Just had a crash, who's fault is it? Need advice please

Jamie_Carter

TrueUnitedFan wrote: »

The thing is, I do not want to guess where she came on on the roundabout. She probably even came right round the roundabout. Who knowns.

I did not see her indication UNTIL impact had occurred..



I did not see her indication UNTIL impact had occurred..

the second video the car that gets hit, is not moving so it's obvious it will suffer move impact it was more of a direct hit, compared to mine.



I did not see her indication UNTIL impact had occurred..

I can't believe she is making an injury claim. It seems this way. What a ****.

I think I need to go an consult with a solicitor myself.

You said earlier that you saw her indicating when she was along side you.

So you are now changing your story....So it looks like the others were right at the start of the thread, and that you are just making this up to try and start an argument.

z1a

100% less than 30mph, means you were parked!

dggar

z1a wrote: »

100% less than 30mph, means you were parked!

As I said in post #109

It's a long time since I did my A level maths but I would interpret "It was 100 percent less than 30mph" as being stationary

Jamie_Carter

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

as per my point.

It would be really funny if she came across this thread. She would be able to use the fact that the OP keeps changing his story in her defence :rotfl::rotfl:

TrickyWicky

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

It would be really funny if she came across this thread. She would be able to use the fact that the OP keeps changing his story in her defence :rotfl::rotfl:

It would be really funny.. would it? Think about that logically for a moment..

To the op it wouldn't be funny. To the driving instructor it could be a relief. I doubt either would find it funny.

You would never know because the op would never tell you so you wouldn't find it funny.

Who would find it funny then?

Jamie_Carter

TrickyWicky wrote: »

It would be really funny.. would it? Think about that logically for a moment..

To the op it wouldn't be funny. To the driving instructor it could be a relief. I doubt either would find it funny.

You would never know because the op would never tell you so you wouldn't find it funny.

Who would find it funny then?

Get a life, you know exactly what I mean

System

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

If that was aimed at me, I think you are missing my point. The OP was in the middle lane, but wanted to turn off and didn't indicate.

The other woman was in the wrong lane, but was indicating, and the OP said that he saw that she was indicating.

But the OP still cut in front of her, even though he knew she was indicating to continue around the roundabout.

So the OP could have easily avoided the collision.

It was aimed at the OP indicating and then turning regardless, not you

Jamie_Carter

!!!!!! wrote: »

It was aimed at the OP indicating and then turning regardless, not you

I wasn't sure.

TrickyWicky

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Get a life, you know exactly what I mean

Lol fair enough mate was just making a point seeing as you seem really down on the op! Sure I don't think the ops teeth are pearly white either but I think they've had enough of a bashing so far.

It gets a bit much seeing people on MSE attacking people every day..

Jamie_Carter

TrickyWicky wrote: »

Lol fair enough mate was just making a point seeing as you seem really down on the op! Sure I don't think the ops teeth are pearly white either but I think they've had enough of a bashing so far.

It gets a bit much seeing people on MSE attacking people every day..

If you read my earlier posts I actually gave the OP the benefit of doubt, and was trying to help. But then they started changing their story. In one post they said that they saw the other car indicating before the collision, then later on they said they only saw them indicating as the collision happened. When in fact it would probably be impossible to see the indicator as the front end of their car was embedded in the OP's door.