Collision with overtaking car

wazza99 · 17 March 2017 at 9:36AM

The claim value is pretty much irrelevant £100 or £10000, the claim fault is more important, thought even a none fault will increase premiums.

csgohan4 · 17 March 2017 at 9:37AM

blind spot???

RADDERS · 17 March 2017 at 9:49AM

I may be in the minority here, but if you have checked your mirrors and indicated then surely it is the fault of the overtaking car. You don't keep checking the mirrors as you do the turn just in case there is someone overtaking, you just turn.
Also at 70mph the car would cover approximately 100 foot per second which could easily explain not seeing it.

SimonD316 · 17 March 2017 at 10:56AM

I agree with Radders here, when you checked and started indicating the other was probably so far behind you didn't think it would be there when you pulled over.

From the picture it looks like there is a parking area on the other side of the road, which is where you wanted to pull up to make the call.

As others have said, if the other car has a dashcam it will show exactly what happened, but if it doesn't show what they want to see don't be surprised if the footage gets lost.

societys_child · 17 March 2017 at 11:26AM

Don't agree with the last two posts, the op has obviously tried to pull across to the other side of the road whilst being overtaken. Claiming the other car was doing 70 or whatever is a red herring, the 'blind spot' remark shows op had not even seen that it was at the side of them so can't really comment on their speed.
Due care and attention . . .?

martinsurrey · 17 March 2017 at 11:45AM

societys_child wrote: »

Don't agree with the last two posts, the op has obviously tried to pull across to the other side of the road whilst being overtaken. Claiming the other car was doing 70 or whatever is a red herring, the 'blind spot' remark shows op had not even seen that it was at the side of them so can't really comment on their speed.
Due care and attention . . .?

I second this.

Indicating does not mean the OP has the right to pull out, it means he intends to pull out IF IT IS SAFE to do so.

Clearly it want safe.

OPs fault, regardless if the other side was speeding (which the OP cant prove anyway as he claims he didn't see the car, so how does he know how fast it was going?).

Placitasgirl · 17 March 2017 at 11:48AM

Surely a side on impact at 70mph would have sent your car into a barrel roll, meaning that you'd be extremely fortunate to be here to tell the tale?

Are you saying that he hit you at 70mph? What was the extent of the damage to both cars?

I agree that if dash cam footage is available and shows you pulling across the front of this car you'll be deemed to be fully liable. If speed is a factor then it's likely the other driver will be reluctant to share the footage, especially if as you claim it shows that you indicated in good time and pulled out when it was clear to do so had he been observing the speed limit.

Aretnap · 17 March 2017 at 12:04PM

dnet wrote: »

I mean if my insurance pays out there will be a figure on it which i will have to declare at my renewal. I assume the level of payout affects the quote

Generally the size of the claim makes little difference - many insurers don't even ask for it.

My understanding is 50/50 means each insurer pays half. So my insurer pays half of theirs and they pay half of mine

Knock for knock, i believe, means each insurer only pays for their own client

That's correct as far as it goes.

However knock for knock had nothing to do with liability and was the result of an agreement between insurance companies to simplify the claims process by not recovering costs from each other, regardless of who was to blame for the accident. These agreements broke down in the 1990s and no claim in the UK has been settled as knock for knock for over 20 years. You can safely ignore anyone who tells you that a claim will go knock for knock.

If it's decided that you were both at fault it will mean that the claim is settled 50/50 (or 70/30, or 20/80 etc, depending on who was more at fault).

Tiexen · 17 March 2017 at 12:17PM

I think the key is if the "overtaking" car was at the back of a queue of cars OP is at the front decides to overtake all of them, BMW would not have seen the OP indicating.

dunstonh · 17 March 2017 at 12:28PM

I may be in the minority here, but if you have checked your mirrors and indicated then surely it is the fault of the overtaking car.

The OP confirms the damage is on the side. Plus, the other car was already in the other lane. She entered the other lane and hit it on the side.

You don't keep checking the mirrors as you do the turn just in case there is someone overtaking, you just turn.

Yes you do. Remember this is not a junction, it is a turn into a lane on the far side of the road.

Collision with overtaking car

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free