Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 17th Jun 19, 3:07 PM
    • 69Posts
    • 15Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Help with 3rd party without MOT
    • #1
    • 17th Jun 19, 3:07 PM
    Help with 3rd party without MOT 17th Jun 19 at 3:07 PM
    Hello.

    Early last week, I was involved in an RTC that wasn't my fault. Unfortunately, there were no witnesses or CCTV to this event.

    1hr after the incident, the other driver called me to say he had no valid MOT. He offered me money for repairs. I checked, and his MOT has indeed expired. I told him I wouldn't commit to anything on the phone. Unfortunately I didn't record this conversation. That was the last I heard from him.

    Late last week his insurers called me to hear my side of the story, as they couldn't get in touch with him. After I had given my side, they called me back 20 minutes later to say they would accept responsibility providing he didn't dispute the story.

    The latest update today (from my insurers) is that the other driver is now not accepting responsibility. My insurers have asked me for a diagram of what exactly happened, which I have provided today. I've been advised not to speak the 3rd party insurers again.

    The police, to my knowledge, don't know about his lack of MOT. Yet.

    Please do let me know what you think, and what I should do.
Page 4
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 20th Jun 19, 12:49 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Posters saying OP may have crossed a lane seem to be picturing a standard roundabout with 2 lanes. I'd suggest that it might be a more specialised one.
    I'm picturing a roundabout with 3 lanes entering, left one goes left, middle one goes straight on ONLY, and right one goes straight on or right. Both cars entering at 6 o'clock on the clock face, and OP plans to exit at 12 o'clock. Other car's lane doesn't continue around the roundabout, and road markings take him off the roundabout at 12 o'clock. OP therefore does not cross lanes, but other driver does, as he crosses his 'straight on' lines, to go right.
    There are general rules for roundabouts, but so many new ones have specific markings and paths to take, that you do have to read the signs and paint on the road in advance.

    EDIT:
    And now after I type that OP links to the actual roundabout - the other driver definitely crossed lines, and it's only a 3 way roundabout - so the other driver wanted to go back the way he came. Other driver should have been in the outside lane, same as OP.

    OP - the lane you were in should be referred to as lane 3, or the outside lane. I understand that it's the 'inside' of the roundabout, but convention generally would call that the outside lane, as opposed to nearside, being beside the kerb, on a road.
    Originally posted by almillar
    Didn't realise this, thanks. Probably where all the confusion has come from. My apologies.
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 20th Jun 19, 12:51 PM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    A446 towards Lichfield?
    Then yes that makes it look clearer and one of those dodgy accident hotspots around the midlands like the M5 J4 roundabout similar incidents occur there
    Originally posted by DUTR
    Yes, correct.

    Super annoying, no CCTV and no witnesses despite it being rush hour. Usually someone stops and asks if you're ok. Not this time!
    • a.turner
    • By a.turner 20th Jun 19, 12:53 PM
    • 623 Posts
    • 257 Thanks
    a.turner
    https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4809675,-1.7078715,3a,75y,64.17h,70.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV6zhfQgO8XRJvQ9e_zTLNQ!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656

    If you can, take a look at the google maps link. Fingers crossed it takes you to the right place.

    I was in the inside lane, coming off at this exit. There is no lane change from me. He left his lane, cutting across me, as if to miss this exit entirely.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    So you've come from the M6 going towards Coleshill in lane 2. Hes in lane 1 and you intended to take the A446 towards Cokeshill in lane 2 and he wants to come round the front of you effectively doing a U turn from lane 1?
    • harz99
    • By harz99 20th Jun 19, 3:01 PM
    • 2,872 Posts
    • 2,829 Thanks
    harz99

    EDIT:

    OP - the lane you were in should be referred to as lane 3, or the outside lane. I understand that it's the 'inside' of the roundabout, but convention generally would call that the outside lane, as opposed to nearside, being beside the kerb, on a road.
    Originally posted by almillar
    Thanks, and that is precisely the way I saw it and why I posted as I did up thread!
    • DUTR
    • By DUTR 20th Jun 19, 3:22 PM
    • 12,038 Posts
    • 6,803 Thanks
    DUTR
    So you've come from the M6 going towards Coleshill in lane 2. Hes in lane 1 and you intended to take the A446 towards Cokeshill in lane 2 and he wants to come round the front of you effectively doing a U turn from lane 1?
    Originally posted by a.turner
    The section of road in question is a partial roundabout (if there is such a thing).
    From what the OP is trying to describe is that it's a dual lane road and the vehicle in the left lane is was attempting to turn right.
    As it happens at this same point the road curves to the left.

    Also as it happens the road markings there at the time of the picture was being updated. ETA the markings have always been that way.

    The driver in the left lane would not could not know that the driver of the vehicle to his right was intending to use the same A446 road that he was already on (no signalling of intent (but at the same time no need to)), and vice versa.

    It will be a pain to resolve and cost and resource may lead to a shared liability conclusion.

    I'd be surprised if this sort of incident doesn't occur several times a month.
    Last edited by DUTR; 20-06-2019 at 3:25 PM.
    • Jumblebumble
    • By Jumblebumble 20th Jun 19, 3:44 PM
    • 271 Posts
    • 101 Thanks
    Jumblebumble
    Click on the link and enter his registration number. See how long he was without MOT and if there are any advisories, like brakes, that could have a bearing on the acident.


    https://www.gov.uk/check-mot-history
    Originally posted by sevenhills
    Are these the same brakes that the driver would no doubt claim were subsequently fixed.?
    In any event I fail to see how an advisory could have any bearing what ever on a subsequent accident.
    • Jumblebumble
    • By Jumblebumble 20th Jun 19, 3:47 PM
    • 271 Posts
    • 101 Thanks
    Jumblebumble
    It could be why he collided with me.

    How can he prove otherwise without a valid MOT certificate?
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    He doesn't need to prove anything
    You do!
    Did you know that cars over 40 years old do not need an MOT ?
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 20th Jun 19, 3:49 PM
    • 856 Posts
    • 574 Thanks
    debtdebt
    Most accidents which occur on roundabouts get settled on a split liability basis.
    • sevenhills
    • By sevenhills 20th Jun 19, 5:00 PM
    • 2,392 Posts
    • 870 Thanks
    sevenhills
    In any event I fail to see how an advisory could have any bearing what ever on a subsequent accident.
    Originally posted by Jumblebumble

    It will be a pain to resolve and cost and resource may lead to a shared liability conclusion.
    Originally posted by DUTR

    If the OP felt hard done by, then he may well be informing the Police about a car being driven on the road without a valid MOT.

    • a.turner
    • By a.turner 20th Jun 19, 7:53 PM
    • 623 Posts
    • 257 Thanks
    a.turner
    If the OP felt hard done by, then he may well be informing the Police about a car being driven on the road without a valid MOT.
    Originally posted by sevenhills
    That's already been suggested.
    • Scrapit
    • By Scrapit 21st Jun 19, 6:01 AM
    • 599 Posts
    • 216 Thanks
    Scrapit
    I'm not sure how you've got here.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    Cos the highway code tells you to look inside(to your left) when exiting a roundabout. And common sense. How does your mot look?
    Last edited by Scrapit; 21-06-2019 at 6:05 AM.
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 21st Jun 19, 10:26 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Cos the highway code tells you to look inside(to your left) when exiting a roundabout. And common sense. How does your mot look?
    Originally posted by Scrapit
    I hadn't reached the exit yet, I was 2 maybe 3 car lengths away. He was about 1 car length in front of me. There is nothing I could have done to prevent this collision. It was super busy on the roundabout too, preempting by braking wasn't really an option.

    That said, I can fully accept how this is probably going to turn into a shared liability issue. But I have to comment that your witch hunt is looking slightly bizarre. I think maybe this has happened to you before? Maybe you were the party that came worse off?

    My MOT is fine, thanks for asking.
    • debtdebt
    • By debtdebt 21st Jun 19, 10:57 AM
    • 856 Posts
    • 574 Thanks
    debtdebt
    If the OP felt hard done by, then he may well be informing the Police about a car being driven on the road without a valid MOT.
    Originally posted by sevenhills
    100 fine.
    • almillar
    • By almillar 21st Jun 19, 11:16 AM
    • 7,954 Posts
    • 3,273 Thanks
    almillar
    Only slightly ahead, about a cars length.

    Damage to his car was minimal, but mostly centred behind drivers side rear door.
    Sorry if I've missed the answer to this - was he indicating to the right?

    There is nothing I could have done to prevent this collision.
    You could have continued round with him. You could have not gone round a roundabout beside another driver. You could have slowed down, or sped up, to make that happen.

    It was super busy on the roundabout too, preempting by braking wasn't really an option.
    The road was too busy for you to use the brakes? I don't think I've ever encountered that level of traffic!
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 21st Jun 19, 11:27 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Sorry if I've missed the answer to this - was he indicating to the right?



    You could have continued round with him. You could have not gone round a roundabout beside another driver. You could have slowed down, or sped up, to make that happen.



    The road was too busy for you to use the brakes? I don't think I've ever encountered that level of traffic!
    Originally posted by almillar
    Sorry, don't know how to do your fancy quote things but:

    He wasn't indicating.

    I don't have the reactions of a cat. It all happened very quickly. Perhaps I could have done more to avoid this collision, but that still doesn't make it my fault/shared fault that it happened. It was his decision to do what he did.

    And yes, it was super busy and super wet.
    • almillar
    • By almillar 21st Jun 19, 11:40 AM
    • 7,954 Posts
    • 3,273 Thanks
    almillar
    Not much you could have done then apart from drive a bit more defensively, and this loon has jumped lanes without indicating. You should pursue that line and feel hard done by if it goes 50/50, in my opinion.
    • a.turner
    • By a.turner 21st Jun 19, 11:55 AM
    • 623 Posts
    • 257 Thanks
    a.turner
    So you've come from the M6 going towards Coleshill in lane 2. Hes in lane 1 and you intended to take the A446 towards Cokeshill in lane 2 and he wants to come round the front of you effectively doing a U turn from lane 1?
    Originally posted by a.turner
    Is this correct? As that island doesn't have a right turn.
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 21st Jun 19, 11:56 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Not much you could have done then apart from drive a bit more defensively, and this loon has jumped lanes without indicating. You should pursue that line and feel hard done by if it goes 50/50, in my opinion.
    Originally posted by almillar
    Agreed, I was on auto pilot, but I am usually a super safe driver. It's an on going joke in my family actually about how careful I am. Perhaps I could have been more defensive. I'm crossing my fingers for a positive outcome, but the longer it goes on the more inclined I am to just cut my losses and take the 50/50.
    • ncfcfan
    • By ncfcfan 21st Jun 19, 11:57 AM
    • 69 Posts
    • 15 Thanks
    ncfcfan
    Is this correct? As that island doesn't have a right turn.
    Originally posted by a.turner
    It doesn't have a right turn. I can't speak for the intentions of other driver though. Perhaps he had made a wrong turn and needed to go back around, but only decided to do this at the last minute.
    • Richard53
    • By Richard53 21st Jun 19, 1:44 PM
    • 2,930 Posts
    • 2,428 Thanks
    Richard53
    It was super busy on the roundabout too, preempting by braking wasn't really an option.
    Originally posted by ncfcfan
    Preventing an accident by braking is always an option. If the cars behind are driving too close and you are afraid there will be an accident, that's not really your problem. The Highway Code is very clear that we should all drive so we can stop if necessary. I can't think of a situation where I would allow my car to hit something because following traffic was too close.

    Say you're driving down a high street with a white van on your rear bumper. A child dashes out into the road. What do you do?

    a) brake and risk a shunt with the van
    b) run the child over

    Sorry, it's a no-brainer and your remark above was silly.
    If someone is nice to you but rude to the waiter, they are not a nice person.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

46Posts Today

3,107Users online

Martin's Twitter