Who's fault?

neilmcl

BertTheRaccoon wrote: »

I think you have misunderstood the accident circumstances/ road layout.

My understanding is it was a straight section of road, OP proceeding in the left lane, solid queue of traffic in right lane. Gap in traffic in right hand lane and oncoming third party turns right and goes through the gap and drives into the driver side of OP's vehicle.

My understanding is that the collision took place some distance back from the junction where the OP was intending to eventually turn left.

That's how I read it.

Stooby2

I read it the same way, OP driving in lane one of two, stationary traffic in lane two. As he approaches the service station, a car turns right through a gap in the stationary traffic and collides with the OP.

As a motorcyclist in London, I sympathise with the OP as I can use a lot of the bus lanes and this can be an issue. I have to be very careful at junctions and keep a wary eye on gaps appearing in the queuing traffic next to me.

I would say the other driver is wholly at fault, they have to make sure the way is clear before they turn. However, I wouldn't be surprised if their insurance company try to apportion some of the blame to the OP, stating they should have been aware of the gap, were going too fast, etc.

Prothet_of_Doom

I'll be blunt. It's the fault of the other person.

But had you been driving slower, you might have been able to react better. Their insurance company will try to state that as fact.

What happens (and it's pretty common for undertaking bikes to be hit like this) is that the stop start traffic, actually flashes their lights to say "I'm letting you into this space",

They then assume all is clear and crash a cyclist is dead. In your case, ONLY a damaged car.

Prothet_of_Doom

BertTheRaccoon wrote: »

So long as you are legitimately allowed to use the bus lane where you did at that time, then I can't see that you should have to accept any contributory negligence here.

.

Even if he were not allowed to use the bus lane, then there is still a case that says, the other person had their eyes closed. There are a few reasons for legitimately driving into a bus lane, outside of the hours that they are valid.

I'm actually trying to give an example......

warehouse

Other persons fault 100%. I hope you got a witness.

DUTR

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

From his description the scenario was totally different. When you strip away all the waffley detail about junctions and distance, I think the basic jist of it was:
" i was driving down the street and as I passed a petrol station on my left, a car coming the opposite direction turned right into the petrol station, crashing into my drivers side"

Which begs the question, why does the OP think he maybe at fault?

drdog_2

I was concerned about who was at fault cause I'm not used to being driven into [despite it happening a year before as well! PS Focus was finally written off by the underwriter and cheque for the value quoted at the inspection recieved ]

Equally I was concerend that they may argue that I was contributory because of where I was. That was before I spoke to insurance and claims management company.

Their view - despite me describing the detail of my first post - is that the third party turned across my path, and as such the 3rd party is a fault, and the claims managent company are satisfied that mine is a no fault claim.

But I shall remain paranoid until I have a cheque and a letter saying everything has been recoevered from the 3rd party and the case is closed.