Who is to blame?

movilogo

This is a very surprising incident! I always thought, that in UK, flashing headlights mean "I'm giving you way". I think most of the people follow this convention.

However, I checked with the Highway Code, which does NOT say so... (it says making others aware of your presence).

It's really confusing.

Astaroth

jamesd wrote: »

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.

I think this is an exceptionally harsh comment - are you extending it to everyone? Perhaps if a family is going on holiday they should all get on different planes just in case?

As to the OP - your son is going to be at least at the majority to blame. The nearest you can argue is that the on coming vehicle gave misleading signals however as your son was crossing the lane the greater duty of care remained with him.

The classic example of misleading signals is someone waiting to turn out of a junction (car A) and sees a vehicle coming from their right (car indicating left to turn. Car A assumes car B is turning into the junction from which they are emerging and so pulls out, car B however is not turning and goes into the side/ rear of car A. In these circumstances liability is split 70/30 against the car turning, the car giving the misleading signal is only 30% responsible.

The argument in your case of misleading signals is more difficult though because of the difference between common practice of what flashing lights means and what it "technically" means. The one thing on your side of cause is that negligence is based on "the average person" and not what a rule book says and so there is an arguement that the average person does interprit the flashing of lights in the given circumstances to mean "go" but even so it would only shift a small proportion of the blame onto the other party.

movilogo

I think there is a great part to blame to the other party. That guy gave misleading signal AND did not slow down! If it was a pedestrian (instead of the OP's car), s/he could have been killed!

The other party hit from his front. Everyone should try to avoid collision as much as possible. If he slowed down, the mishap could be avoided.

Think in this way, the car was coming, a pedestrian was waiting besides road to cross, the driver waved to cross (apparently) and pedestrian started to cross, now the driver didn't slow down and hit the pedestrian. Whom to blame??? The point the other guy "flashed his headlight" could swing the case in OP's favor. Otherwise it could have been 100% OP's son's fault.

brazilianwax

movilogo wrote: »

I think there is a great part to blame to the other party. That guy gave misleading signal AND did not slow down! If it was a pedestrian (instead of the OP's car), s/he could have been killed!

The other party hit from his front. Everyone should try to avoid collision as much as possible. If he slowed down, the mishap could be avoided.

Think in this way, the car was coming, a pedestrian was waiting besides road to cross, the driver waved to cross (apparently) and pedestrian started to cross, now the driver didn't slow down and hit the pedestrian. Whom to blame??? The point the other guy "flashed his headlight" could swing the case in OP's favor. Otherwise it could have been 100% OP's son's fault.

How exactly?? Flashing lights is nothing like waving a pedestrian across the road! And the OP's son failed to notice that the other car was not slowing down (you can tell when the front dips) having assumed that the flash meant that the other driver was going to stop.

jamesd

Astaroth wrote: »

I think this is an exceptionally harsh comment - are you extending it to everyone?

To those who place an 11 year old in the path of an oncoming car which:

• is travelling at a velocity that will cause it to hit
• is not showing signs of braking
• has a driver giving a signal assumed to mean the opposite of the signal's official meaning
• has not yet slowed to a velocity at which it won't hit

Only once the velocity will no longer cause a collision is it safe to proceed, assuming that it still has sufficient time to stop completely if you stall. Anything else is risking the safety of the 11 year old.

movilogo, waving a pedestrian across is entirely different because that signal has an unambiguous meaning. Even so, I don't trust this indication until I see that the car is braking at a rate which will cause it to miss the only body I have and continually recheck this as I cross unless it is at rest. Spare parts are hard to come by.

cazziej

Thanks for all your replies.

This is in particular for Jamesd::mad:

Please do NOT patronise me. You have answered my query with a reply that implies that my son is a boy racer and drives around town trying to kill both himself and my other son. If you do not have anything constructive to say, please do not bother replying.

I am assuming you are not a mother! (the name gives me a clue) so please do not lecture me on how to care for my children and when I should allow them to travel together.

I presume by your reply that you are the most perfect driver ever and never make even the slightest mistake - lets hope you contine to remain like this.:rolleyes:


Astaroth and Movilogo: thank you. Every single person I have asked said that in the same scenario, if they had been my son, they would have turned.

The other drivers car just clipped the back of my sons car, and son says the other driver could easily have avoided him if only he had slowed slightly.

In addition, the other driver must have known that he was giving misleading signals, if he did not intend to stop, as he apologised to my son several times in front of the police.

Once again, thanks for all your replies, except of course the lecture on child safety from Jamesd.

Carol

jamesd

cazziej wrote: »

Every single person I have asked said that in the same scenario, if they had been my son, they would have turned.

Everyone except: Alfrescodave, brazillianwax, aj3001, dunstonh, sazzacat and jamesd, all of whom indicated that he treated the lights in the wrong way.

If you'd like to reduce the chance of him being involved in another collision, please give him a defensive driving course for his next birthday or Christmas gift. Doesn't matter who you think was responsible, it'll teach him to be aware of other people making mistakes as well as any of his own.

Telling you a truth you don't want to listen to is not patronising you. You have my sympathy for the concern the collision has caused you but I'm more interested in reducing the chance of a repeat occurrence than making you happy. As for why those you asked in person told you what you wanted to hear, you need only look at your reaction to those here who didn't.

dunstonh

To be fair to jamesd, if someone flashes, it is quite easy to see if they have slowed/stopped to let you go. For there to have been a crash and it to have happened on the side of the car, the oncoming car must have had insufficient time to brake and your son obviously didnt judge the speed of the uncoming car. It is possible that your son crept forward and the other car flashed as a warning in case your son didnt see him. That is quite an acceptable and common reason for flashing.

The damage to the side of the car indicates that your son pulled out at a point when the other car was very close. Had your son pulled out earlier and the other car couldnt stop in time, the damage would have been to the rear of the car. So, the gap between the two cars at the point your son pulled out must have been very close.

---lee---

From the description, the accident is clearly your sons fault. Anyone who drives should be aware that the indications of other drivers are meaningless (this includes hand signals, indicators and flashing headlights etc). You should only proceed when you are clear on the intentions of the other drivers and can see that it’s safe. You can never rely on another driver having to brake or take avoiding action for you.

It was up to your son as the driver to judge if he had enough time to turn in front of the vehicle. Clearly in this instance he did not. I (like many drivers) have been flashed many times with the intention of letting me out of a junction etc only to find that on checking there is another car oncoming from the opposite direction. The same goes for roundabouts. I’ve lost count of the number of drivers that I could swear were going to go straight on who ended up turning right at high speed without indicating. To proceed without making these sort of checks is basically taking a gamble and one day the odds will catch you out.

I would also like to point out that many cars these days have automatic headlights which come on (and off) without any input from the driver!

The best thing your son can do is learn from this accident and accept that he is 100% to blame and be thankful that nobody was hurt or killed - only then can he learn from this error and move on. I would also recommend that you consider putting him through an advanced driving course from IAM. The cost is negligible and the benefits are tremendous.

courtjester

jamesd wrote: »

movilogo, waving a pedestrian across is entirely different because that signal has an unambiguous meaning.

Have you ever been to Bulgaria?

If you nod your head there it means 'no'. Shaking your head from side to side means 'yes'. The same goes for a lot of conventional signals where quite different gestures are in use across europe or the rest of the world, many of whose natives are visiting or even now living and driving in the UK.

In a multi-cultural society, with different mannerisms being imported all the time, who is to say what is the universally accepted gesture or signal - how are you to know what nationality or conventions the driver of another vehicle abides by?

The same goes for the different 'common' usage of lights or signals in different countries - on the continent, most signals appear to be of the 'out of my way' variety.

The only certainty seems to be that in a court of law the rule of the land will be the one that is applied, even if you can claim that most people do something different.