Opinions on arguements for fault

pelirocco

DUTR wrote: »

It's not a matter of what I think as such, you asked for an opinion, that said, if I'm overtaking someone, I do so quick as a 'flash' from what you describe, it sounds like the manouvre you were attempting was taking a good few seconds, did you not sound the horn as you passed?

Do you always sound your horn when overtaking ?

OP , the fiesta driver should have checked her blind spot , she should be checking in her review mirror often enough to see you had started overtaking , before you entered her 'blindspot' IMHO

I had someone reverse into me as i was driving past their parking spot , they claimed it was my fault as i should have seen them reversing . The fact that they drove full pelt into the side of my vehicle would make most people wonder how i could have forseen it !

DUTR

pelirocco wrote: »

Do you always sound your horn when overtaking ?

OP , the fiesta driver should have checked her blind spot , she should be checking in her review mirror often enough to see you had started overtaking , before you entered her 'blindspot' IMHO

I had someone reverse into me as i was driving past their parking spot , they claimed it was my fault as i should have seen them reversing . The fact that they drove full pelt into the side of my vehicle would make most people wonder how i could have forseen it !

Of course not!
Did you not read the opening post of the thread?

knightstyle

Highway code:
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake
use your mirrors, signal when it is safe to do so, take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out
not assume that you can simply follow a vehicle ahead which is overtaking; there may only be enough room for one vehicle

Joe_Horner

Playing Devil's advocate for a minute (you did ask what she could claim against you)....

You say the tractor was doing about 20 and you were at around 55 as you passed. That suggests one of two things:

(a) you were following for a while (long enough to assess the situation), at 20mph, and accelerated very hard indeed to be doing 55 by the time you got level with the Fiesta. You don't say what you were driving, so whether or not that would be possible is hard to say.

(b) you weren't following for any significant time, "came up behind" the Fiesta at some speed and made a decision to go out and round without having any real chance to assess what she was doing or about to do, no matter how much it "seemed to you" that she wasn't trying to pass.

Scenario (a) has the problem that, if you moved that fast, it's entirely possible that she was already starting her overtake in a slower manner as you went and the collision point was only because of you out-accelerating her.

Scenario (b) has the problem that, if you approached, "assessed" and went without slowing then you can't really have assessed whether or not she was intending to pass - all you would have had a chance to see is "Tractor, car behind, space to pass both", which isn't enough to establish a safe overtake.

I'm not passing judgement either way, but you did ask how she might have seen it

MoneySavingWantTo

I think I know the answer to this but want to check anyway. When insurance was up for renewal I had letter from my insurer saying the matter was finished. I have since renewed with different insurer (nearly 6 months ago) on the basis that the matter was closed. Following letter last week do I now need to inform my current insurer the matter is no longer closed?

Glad I sparked some discussion.

almillar

So apart from the spelling of manoeuvre what did I get wrong?
I wasn't quoting the Highway Code, but going by knightstyle's quote:

use your mirrors, signal when it is safe to do so, take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out

it was a paraphrase. I've certainly heard it said plenty. Is it not relevant? Is it not what the Fiesta driver failed to do?
MoneySavingWantTo - Would you mind answering the questions in my post #26 to help conclude this then? And presumably this means she didn't claim?

Car_54

almillar wrote: »

So apart from the spelling of manoeuvre what did I get wrong?
I wasn't quoting the Highway Code, but going by knightstyle's quote:
it was a paraphrase. I've certainly heard it said plenty. Is it not relevant? Is it not what the Fiesta driver failed to do?
MoneySavingWantTo - Would you mind answering the questions in my post #26 to help conclude this then? And presumably this means she didn't claim?

It's MIRRORS (plural), signal, manoeuvre

Most people get it wrong, including probably the Fiesta driver.

MoneySavingWantTo

almillar wrote: »

Mirror, signal, manouvre.
Did you do that? check no-one was overtaking you, indicate right, then overtake?
Did she? Looks like she didn't look properly at least, and if you can say that she didn't indicate that's another mark against her.

Hi almillar,

Yes. I did those things and feel I correctly executed my manoeuvre in accordance with the highway code. I would expect she is disputing that but I have had not comment as to the basis on which her insurer's investigation is on going.

As I describe in my opening post, the fiesta made no signs of overtaking, that includes no use of indicator to show her intention to overtake. I can only assume she did not look to her blind spot before she pulled out otherwise she would have seen me.