Not Happy with 50:50 Fault

Tiexen

KarachiKid wrote: »

Yes, I knew he was there. I honked my horn, which was ignored.
I could have braked. Sure. Causing the car behind me to go straight in to the back of my car. ..:undecided

Now that would have be a no fault on your part.

spadoosh

KarachiKid wrote: »

Yes, I knew he was there. I honked my horn, which was ignored.
I could have braked. Sure. Causing the car behind me to go straight in to the back of my car. Or maybe I could have out-accelerated him. But I drive a 1.4 Honda Civic, not a sports car.
It was his fault, of that I am convinced. And I really don't want speculation based on a few lines of text. I was there, I know. But I suppose that's the problem - whomever it is that makes the decision on this case wasn't there either. So I guess that's it. I lose out and Mr Livery Van gets to go on ruins people's financial situations or potentially worse. Justice is served...:undecided

You know the awareness levels, distances and breaking distance of the vehicle behind you? Im certain theydve not hit you.

For future reference if you have an opportunity to avoid a crash, you should take it, insurers dont generally side with people who can avoid crashes but choose no to. That opportunity was breaking to allow them in, not being a douche bag and spending time beeping your horn when they are overtaking you and perfectly aware that your car is there.

Theres loads and loads of idiots on the road. Some will cut in front of you other will try and block anyone overtaking them for fear of losing out on moral superiority points. They share something though and that is typically higher insurance premiums.

You need to learn about defensive driving. You really do only have yourself to blame for this accident. You choose not to avoid it by your own admission. Its also a lot more clear cut if someone goes in to the back of you. Dont for one second think this decision is because they wherent there. The decision is because you couldve avoided it and chose not to. People screw up and misjudge things all the time when driving, if youre accepting of that you should forgive someone cutting you up once for the sake of not having to crash your car and go through an insurance claim.

Im being harsh because i needed the harsh reality of it too to make me a better driver.

KarachiKid

Spadoosh, you're a colossal idiot.
I was maintaining speed whilst beeping. The gap between myself and the car in front was maintained. The gap between myself and the car behind was also maintained. The gap between me and the driver who ran out of road was decreased to the point of a collision because he failed to brake.
This was not about superiority points. I couldn't give a bag of bothereds whether I make it to work one car length behind when I would have. If there was room for me to manoeuvre then I would have. There wasn't.
Take your psychic powers elsewhere. You literally have no clue, you presumptuous !!!!!!.

SonOf

Yes, I knew he was there. I honked my horn, which was ignored.
I could have braked. Sure. Causing the car behind me to go straight in to the back of my car. Or maybe I could have out-accelerated him. But I drive a 1.4 Honda Civic, not a sports car.

I'm afraid that makes you partly at fault for this accident. Merges do not just happen. There are signs warning you. If you didnt have enough gap in front then its your fault. If there wasnt enough gap behind then its the driver behind your fault. And if you had to slam your brakes on then its also your fault as it shows a lack of awareness.

Yes, you may feel its harsh but that is why it is 50/50.

It was his fault, of that I am convinced.

You knew he was there enough to honk your horn. You knew you were in a merge point. You had time to allow a gap.

But I suppose that's the problem - whomever it is that makes the decision on this case wasn't there either.

And the other driver will claim that he was merging into the gap and you accelerated to close the gap. Unless you have a dashcam showing you left a gap and he misjudged it, there is no reason for the insurer to believe you over the other party.

I was maintaining speed whilst beeping. The gap between myself and the car in front was maintained. The gap between myself and the car behind was also maintained. The gap between me and the driver who ran out of road was decreased to the point of a collision because he failed to brake.

The more you describe it, the more it actually sounds like you were at fault as well. Blaming the driver "who ran out of road" sounds like you prevented him from merging.

Name calling people who are trying to explain why it is 50/50 is daft.

csgohan4

KarachiKid wrote: »

Spadoosh, you're a colossal idiot.
I was maintaining speed whilst beeping. The gap between myself and the car in front was maintained. The gap between myself and the car behind was also maintained. The gap between me and the driver who ran out of road was decreased to the point of a collision because he failed to brake.
This was not about superiority points. I couldn't give a bag of bothereds whether I make it to work one car length behind when I would have. If there was room for me to manoeuvre then I would have. There wasn't.
Take your psychic powers elsewhere. You literally have no clue, you presumptuous !!!!!!.

Do you have dash cam footage? If not, how do you expect to win 100%? We can only go by what your saying and by your side of the story only to which we were not there


You can try and get the insurer to reject the 50/50 but most have T+CS saying you agree to the insurer agreeing on your behalf.

BoGoF

Maintaining your speed whilst beeping? Why?

No we weren't there, nor do we have the other drivers version. No witnesses so a nailed on 50:50 all day long.

If you want to take this to court then it will be an expensive lesson for you.

ripplyuk

I’m guessing this was on a motorway because the other driver didn’t just stop when he ran out of road. If that’s the case, then surely the OP would have ended up with a fault claim anyway if they had braked hard enough for someone to go into the back of them?

BoGoF

ripplyuk wrote: »

I’m guessing this was on a motorway because the other driver didn’t just stop when he ran out of road. If that’s the case, then surely the OP would have ended up with a fault claim anyway if they had braked hard enough for someone to go into the back of them?

Why would that have been OP's fault? Person behind was driving too close if that did happen

cajef

KarachiKid wrote: »

Spadoosh, you're a colossal idiot.

They didn't get their car written off by being pig headed and not letting someone merge in.

ripplyuk

BoGoF wrote: »

Why would that have been OP's fault? Person behind was driving too close if that did happen

Yes, on normal roads but I thought there were rules against braking hard on motorways. I could be wrong though.