
ktards like you, that must have obtained a licence with your breakfast cereal that are the greatest danger on the road, not people doing 5 mph over the limit. Edited by MB140 on Tuesday 21st January 18:58
ktards like you who need a whoosh parrot. I've driven for 30 years never had a claim or accident of any kind and that includes driving in over 17 countries with a 40/44 ton artic.
Two sp 30's though.. ??
It’s 50/50.
Wife should have checked mirrors, 4x4 driver should have anticipated her movements and the road ahead.
Had at least one of the drivers done the above then the accident would not have happened. Case closed.
Anyone who says it’s 100% the fault of one driver or the other are complete idiots.
Just because you have no contact doesn’t mean an accident is not your fault.
Very, very simple.
roadsmash said:
Anyone who says it’s 100% the fault of one driver or the other are complete idiots.
Very, very simple.
Finish the sentence. Very, very simple.
Anyone who makes sweeping judgements on very little information are complete....
Very, very simple.
Edited by meatballs on Tuesday 21st January 21:45
meatballs said:
Finish the sentence.
Anyone who makes sweeping judgements on very little information are complete....
Very, very simple.
In my opinion there is a great deal amount of information available to make an informed judgement.Anyone who makes sweeping judgements on very little information are complete....
Very, very simple.
Edited by meatballs on Tuesday 21st January 21:45
If you know anything about the way that claims in the U.K. are handled, you will know this is always going to be a 50/50.
If I was the wife, I’d be aggrieved that someone has overtaken me when it’s clear I’m about to overtake the bus. I’d be upset that 99 times out of 100 I would be able to go around the bus, without checking my mirrors properly, and not hit anyone impatient enough to overtake me and the bus.
However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that the wife has not checked her mirrors when overtaking and moving into another lane.
The 4x4 driver is a tool, the wife was careless.
Very simple.
roadsmash said:
In my opinion there is a great deal amount of information available to make an informed judgement.
If you know anything about the way that claims in the U.K. are handled, you will know this is always going to be a 50/50.
If I was the wife, I’d be aggrieved that someone has overtaken me when it’s clear I’m about to overtake the bus. I’d be upset that 99 times out of 100 I would be able to go around the bus, without checking my mirrors properly, and not hit anyone impatient enough to overtake me and the bus.
However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that the wife has not checked her mirrors when overtaking and moving into another lane.
The 4x4 driver is a tool, the wife was careless.
Very simple.
I note there are legal sanctions for being careless, I cannot find any about being a tool.If you know anything about the way that claims in the U.K. are handled, you will know this is always going to be a 50/50.
If I was the wife, I’d be aggrieved that someone has overtaken me when it’s clear I’m about to overtake the bus. I’d be upset that 99 times out of 100 I would be able to go around the bus, without checking my mirrors properly, and not hit anyone impatient enough to overtake me and the bus.
However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that the wife has not checked her mirrors when overtaking and moving into another lane.
The 4x4 driver is a tool, the wife was careless.
Very simple.
Scenario for those saying its the OPs wifes fault:
Im driving my (chipped) 335d on a tortuous B road with minimal overtaking opportunities
A queue of traffic has built up behind someone in an MX5 who cant go very fast
I am car 5 in the queue
I know the road better than the 4 losers Im stuck behind and when it opens onto a mile long straight they dont immediately realise they can overtake the lead car
Wahay - this is my chance and I give it the beans as I hit the apex of the bend opening onto the straight bit
Unfortunately car 2 pulls out to overtake just as I draw level and I take avoiding action and crash into a barrier
Who is liable?
Cheers
roadsmash said:
meatballs said:
Finish the sentence.
Anyone who makes sweeping judgements on very little information are complete....
Very, very simple.
In my opinion there is a great deal amount of information available to make an informed judgement.Anyone who makes sweeping judgements on very little information are complete....
Very, very simple.
Edited by meatballs on Tuesday 21st January 21:45
roadsmash said:
Dont like rolls said:
roadsmash said:
Not sure whether to laugh or cry!
I know the feeling when I look in the mirror as well ...I have learnt laughing at yourself is always better.I do look forward to your next ban.
numtumfutunch said:
Scenario for those saying its the OPs wifes fault:
Im driving my (chipped) 335d on a tortuous B road with minimal overtaking opportunities
A queue of traffic has built up behind someone in an MX5 who cant go very fast
I am car 5 in the queue
I know the road better than the 4 losers Im stuck behind and when it opens onto a mile long straight they dont immediately realise they can overtake the lead car
Wahay - this is my chance and I give it the beans as I hit the apex of the bend opening onto the straight bit
Unfortunately car 2 pulls out to overtake just as I draw level and I take avoiding action and crash into a barrier
Who is liable?
Cheers
Car 2.Im driving my (chipped) 335d on a tortuous B road with minimal overtaking opportunities
A queue of traffic has built up behind someone in an MX5 who cant go very fast
I am car 5 in the queue
I know the road better than the 4 losers Im stuck behind and when it opens onto a mile long straight they dont immediately realise they can overtake the lead car
Wahay - this is my chance and I give it the beans as I hit the apex of the bend opening onto the straight bit
Unfortunately car 2 pulls out to overtake just as I draw level and I take avoiding action and crash into a barrier
Who is liable?
Cheers
However, the OP’s wife’s situation is different because there is a stationary bus blocking the road somewhat.
A sensible driver would not overtake a car that is about to go around a bus.
That is the key and vital difference which puts blame on to the 4x4 driver as well.
meatballs said:
Then you are mistaken. Second hand account passed on from someone who didn't even see the other vehicle.
This is PistonHeads. Nothing on here is first hand.That’s the idea of a discussion forum.
Regardless of it being second or third hand, there is enough information here to ascertain this will be a 50/50.
A reasonable scenario is a queue of traffic following the bus. 4x4 somewhere in that queue wants to overtake vehicles, there are no intermediate gaps so needs enough road to pass everything up to and including the bus. 1 mile straight nothing coming the other way pulls out and starts to pass with plenty of room.
Now a good driver might see the empty lay-by half a mile up the road and factor that in, a better driver would realise that it is a bus stop and make the link to the lead vehicle being a bus.
It's a very good driver that would think, when the bus pulls in it probably won't pull in fully and a vehicle might not be paying attention and pull out on me. To do that before starting the overtake would be very good indeed. If they realise that possibility, once committed on the offside and passing the queue, the driver finds themselves having to choose between definitely doing something wrong and forcing their way back in, braking on the offside and looking for a way back in (which is the right thing to do, but few honestly do that) or carrying on with the overtake as the least bad option, as there are several what ifs that have to happen before it goes wrong.
The advice has always been and technically still remains use headlight flashes and or the horn in anything like this to mitigate the risk; but these days, because of constant misuse, it is just as likely to spark some unpredictable actions or road rage, worse than what you are trying to mitigate.
I still can't see anywhere that the OP's wife isn't liable in some way, the 4x4s liability will depend on what they did or didn't do. Going back to my first post, the problem for the OP's wife is that they say they didn't see the 4x4, so the only account of what the 4x4 did, will be what they say they did and if it is remotely credible, that's what happened. Not seeing them is always going to be problem as, objectively, a competent and careful driver would see them.
Now a good driver might see the empty lay-by half a mile up the road and factor that in, a better driver would realise that it is a bus stop and make the link to the lead vehicle being a bus.
It's a very good driver that would think, when the bus pulls in it probably won't pull in fully and a vehicle might not be paying attention and pull out on me. To do that before starting the overtake would be very good indeed. If they realise that possibility, once committed on the offside and passing the queue, the driver finds themselves having to choose between definitely doing something wrong and forcing their way back in, braking on the offside and looking for a way back in (which is the right thing to do, but few honestly do that) or carrying on with the overtake as the least bad option, as there are several what ifs that have to happen before it goes wrong.
The advice has always been and technically still remains use headlight flashes and or the horn in anything like this to mitigate the risk; but these days, because of constant misuse, it is just as likely to spark some unpredictable actions or road rage, worse than what you are trying to mitigate.
I still can't see anywhere that the OP's wife isn't liable in some way, the 4x4s liability will depend on what they did or didn't do. Going back to my first post, the problem for the OP's wife is that they say they didn't see the 4x4, so the only account of what the 4x4 did, will be what they say they did and if it is remotely credible, that's what happened. Not seeing them is always going to be problem as, objectively, a competent and careful driver would see them.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff