roundabout accident 3rd party pulled out on me

[Geminilady]

Ok so im kind of stuck on information i need for this accident and hoping i can seek some advise on here!!

This morning i was travelling to a friends in my car and got to a roundabout i proceeded on the roundabout in the right hand lane to take the fourth exit and come back to the road i started on i was indicating to where i was going and as i approached the second exit a van pulled out infront of me not leaving me enough breaking space and i slammed my breaks on and hit the back of him van damaging his rear bumper and taking out my light my indicator and dislodging my bumber and bonnet. the road was busy so i wasnt speeding. he clearly was not giving way to the right or me who was already establised in my lane on the roundabout. he proceeded to demand i was at fault yet he cut me up and didnt even give me chance to reduce speed as he was infront of me which caused me to immediatly slam my breaks on and toot my horn.

when contacting my insurance company they said because he was establised in his lane it is my fault because i hit his rear. how can this be acceptable??? since when do you give way to someone on your left unless signs indicate you to do so?? why should i be at fault when i didnt have the correct stopping distance between us because he shot out right infront of me?? please help me i am not to blame!!!!

[Geminilady]

i have also looked at the website for highway code here:

 

Roundabouts (184-190) : Directgov - Travel and transport

 

Control of the vehicle (117-126) : Directgov - Travel and transport

 

this was the information i found about roundabouts and stopping distance to be left between cars!!

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[Geminilady]

yes i have witnessess but i was 1 metre from the second exit as i was proceeding to the fourth exit when he shot infront of me. My insurance company disregard the witnessess at the moment because i hit him yet how could i have stopped when he pulled right out infront of me that is something you anticipate but dont expect! there was not enough breaking distance nore was he giving way to the right im horrified at the thought people get away with this

[Geminilady]

also at that time in the morning its a very busy roundabout and one exit has road works down it and a main school so the traffic isnt excessive speedwise one exit leads into town and he still proceeded to bolt out directly infront of me so i will get penalised for someone elses negligence to the highway code i couldnt even reverse to move the car from his to get to a safe space cos the roundabout was that full. this shows that people can [problem] the system for new cars and just do stupid stuff to get hit from behind!! im so upset i dont understand why this situation is so unfair

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[Geminilady]

i believe he is insured for a small business so looks like a works van he is insured by MMA who i have never heard and they say:

 

MMA Insurance plc is a general UK insurer offering a range of insurance products for individuals and small to medium sized businesses. We are committed to providing a high quality service to our customers and all of our products are sold exclusively through a national network of over 3,000 intermediaries.

 

so im i still aloud to ask??

[vusys1]

what side of your car was damaged ? & what side of his?

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[Mossycat]

and the law alsways states that if hit in the rear it is the car behinds fault,

 

 

Just to clarify that, there is NO LAW that says that, and whilst it is usually the fault of the driver behind it is NOT always the case.

 

Mossy

[Mossycat]

Whilst I sympathise with your position I can understand where your insurers are coming from. If he was established in his lane then it will be extremely difficult to prove that he 'cut you up' or failed to giveway at the roundabout. What you need are independent witnesses to the accident (ie not someone known to you and not someone travelling with you).

 

Without independent evidence then it comes down to vehicle damage, but if he was established in his lane and it's your front end and his back end (ie no side damage to his van) then trying to convince anyone that he failed to giveway will be very hard.

 

What you have to remember is that your insurers were not there, they did not see the accident, they can only go on what is said to them and he fails to confirm your version of events and if the accident damage indicates that he was established in his lane then you will probably find that you do get held liable.

 

It's also worth bearing in mind that the Highway Code is just that, ie a code and NOT law, so whilst contravening the highway code may not be good driving etiquette there is NO legal obligation to stick to it.

 

Mossy

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[postggj]

Agree

 

Its Called Adaquate Breaking Distance

[Mossycat]

erm beg to differ

 

you may feel the driver in front caused the accident but the law would argue you should have been clear in front

 

Erm I'd look up Insurance Fraud and read about cases where drivers deliberately pull out or brake suddenly and without warning.

 

In each of those cases the driver behind was held not liable.

 

That's just one example, there are others times when the driver behind was not responsible (eg a multiple accident and they are shunted into the car in front) etc etc

 

Again I will state THERE IS NO LAW WHATSOEVER THAT STATES THAT THE DRIVER BEHIND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR AN ACCIDENT.

 

Each case is taken on its own merits and whilst I agree that normally it is the driver behind who is responsible it is NOT automatic, so to post a statement like you did earlier is both misleading and wrong.

 

Mossy

[postggj]

This Is Interesting

You Mention Driver Fraud

But That Is Only When Fraud Has Been Confirmed Did The Inocent Party Get Away With It

 

Ref Multiple Pile Ups

 

Who Does Pick Up The Bill For This

 

Ref Adaquate Breaking Distance

 

I Did My Hgv Traning With Drive Tech

 

They Told Me That In 99.999 % Of Accidents, The Driver Behind Is Classed As Responsable For Not Having Enough Breaking Distance

 

The Reason For This Is Cost (unoficial)

Its Cheaper To Settle A Disputed Claim Than Fight It Through Solicitors

[Geminilady]

just to clarify my driver side corner hit the centre of his rear bumper because of the positioning of him as he pulled direct infront of me and left me NO breaking distance to avoid collision

[Mossycat]

This Is Interesting

You Mention Driver Fraud

But That Is Only When Fraud Has Been Confirmed Did The Inocent Party Get Away With It

 

Ref Multiple Pile Ups

 

Who Does Pick Up The Bill For This

 

Ref Adaquate Breaking Distance

 

I Did My Hgv Traning With Drive Tech

 

They Told Me That In 99.999 % Of Accidents, The Driver Behind Is Classed As Responsable For Not Having Enough Breaking Distance

 

The Reason For This Is Cost (unoficial)

Its Cheaper To Settle A Disputed Claim Than Fight It Through Solicitors

 

You were told right, it is cheaper to settle a claim than to fight it through the Courts or through solicitors, and in the absence of independent evidence or impact damage to indicate otherwise then it is normally the driver behind who is responsible.

 

I'd also agree that about 99% of all accidents are the fault of the driver behind, however, I was disagreeing with the statement that someone else posted saying 'The law says it's the fault of the driver behind', first off there is no law that states that and second off it is NOT ALWAYS the fault of the driver behind.

 

With regard to your question about who picks up the bill for multiple accidents that depends entirely on each case and if there are any TPSA's in place (third party sharing agreements), so it's not possible to give you a definitive answer.

 

Anyway now rather than getting sidetracked I think the OP wants/needs advice about this particular incident.

 

Mossy

Edited January 26, 2010 by Mossycat

[Mossycat]

just to clarify my driver side corner hit the centre of his rear bumper because of the positioning of him as he pulled direct infront of me and left me NO breaking distance to avoid collision

 

OK hate to say this but it looks bad because of the impact points.

 

Whilst I fully accept what you have said about the accident circumstances and that he probably did not give way and he then cut you up, the problem is that the damage to his vehicle is in the centre of his rear bumper, therefore he was in position in lane when the accident occurred.

 

No doubt he will deny failing to give way and claim that you simply ran into the back of him, sadly the impact damage would substantiate that.

 

Additionally, for a driver to enter a roundabout and get into that position in front of you (ie with his vehicle straight to the lane he was travelling in) would suggest that it did take some time (ie it was not as instant as simply pulling out), you have stated you were in the right hand lane so the roundabout must be at least two lanes, in that case the van driver had even further to travel to get in front of you.

 

I'm sorry to say this, but unless you have got an INDEPENDENT witness it is likely his version will be believed and you will end up getting the blame, it's not fair and it's not right but that's the way it is.

 

Mossy

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[Mossycat]

splitting hairs:(

 

Why have you changed what I said in the quote marks?

 

If you want to add a comment to something I said please post it out of the quote marks, not in it, because you are making your last post appear as though I said something I didn't.

 

Please edit it

 

Thanks

 

Mossy

Edited January 27, 2010 by Mossycat

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[Mossycat]

thats why its in red, so people know I added it

 

You also changed something I did say to red, so it's confusing between what I did say and what you added.

 

Will now you please edit your post and take out anything of the quote marks that I DID NOT say, the idea of quoting is to quote what someone did say and NOT what you have added.

 

Additionally, when people who have subscribed to the thread receive an email the bits you have added DO NOT APPEAR in red in the email so what you have added makes it look like I did say that.

 

Mossy

[PGH7447]

""

Edited January 27, 2010 by PGH7447
deleted

[MARTIN3030]

This is a reasonable request PGH.

Can you please return Mossycats quote to its original text.

[Mossycat]

NO

 

Any particular reason?

 

Mossy