Who is to blame?

cazziej

Hello

My son has just been involved in a car crash. He was practically stationary on the road, indicating to turn right. The car coming towards him flashed his lights and my son started turning right. However, the driver who had flashed his lights did not slow down and crashed into the back passenger door.

My 11 year old son was in the car with him at the time (wearing his seatbelt of course) but thankfully sat in the middle seat.

When my son got out to see the driver of the car and ask him what was going on, the driver said he was flashing his lights to "let you know not to go".

The police were called and the other driver admitted to flashing his lights, still saying it was to make sure my son didn't turn. My 11 year old banged his head and is very shook up. The police called an ambulance for him and the technician checked him out and felt that he should be okay, I agreed, obviously with the proviso that I take him to casualty if he starts vomiting or having headaches.

Anyway, back to the crash. My son has 3rd Party, Fire and Theft insurance. Himself and the other driver have swapped details, the other driver going on to apologise profusely to my son. The police were also not impressed with the other drivers version of events and told him so.

My question is, how will blame be apportioned? Can anybody advise regarding this?

Thanks in advance.

Carol

Alfrescodave

Tricky one, I was always told by various instructors that the use of lights is only to let people know that you are there. Similarly for other drivers waving you to go; the final responsibility is yours. In France flashing lights actually means "I have right of way - do not go"

brazilianwax

cazziej wrote: »

Hello

My son has just been involved in a car crash. He was practically stationary on the road, indicating to turn right. The car coming towards him flashed his lights and my son started turning right. However, the driver who had flashed his lights did not slow down and crashed into the back door behind my son.


Anyway, back to the crash. My son has 3rd Party, Fire and Theft insurance. Himself and the other driver have swapped details, the other driver going on to apologise profusely to my son. The police were also not impressed with the other drivers version of events and told him so.

My question is, how will blame be apportioned? Can anybody advise regarding this?

Thanks in advance.

Carol

If he was turning right and the other car was travelling straight then it was yur son's fault - he didn't have right of way.

As the other poster has said, flashing lights technically means 'I am here', not 'go ahead with your manouver'. The front of a car will dip when slowing, so your son should have been able to see if it was slowing down or not.

He could try to claim from the other driver, but I wouldn't hold out much hope TBH.

Sorry

aj3001

It was his fault, in European countries to flash the headlights literally means "move out my way, I'm coming through"

You should not rely on signals of other drivers, and by acting on their instruction does not remove blame from your son I'm afraid

The guy in the other car could have argued 1. he never flashed his lights, 2. he hit them accidently when operating the indicators etc etc but it is down to your son

brazilianwax

Don't wanna rain further on your parade, but his insurance is about to skyrocket too.

dunstonh

Highway code is clear, flash of lights is to warn driver that you are coming. The fact that many people use it to indicate the opposite doesnt matter.

cazziej

Looking like that.

It is very frustrating, as he is a very careful driver, and would certainly never put his little brother in any danger.


Someone has mentioned that it could be a scam, i.e. driver flashes lights to let him go, then not actually give way, in order to get a payout.

Son also says he had more than enough time to stop and also could have swerved (no other driver behind him nor son).

He is aware technically, that flashing lights don't mean anything, but even the policeman agreed with my son and disagreed with the other driver. As my son was stationary waiting to turn, why did he flash him, if he was going to carry on anyway? I am sure that 90% of people would turn if they were flashed.

Somebody has mentioned 50:50 blame; what exactly would this mean (obviously I know in principle) but does naybody have information?

Thanks again for your replies.

Carol

brazilianwax

In your first post you said he was 'practically stationary' and now that he was stationary. I doubt it will make a difference to the outcome but your son needs to get his story straight.

He needs to tell his insurance company about the incident, giving them all details. They will then negotiate with the other insurers.

50:50 means that the 2 insurers will share the costs, each paying for the other's damage. However, it is very likely no to go 50:50 and for your son to be found at fault.

Is the car a write off?

firesidemaid

hello.

hope your relatives are ok. having had my first accident ever in 15 years last year, i know what a shock it can be.

i had to go on a course as a result and learnt ever such a lot.

accidents can be apportioned blame by insurance cos, whilst the police attending the scene will make their recommendations regarding prosecutions, courses of action etc.

one thing i did learn was what everyone else has said about flashing lights. in fact, if you now flash your lights on a driving test, you will automatically fail.

i have to say in practice it is sometimes difficult, especially at night, to know if you should/can go or not without it....

cazziej

brazilianwax wrote: »

In your first post you said he was 'practically stationary' and now that he was stationary. I doubt it will make a difference to the outcome but your son needs to get his story straight.

He needs to tell his insurance company about the incident, giving them all details. They will then negotiate with the other insurers.

50:50 means that the 2 insurers will share the costs, each paying for the other's damage. However, it is very likely no to go 50:50 and for your son to be found at fault.

Is the car a write off?

Hi, with regard to the positioning of the car, he knows exactly where it was, I am just summarising and using my own words. He is going to contact his insurers tomorrow.

He was able to drive the car home, it only happened 2 minutes away. The rear passenger wheel was slightly buckled and his cousin has changed this for him. He is hoping to take it to the garage tomorrow.


Carol

jamesd

cazziej,

"My son has just been involved in a car crash. He was practically stationary on the road, indicating to turn right. The car coming towards him flashed his lights and my son started turning right. However, the driver who had flashed his lights did not slow down and crashed into the back passenger door."

Your son saw an oncoming vehicle which signaled its presence to him then he turned directly in front of it. Liability seems to lie 100% with your son.

Now assume that the other driver was completely ignoring the rule that your flash lights to warn of your presence. Your son proceeded to turn in front of a car that by his own account had shown no signs of slowing down while he had your 11 year old son in the car with him. At the very best, that's grossly irresponsible and careless with the life of your 11 year old.

The prudent rule is quite simple: you assume that the other driver is out to kill you and you wait until it is obvious from the braking of the other vehicle that it cannot hit you before you even think of moving in front of it.

"It is very frustrating, as he is a very careful driver, and would certainly never put his little brother in any danger."

He placed the vehicle with the 11 year old in front of a vehicle that by his own account had not shown any sign of braking. That is careless and irresponsible, not "very careful".

As others have indicated, there are two meanings for flashing of lights. One of them is the rulebook. Only one of them - I'm here - will protect the lives of all of those present. The one in the rulebook. Take it that way or be clear that you're choosing to gamble your life on someone ignoring the rules every time you take it the other way.

I suggest that you do not trust this son with the life of your 11 year old, lest you lose both in a single event.