Car insurance dispute - undertaking

mikeyranson

I'm in dispute with my insurance company after another driver attempted to undertake my mrs in a 30 mph area. Now my understanding is that, you cannot undertake on any road. If a vehicle in front intends to turn off to the right, then you cannot undertake until that car in front, is committed to taking that right turn. Eg, indicates to a filter lane.
During the incident, my mrs was taking a left hand bend on a busy junction area. Another driver thought that she was trying to push into queuing traffic in the right hand lane. She never indicated to show that she was, as she wasnt turning off, just going straight ahead. My mrs was unaware of his presence so couldnt establish where he came from. He was either trying to undertake by emerging from a bus lane that was to her left or tried to undertake in a gap that was to her left due to the wide shape of the junction. Due to the bus lane on her left, the white lines in the road are wide ,so she followed the white lines to drive in the straight ahead direction she was going and not trying to push into a queuing lane. The bus lane and her lane merge together.
The other driver swiped the NS front of our car whilst he tried to undertake her. He claimed that she didnt indicate to join the right hand lane and she replied she wasnt going that way, so there was no need for her to indicate either way.
The other driver has told his insurance that my mrs came in from different direction and pulled out in front of him. The law of physics goes against this where he claimed she came from and the point of impact was some 30 meters apart.
His insurance is now offering a 50/50 which i refuse to accept. I have said i will take this to court if i have to, as he undertook my mrs which is illegal, as in highway code rule 163 "only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so".
Can i fight this and refuse the 50/50 claim?
Can i take it to court? is it worth it?
I'm protecting my own insurance as London is full of a***holes who cant drive and it comes cost to myself.
How will this affect my insurance.?
Any other advice?
Many thanks

Silver-Surfer_2

At times it's perfectly acceptable to pass a vehicle on its near side.

bigjl

Could you re write that perhaps without it being a big block of words?

And if you say which junction it was some forum members that know London well will be able to give you more accurate advice.

Retrogamer

I think a 50/50 split sounds as good as you'll get in this situation.

Undertaking is normally classed as overtaking on the left to gain an advantage through queuing traffic. It's not illegal in itself but depending how and where it's done it often constitutes driving with undue care & attention.

However, this doesn't matter so much as negligence and breaking the law don't always go hand and hand.

Your Mrs is partially responsibly. She should have checked the road was clear beside her, before moving into that space. It's fine & legal for cyclists to pass stationary or slow moving traffic on the left. Usually when cars turn into cyclists, the driver is held at least partially responsibly for not checking it's clear.

Your Mrs has done the same thing here, except a car is much easier to spot than a cyclist so if you did take it to court (your insurance company probably won't not be keen on this) don't be surprised if the judge asks why she didn't check it was safe to change her road position. If she claims she did check, she might be asked why she never seen the car.

khcomp

One thing I noticed in your post is 'The other driver swiped the NS front of our car ' - this would imply that the other vehicle was at least virtually parallel with, or ahead of, yours. This would imply at least partial blame on your part, but to be honest it's difficult to understand the scenario without a drawing.
The effect on your insurance in the event of a claim varies on your current no claims, how much your insurance costs (in London I assume it's not cheap!) and how well you can do by shopping around at renewal time.

AdrianC

mikeyranson wrote: »

Now my understanding is that, you cannot undertake on any road.

It is never illegal to pass on the left.

It might, in certain circumstances, be seen as evidence of careless driving. It might be firmly contra-indicated in the HC, except in certain circumstances, but it's not illegal.

My mrs was unaware of his presence so couldnt establish where he came from.

The bus lane and her lane merge together.
The other driver swiped the NS front of our car whilst he tried to undertake her.

So her lane merged with a bus lane, and she just moved left without looking, assuming that there wasn't anything in the bus lane at the time...?

It doesn't even matter whether the bus lane was operational or not at the time... Still, good job it wasn't a cyclist or motorcyclist, eh?

London is full of a***holes who cant drive

Yup...

MEM62

mikeyranson wrote: »

I'm in dispute with my insurance company after another driver attempted to undertake my mrs in a 30 mph area. Now my understanding is that, you cannot undertake on any road. This is not correct. Although the Highway Code advises against it, it is an offence in its own right. If a vehicle in front intends to turn off to the right, then you cannot undertake until that car in front, is committed to taking that right turn. Eg, indicates to a filter lane.
During the incident, my mrs was taking a left hand bend on a busy junction area. Another driver thought that she was trying to push into queuing traffic in the right hand lane. She never indicated to show that she was, as she wasnt turning off, just going straight ahead. My mrs was unaware of his presence so couldnt establish where he came from. Poor observation? He was either trying to undertake by emerging from a bus lane that was to her left or tried to undertake in a gap that was to her left due to the wide shape of the junction. Speculation without witnesses. Due to the bus lane on her left, the white lines in the road are wide ,so she followed the white lines to drive in the straight ahead direction she was going and not trying to push into a queuing lane. The bus lane and her lane merge together.
The other driver swiped the NS front of our car whilst he tried to undertake her. He claimed that she didnt indicate to join the right hand lane and she replied she wasnt going that way, so there was no need for her to indicate either way.
The other driver has told his insurance that my mrs came in from different direction and pulled out in front of him. The law of physics goes against this where he claimed she came from and the point of impact was some 30 meters apart.
His insurance is now offering a 50/50 which i refuse to accept. It is not for you to accept of reject - that decision must be made by your wife. I have said i will take this to court if i have to, You mean you wife will take it to court - you are not involved. as he undertook my mrs which is illegal, No, it isn't as in highway code rule 163 "only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so".
Can i fight this and refuse the 50/50 claim? Your wife can if she wants
Can i take it to court? is it worth it? If your wife is prepared to risk the outcome
I'm protecting my own insurance as London is full of a***holes who cant drive and it comes cost to myself.
How will this affect my insurance.?
Any other advice?
Many thanks

I appreciate that I am playing devils advocate with some of the comments above. However, there is a serious point and, as the driver, the case can only be fought by your wife. But consider - do you have witness statements to back up your wife's account of the accident? Did she take any photo's of the position of the cars immediately post-collision? Also, your argument re undertaking being illegal will not stand up. The specific offence of undertaking (or nearside undertake) was actually removed from the statute books with the introduction of the 1972 Road Traffic Act, and although the Highway Code advises against it, there is no specific law that prevents it.

Fight it if your wife is comfortable with the risk but try to take all emotion out of your decision-making process and decide based on the case that you will be able to put forward.

Maybe the 50/50 is the way to go.

Nobbie1967

Without independent witnesses, I don't see how you're going to prove the other driver was at fault. The scenario sounds very ambiguous regarding fault and 50/50 is probably the only likely outcome. Not worth the time and money taking this to court. Accept it and move on unless you've got witnesses or dash cam footage.

AdrianC

MEM62 wrote: »

However, there is a serious point and, as the driver, the case can only be fought by your wife.

Who's the policyholder?

mark1959

I think your wife should look where she's going.

mikeyranson

I've tried to insert a detailed image but i cant make this work. The above is to the exact area.

In the image, the path that my mrs took is the same of the lorry and two cars in the google map. The two cars, i would say have entered the bend from the middle lane. She drove ahead up the A200 where it then joins onto the A2208. The white lining is bad but vehicles follow the white line. As my mrs is following the white line of the road, the third party undertook her in the wider space on the near side. The impact happened just where the white car is positioned behind the truck on the map image.

I have read what you have all said and i do take your views.

This happened in Surrey Quays, SE16, London. At this junction on the approach, there are three lanes, The 1st lane to the left, is a bus lane, middle lane is to head straight on, the third lane to turn right at the next junction. The mrs was in the middle lane to go straight ahead. There was queuing traffic in the right hand lane. The junction is on a left turn bend, so as she remained in the middle lane as the road sweeps to the left, the bus lane merges with the middle lane. The other driver either, emerged from the bus lane, where he should not have been or tried to race past her, by undertaking her. If i could upload an edited picture, i would. be so much easier.

My car was hit on the front nearside wing. This was caused as the other driver was trying to pass at speed. Lets say, to race past to get in front. Common thing on the roads today. Even so, she still should have been more observant. agreed.

I am the policy holder, the mrs is the named driver.
I am arguing thecase, as i am the stronger vocal person and a better driver than her.
Yes, she should have looked around and observed her mirrors.
I hate cyclists. They are a road problem.