Non fault accident help!

Chopper_Read

DUTR wrote: »

Op have the Police informed you that they are going to press charges against the other vehicle driver?
I have re-read your post and the logical side of me sees this...
You are driving along the carriageway, this road must be a good 7 metres wide, you notice that the vehicle ahead of you is possibly going to make a manouvre.
Yet observing all this you decided (incorrectly IMO) that you are going to proceed regardless, whilst you are in close proximity of the vehicle ahead of you (who does have the right of way) your evasive action is to make a sharp right turn, not only clearing the the 2nd probaly opposite lane but also mounting the footway (possibly verge) and only when your vehicle collides with the wall does the vehicle in your control come to rest.
In my mind what was wrong with the brakes for it to take so long to restrain the foward motion of your car? What sort of speed were you doing?
BTW this is not an attack as people in authority (not me ) could/would be asking similar and stronger more detailed questions

So now do you see why the other car is involved?

leftinamess

DUTR wrote: »

Op have the Police informed you that they are going to press charges against the other vehicle driver?
I have re-read your post and the logical side of me sees this...
You are driving along the carriageway, this road must be a good 7 metres wide, you notice that the vehicle ahead of you is possibly going to make a manouvre.
Yet observing all this you decided (incorrectly IMO) that you are going to proceed regardless, whilst you are in close proximity of the vehicle ahead of you (who does have the right of way) your evasive action is to make a sharp right turn, not only clearing the the 2nd probaly opposite lane but also mounting the footway (possibly verge) and only when your vehicle collides with the wall does the vehicle in your control come to rest.
In my mind what was wrong with the brakes for it to take so long to restrain the foward motion of your car? What sort of speed were you doing?
BTW this is not an attack as people in authority (not me ) could/would be asking similar and stronger more detailed questions

I was travelling behind the car when he indicates to turn left into the hotel on a long open stretch of road, I begin to overtake when he is beginning his turn, while I am in his blind spot he all of a sudden decides he is no longer going to turn left but throws his indicator on to go right and proceeds across my path..... I have no other option to avoid collision in going off the road into a wall. When the police arrived he confirmed what had happened and the officer asked why he changed his mind while being overtaken and he answer was, I just didn't see him......

DUTR

Chopper_Read wrote: »

So now do you see why the other car is involved?

Chopper I asked you for the reference you made earlier, I have not seen a reply yet, earlier in the thread post #2 , you have one line of thought that the OP is likely to be in the 'wrong' and then as the thread has progressed, you seem to have changed your tune, (it is not an attack) but I'm still waiting for the reference to the highway code/road traffic act, which suggests that the other driver is liable .
And to be fair the amount of 1 liner replies seems a little troll like, I'm interesting in reading your ideas without having to assume what you mean by the posts as there is not enough (IMO) content in them

DUTR

leftinamess wrote: »

I was travelling behind the car when he indicates to turn left into the hotel on a long open stretch of road, I begin to overtake when he is beginning his turn, while I am in his blind spot he all of a sudden decides he is no longer going to turn left but throws his indicator on to go right and proceeds across my path..... I have no other option to avoid collision in going off the road into a wall. When the police arrived he confirmed what had happened and the officer asked why he changed his mind while being overtaken and he answer was, I just didn't see him......

It still doesn't clarify why it had taken you such a distance to bring the vehicle to a halt?
Did the Police later inform that they are going to charge the other driver and that you maybe called as a witness?

leftinamess

DUTR wrote: »

Chopper I asked you for the reference you made earlier, I have not seen a reply yet, earlier in the thread post #2 , you have one line of thought that the OP is likely to be in the 'wrong' and then as the thread has progressed, you seem to have changed your tune, (it is not an attack) but I'm still waiting for the reference to the highway code/road traffic act, which suggests that the other driver is liable .
And to be fair the amount of 1 liner replies seems a little troll like, I'm interesting in reading your ideas without having to assume what you mean by the posts as there is not enough (IMO) content in them

I have also been told that if I had collided with the vehicle it would all be very straight forward to claim against the other person but because I avoided him its a lot harder

leftinamess

DUTR wrote: »

It still doesn't clarify why it had taken you such a distance to bring the vehicle to a halt?

It wasn't a large distance, it was quick reaction onto wet grass verge

leftinamess

DUTR wrote: »

It still doesn't clarify why it had taken you such a distance to bring the vehicle to a halt?

It was a distance of about ten meters

DUTR

leftinamess wrote: »

I have also been told that if I had collided with the vehicle it would all be very straight forward to claim against the other person but because I avoided him its a lot harder

Yes I can fully understand that logic there.

leftinamess wrote: »

It wasn't a large distance, it was quick reaction onto wet grass verge

Before the wet grass there is a good 3.7 metres or more of carraigeway, possibly a kerb, then the grass then possibly a footway which should be at least 1.5metres wide possibly some more verge then the wall, I guess you can tell I'm suspecting there was too great a speed for the situation ahead.

leftinamess wrote: »

It was a distance of about ten meters

Do you have the streetview of where this occured?

thegirlintheattic

You have to tell your insurers (so the damage is done).

The way I see it:

The owners of the wall will come after you. You hit the wall so you are at fault. Your insurers will pay the owners of the wall. It will be treated as a fault accident with all that entails. You will then have to try to pursue the other insurers for the damage to your car, but I think you will have an uphill battle, as you are the one who hit the wall.

leftinamess

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

You have to tell your insurers (so the damage is done).

The way I see it:

The owners of the wall will come after you. You hit the wall so you are at fault. Your insurers will pay the owners of the wall. It will be treated as a fault accident with all that entails. You will then have to try to pursue the other insurers for the damage to your car, but I think you will have an uphill battle, as you are the one who hit the wall.

It's looking that way, if anyone was in the car they would understand I wasn't at fault, the person that caused the accident was very spooked and knew what he had done was wrong but that's just the way it goes sometimes. Can I just say to everyone the wall is fine and all being sorted.......