Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 8:52 PM
    • 7Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Colinwchester
    Accident advice
    • #1
    • 10th Jul 17, 8:52 PM
    Accident advice 10th Jul 17 at 8:52 PM
    Hi all

    Not sure if this is the right forum but I'm just looking for a second opinion over a car accident I had last week.

    Cutting a long story short I was driving down a residential street and overtook a parked car that was parked adjacent/opposite a side road.

    As I was approaching (like 10 feet away!) I saw a car just pull out and turn left into my path. Despite holding down the horn and slamming the brakes the other driver hit the side of my car.

    After messing about with the insurance company earlier they said the third party is looking to do a 50/50 claim as I was on the wrong side of the road.

    Now I agree that I was on the "wrong side" of the road but for good reason (ie over taking) so I dont see how I can be held responsible.

    The claim is still ongoing but, as you may have gathered, its annoyed me somewhat so I thought I'd see what other people thought.

    Thanks
Page 1
    • z1a
    • By z1a 10th Jul 17, 8:59 PM
    • 811 Posts
    • 652 Thanks
    z1a
    • #2
    • 10th Jul 17, 8:59 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Jul 17, 8:59 PM
    You were passing a parked car, not overtaking, but I would say other driver at fault, sounds like he turned blindly into your path.
    • Strider590
    • By Strider590 10th Jul 17, 9:02 PM
    • 11,622 Posts
    • 6,529 Thanks
    Strider590
    • #3
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:02 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:02 PM
    Insurance is going to try for 50:50 at first, they probably haven't even heard from the other driver yet.
    “I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”

    <><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/
    • lister
    • By lister 10th Jul 17, 9:04 PM
    • 202 Posts
    • 220 Thanks
    lister
    • #4
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:04 PM
    • #4
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:04 PM
    From what you say if you were established on the priority road (whichever side) as the 3rd party emerged into your path, then it is fairly clear where the principle fault lies.

    The questions I would be asking myself are
    a) Was I, and if so why, travelling at a speed whereby I couldn't stop in the event of someone predictably emerging from behind the vehicle?
    b) Was I, and if so why, not fully alert to the risks and therefore slow to react to the threat?

    Because without a) and/or b) being true, no accident would have occurred.
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:05 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    • #5
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:05 PM
    • #5
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:05 PM
    Thank you, thats my thoughts too. We all know how insurance companies work (ie pay as little as possible) so Im assuming theyre just trying their luck.

    Its nowhere near being settled but it has irked me a bit
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:07 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    • #6
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:07 PM
    • #6
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:07 PM
    Thanks Lister - I see your point. I was travelling at around 20mph and then saw him pulling out. Id stopped literally just before the turning (horn blaring etc) but he clearly didnt look and carried on- thus hitting me.
    • lister
    • By lister 10th Jul 17, 9:09 PM
    • 202 Posts
    • 220 Thanks
    lister
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:09 PM
    • #7
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:09 PM
    Am also slightly confused as to how the 3rd party emerged into your path, but hit the side of the car. Surely if he turned into your path he hit the front?

    I assume he was trying to turn into your path, but didn't actually get that far because you were by now alongside him, hence the hit in the side?
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:12 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:12 PM
    • #8
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:12 PM
    Sorry Lister, I've not made that very clear. My car stopped just short of the turning of the side road, the driver of the other vehicle saw me at the last moment but didnt have chance to stop - he basically tried to steer out of the way by mounting the pavement and scraping down the side of my car in the process.

    Thankfully nobody was on the pavement!
    • lister
    • By lister 10th Jul 17, 9:14 PM
    • 202 Posts
    • 220 Thanks
    lister
    • #9
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:14 PM
    • #9
    • 10th Jul 17, 9:14 PM
    Thanks Lister - I see your point. I was travelling at around 20mph and then saw him pulling out. Id stopped literally just before the turning (horn blaring etc) but he clearly didnt look and carried on- thus hitting me.
    Originally posted by Colinwchester
    Probably over-committed to emerging combined with poor observation. Many people trying to mitigate the risk of lack of vision by emerging quickly, while staring right not left. That is, on occasion, a reasonable strategy (the speed, not the direction of observation) - but only for poor vision away from the desired direction of travel, not towards it.

    Your description now clarifies by previous questions though.

    As with many accidents, I suspect with hindsight it was avoidable, but hindsight is easy - it is foresight (whilst on the move) that is the harder bit. The great danger is that there is an easy assumption when on a priority road, that noone will emerge into your path because they shouldn't. Trouble is that folks do, on occasion, the inappropriate thing.
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:18 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    Very true Lister. Hindsights a wonderful thing! If only Id set off a minute or two later haha!

    Glad the consensus so far is the third party is to blame.

    I tend to overthink things at times and found this annoying so wanted to ask a different opinion
    • lister
    • By lister 10th Jul 17, 9:19 PM
    • 202 Posts
    • 220 Thanks
    lister
    Were they a young driver or an older driver perchance? Inexperience or skills dulled by age do tend to lead to drivers not taking the most obvious action in good time.

    Not impossible they barely braked at all and instead tried to steer to safety - known in the trade as voting with the steering wheel. In practice of course, both would be highly desirable actions by the sound of it.
    • z1a
    • By z1a 10th Jul 17, 9:22 PM
    • 811 Posts
    • 652 Thanks
    z1a
    "If only Id set off a minute or two later haha!"
    You might then have had a head-on with an artic.
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:23 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    He was mid 20s maybe?!

    I suspect he probably only braked once he hit me but who knows? I was more focused on trying to avoid him.

    It was a daft move on his part though as the road he came from has some hedges that obstruct the view both ways. Plus with the other car parked at the end of the road id have thought most people would stop regardless of going right or left.
    • Colinwchester
    • By Colinwchester 10th Jul 17, 9:27 PM
    • 7 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Colinwchester
    Not down that road z1a. Quiet residential road - no doubt why the other guy drove like a he did
    • lister
    • By lister 10th Jul 17, 9:36 PM
    • 202 Posts
    • 220 Thanks
    lister
    Plus with the other car parked at the end of the road id have thought most people would stop regardless of going right or left.
    Originally posted by Colinwchester
    Ah, well when you watch drivers, you'll spot an interesting psychological tendency that is fairly endemic. Most drivers base their decisions on what they can see, not what they can't see.

    So this translates as - if you look right and left and can't see anyone approaching, it is safe to emerge - regardless of the fact that you can't actually see very far at all.

    Deal with this mentality daily coming out of the cul-de-sac I live in. I watch cars piling round onto my side of the road without looking - to find me already stopped in their path by the time they see me. There is always space to slow or stop behind the first parked car and see if it is safe, but almost no-one does - they look two feet in front, see nothing and commit onto the wrong side of the road. And of course most of them live in the road, so know what is around the corner...
    • Richard53
    • By Richard53 11th Jul 17, 6:46 AM
    • 2,576 Posts
    • 2,192 Thanks
    Richard53
    My wife's only accident: overtaking a car on an A-road while passing a junction with a minor road to the right. A car emerged from the minor road into her path, with the driver looking carefully to his right and not in the direction he was going. Speeds fairly modest (<30 mph), so no major damage.


    Funnily enough, I saw it happening and was hard on the passenger's virtual footbrake before she even saw him. She admitted afterwards that she was relying on the notion of 'I'm on the major road, he can't possibly pull out', whereas I am more pessimistic about other drivers. Lesson learned. It sounds similar to the OP's incident. It was found 100% in her favour and she made a full recovery of all her losses.


    Incidentally, it sounds as if the OP was stationary at the time of impact. If so, it is highly likely that the issue will be found in his favour.
    An hour alone spells freedom to the slave.
    • arcon5
    • By arcon5 11th Jul 17, 7:08 AM
    • 13,193 Posts
    • 8,363 Thanks
    arcon5
    Were they a young driver or an older driver perchance? Inexperience or skills dulled by age do tend to lead to drivers not taking the most obvious action in good time.
    Originally posted by lister
    Lol good guess, was they young or was they old or was they in between?They'll be either inexperienced, skills filled, or complacent with being in the middle group.

    What a detective
    • bigadaj
    • By bigadaj 11th Jul 17, 6:48 PM
    • 10,803 Posts
    • 7,100 Thanks
    bigadaj
    My wife's only accident: overtaking a car on an A-road while passing a junction with a minor road to the right. A car emerged from the minor road into her path, with the driver looking carefully to his right and not in the direction he was going. Speeds fairly modest (<30 mph), so no major damage.


    Funnily enough, I saw it happening and was hard on the passenger's virtual footbrake before she even saw him. She admitted afterwards that she was relying on the notion of 'I'm on the major road, he can't possibly pull out', whereas I am more pessimistic about other drivers. Lesson learned. It sounds similar to the OP's incident. It was found 100% in her favour and she made a full recovery of all her losses.


    Incidentally, it sounds as if the OP was stationary at the time of impact. If so, it is highly likely that the issue will be found in his favour.
    Originally posted by Richard53
    Interestingly had exactly the opposite situation, not long after I passed my test.

    Pulled out from a junction, looked right, then left, then right as I pulled out. In that time a guy had decided to overtake and hit my off side, not full on but he must have been doing 60mph or more. No one hurt, but cars were write offs, the overtaking driver was a church minister.

    I was 18 and went to univestity a few weeks later, the police decided to charge him with careless driving which he contested, meaning I had to travel 200 miles back as a witness, though he did plead guilty just a couple of days before the hearing.

    Blame is dependent on the exact timing, though when overtaking that driver would often be deemed responsible.
    • Richard53
    • By Richard53 12th Jul 17, 8:34 PM
    • 2,576 Posts
    • 2,192 Thanks
    Richard53
    Interestingly had exactly the opposite situation, not long after I passed my test.
    Originally posted by bigadaj
    I guess it is down to who started their manoeuvre first. You pull out and then he starts his overtake - his fault. He's overtaking and you pull out into his path (my wife's situation) - your fault. But an accurate assessment depends on a matter of a few yards and a couple of seconds here and there, and I was certain it would be a 50/50 decision by the insurers. I was quite surprised when it went in her favour. I took a lot of photos at the scene - it was the days before mobile phones and I just happened to have my camera in the car - and maybe these helped.
    An hour alone spells freedom to the slave.
    • NBLondon
    • By NBLondon 13th Jul 17, 8:47 AM
    • 1,469 Posts
    • 7,441 Thanks
    NBLondon
    The photos probably did help - otherwise it might end up 50:50 as both parties claim they were established in the manoeuvre. My wife has been caught with a similar situation; she pulled out of a parking space onto an empty main road (having just dropped me off) shortly before the other party darted out of a side road and into her front wing. I was standing on the pavement and it seemed like he looked right, then left then pulled out right without checking back in the direction he was turning. However - I couldn't be a witness so it went 50:50 in court after the other guy misremembered/lied about where the impact happened.
    This Be the Verse - Philip Larkin. The first line that everyone knows.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

220Posts Today

1,601Users online

Martin's Twitter