Jump to content


Car accident malicious intention


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4972 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Good day everyone,

I hope to find out some valuable information from all you in the know. :)

 

Yesterday whilst driving in the fast lane to work a women in a vehicle held the fast lane for sometime and pepole were undertaking her. I was the last person in the queue and proceeded in the usual standard manor of driving and came closer to her in the hope that she would acknowledge me wanting to overtake, she did see me and then taunted me by applying her brakes for a split second and then shaking her head at me. i decided to back off for a bout 3 miles and followed the same procedure as undertaken is a offence.

As i approached her she looked in the rearview mirror and shook her head again applied the braked for a split second and i braked and then as i let go the brakes she smiled at me in the rearview mirror and then slammed her brakes on causing me to slide straight into the back of her at 70mph (the road ahead had no vehicles or possible hazards what so ever).

Now she did not get out of the vehicle as she locked the doors possibly fearing the fact that i was going to (hmm and believe me wanted to) give her a good piece of my mind. I called the emergency services and she still looked over her shoulder smiled and then when the ambulance came she was well needless to say in pain etc but her car was not badly damaged and she drove it off the motorway for quite some distance again looking over her shoulder for oncoming traffic yet she barely moved her head when the paramedic was there.

 

Now what i need to find out is the law with regards to

a) dangerous and reckless driving

b) Careless driving and driving without due consideration - Section 3 RTA 1988.

c) Causing bodily harm by furious or wanton driving - S35 Offences against the Person Act 1861

d) Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm sections 18 and 20 Offences Against The Person Act 1861

e) also the intention to commit fraud to her insurance company

f) the lack of respect for company property as it was her company vehicle and had it been her own i very much doubt she would have done this terrible act.

She obviously did not take into account that she could have killed myself as well as herself.. society today:-x .

 

Now no one stopped as usuall.

 

How do i approach this situation as i would hate to think that this women would get away with it. I have suffered some injuries but am a tough bugger but the principal of this matter is what i would like to fight legally.

 

What is the law with regards to a lie detector etc.

 

Well thank you hope to get some good advice please.

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

beine a professional driver i see these idiots on the road all the time. dont mean to be picky but there is no such thing as a fast lane, only for overtaking,( lane hoggers.)

unless you have a witness i believe you will have to bear the consequences even though it was not your fault.

you have to have adaquate breaking distance between yourself and the vehicle in front. (quote) only a fool breaks the two second rule)

not having a go at you, but the ammount of people on the road today who do not drive correctly staggers belief. if people knew the rules of the road there would be fewer accident, same old story not enough police to educate drivers

my only advice would be to talk to your insurance company, the know what is going on with bogus personel injury claims and insurance fraud.

good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah i wont take it as being picky but thanks its my thoughts as well to the lane hogging story.

The 2 second rule obviously for safety but how does one then make drivers ahead aware that they would want to overtake without flashing lights at them, indicating to them or bluntly telling them to move over lol..

 

Thanks for that postggj;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the previous advice - regardless of what the driver in front was or was not doing, you should have maintained a safe distance so that if she did slam her brakes on you could have reacted in time. As you stuck her from behind then as far as the police and your respective insurers will be concerned, you did not keep a safe braking distance and I believe they will put the accident down as being 100% your fault, regardless of the incidents which led up to it.

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now what i need to find out is the law with regards to

a) dangerous and reckless driving

b) Careless driving and driving without due consideration - Section 3 RTA 1988.

c) Causing bodily harm by furious or wanton driving - S35 Offences against the Person Act 1861

d) Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm sections 18 and 20 Offences Against The Person Act 1861

e) also the intention to commit fraud to her insurance company

f) the lack of respect for company property as it was her company vehicle and had it been her own i very much doubt she would have done this terrible act.

 

what do you want to know about this area of law? if you can expand hte question i may be able to offer a little insight as criminal law is my area so to speak

 

 

 

What is the law with regards to a lie detector etc.

 

 

a lie detector would be no use to you im afraid.

 

 

 

regards

paul

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lack of independent witnesses will be the main problem with regards to dealing with this matter. There is also the issue that you ran into the back of her. The fact that she braked hard and it appeared as if she was trying to cause a collision is of little relevance, especially without witnesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...