Hit by 3rd party on roundabout - claiming not at fault, have pictures etc..

bikingbarney

Its easy .... instead of following his lane around the island he cut straight across both lanes and by doing so cut into the aide of the op in her lane

Tilt

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

The bold part has really confused me. If he was going straight on and continued to go straight that would be the correct thing to do. I'm obviously not reading this the way it was intended.:huh:

As above. You can't got 'straight' at a round-a-bout without crossing into another lane as the lanes will inevitably follow the contour of the round-a-bout!

Chopper_Read

tyrone1980 wrote: »

Hi! no I was turning right in the right hand lane (arrows are right only). He was going straight on in left hand lane and rather than follow the curve of the roundabout went straight e.g from left lane cut into the right lane (where I was) and went into my passenger side. This happened less than 10 minutes before I was due in work, to get to my place of work the only way is to turn right at this roundabout then after about 100 yards turn left into works car park. If it goes to court I can prove that this would be an appropriate time e.g add weight that I would normally be turning right at that time. If that makes sense. In case they try to say I was going straight on.

Sorry, but where you were going proves nothing.

If it came down to it you would need to prove how you took the island expect a 50/50 out of this and anything else is a bonus.

Robin_TBW

shirlgirl2004 wrote: »

The bold part has really confused me. If he was going straight on and continued to go straight that would be the correct thing to do. I'm obviously not reading this the way it was intended.:huh:

Sounds like he went literally straight ahead and didn't curve around the roundabout.

dori2o

It sounds as though there are 2 lanes on the roundabout.

From what the OP describes there are also 2 lanes at the junction to join the roundabout.

Op was in the offside lane, the Van was in the nearside lane.

It seems that the Van driver has tried to straightline the roundabout, i.e. has not stuck to the nearside lane, but has cut into the offside lane, with the intention of taking the straightest line possible across the roundabout to take the 2nd exit which is straight on.

In doing so the van has collided with the OP who was travelling in the offside lane preparing to travel past the 2nd exit taking the 3rd exit as per the markings on the road.

Essentially the van driver has cut them up and is now denying responsibility.

Is this right?

Can you get an aeriel shot of the roundabout from google or any other maps service so we can see?

forgotmyname

Big roundabout near me. The people in the left hand lane going straight on do it all the time. They rarely stay in the left hand lane.

JQ.

For future reference, it's much much more important to get details of independant witnesses than it is to get photos. Photos prove very little in situations like this, a solid statement from an "independant" witness will be far more influential. Photos are still important, but the very first thing to do (assuming no injuries) is to stop other cars and get their driver's detail.

I've witnessed 3 car crashes in my driving career and each time I've stopped and offered my details, but each and every time I've been the only one who has stopped, despite there being numerous other witnesses. In the 2 no-fault accidents that I've had, I've had to physically stop other cars by standing in the middle of the road to get their driver details, as they were obviously happy to drive off without helping. They were fine about it, it just never crossed their mind to offer their details, and both times their accounts supported my view that it was the 3rd parties fault - claims went through with no issues.

fivetide

JQ. wrote: »

For future reference, it's much much more important to get details of independant witnesses than it is to get photos. Photos prove very little in situations like this, a solid statement from an "independant" witness will be far more influential. Photos are still important, but the very first thing to do (assuming no injuries) is to stop other cars and get their driver's detail.

sorry but I have to disagree.

I had an accident caused by a coach cutting the corner on a blind bend. The driver argued that I had been going too fast and had actually hit him. He had a number of witnesses from the coach who backed him up.

However, despite me only having my partner, not an independent witness at all, I won the court case as it was clear to see from the pictures I took of the scene that the impact had indeed taken place on my side of the road.

The judge said he didn't think any of the other parties witnesses were lying but it was clear from the evidence that the recollections were not entirely accurate which can happen.

Moral of the story - yes get those witnesses but do make sure you get snaps of everything at the scene from multiple angles because it makes it much easier to support your claim.

In the OP's case if there had been a clear picture of debris in his lane for example, that would add a lot of weight to his argument.

JQ.

fivetide wrote: »

sorry but I have to disagree.

I had an accident caused by a coach cutting the corner on a blind bend. The driver argued that I had been going too fast and had actually hit him. He had a number of witnesses from the coach who backed him up.

However, despite me only having my partner, not an independent witness at all, I won the court case as it was clear to see from the pictures I took of the scene that the impact had indeed taken place on my side of the road.

The judge said he didn't think any of the other parties witnesses were lying but it was clear from the evidence that the recollections were not entirely accurate which can happen.

Moral of the story - yes get those witnesses but do make sure you get snaps of everything at the scene from multiple angles because it makes it much easier to support your claim.

In the OP's case if there had been a clear picture of debris in his lane for example, that would add a lot of weight to his argument.

You're missing my point - witnesses disappear very quickly, if you don't get their details very quickly they'll just drive off. You can still leave your car stationary at the point of impact and get photos later. Photos are still important but you need to prioritise getting witnesses.

The photos were of use in your case because neither you nor the bus driver had "independent" witnesses. Had there been car drivers behind you or the bus, who catagorically stated that the bus driver was at fault by cutting the corner, it would have been far more clear cut and probably never have got to court, don't you agree?

neilmcl

OP, can you give us a google maps link to the roundabout in question? It may clear up a few things.