advice needed as third party keeps changing their story

[dopeymam]

Hi Everyone, hoping someone can help?

 

My mum was involved in an accident in October last year in which her car was written off.

 

She was travelling in the outside lane of a 4 lane road with 2 lanes in either direction and no central reservation and wanted to carry out a u-turn in order to park facing the flow of traffic outside a church where she regularly plays the organ for funerals.

 

She indicated right and slowed down (although she didn't stop before commencing her turn because the oncoming lanes were clear) and as her front wheels crossed the central white line she was hit in the rear drivers side door by the person who was travelling behind her:x:-x:x.

 

Immediately after the collision, the TP parked her car on the opposite side of the road (against the flow of traffic, facing the direction in which she was originally travelling), got out of her car and said "I don't believe this, I was only doing 35 (the speed limit on this stretch of road is 40), I'm in a hurry to collect my child from school!"

 

They exchanged details and went on their way.

 

Now the TP is denying any liability:eek: and has changed her story 4 times, saying my mum had been in front of her, along side her, parked in the bus stop on the left hand side of the road and just turned across her path, and had been on the other side of the road.

 

My mum's solicitor received a letter in December from the TP insurer's informing us that their insured had cctv footage of the accident and that they were refusing to comment on liability until they had sight of it. They wrote to the solicitor again in February advising that as the cctv had been of no help to them, they were willing to settle on a 50-50 basis. My mum refused to accept this as she knew that she did nothing wrong.

 

Mum's solicitor issued court proceedings in May and has since had a letter back to inform them that the TP had instructed local no win no fee solicitors to act on their behalf and that they will be defending her case in court.

 

My questions are:

 

1) what will happen if it gets to court and the judge reads all the different stories given by the TP?

 

2) the 2nd letter from the TP insurers implies that they have viewed the cctv footage and yet we know it doesn't exist. will it count against the TP?

 

3) do you think my mum could be found liable for this accident in court, given the fact that the TP has changed their version of events so many times?

 

Sorry that this post is so long winded but I felt it necessary to include all relevant info.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read it and any advice would me much appreciated:)

 

DopeyMam xxx

[dopeymam]

can anybody advise on this please?

[crem]

they were willing to settle on a 50-50 basis. My mum refused to accept this as she knew that she did nothing wrong.

 

 

Excuse me! Either I have mis-read your post or you are viewing your mother's actions through rose-tinted glasses.

 

From your description, you say your mother attempted to do a U turn on a 4 lane road, turning from the nearside lane in one direction onto the nearside lane in the other direction without taking sufficient care to ensure the road was clear and safe to do so. Another car travelling in the same direction in the 2nd lane at a legal speed of 35mph (on a 40mph road) was unable to avoid colliding with your mother's car.

 

If I was the 3rd party I would not be expecting a 50/50 claim on this at all and would be holding your mother entirely at fault.

[dopeymam]

crem,

 

thanks for taking the time to read this.

 

but yeah, u have mis-read my post.

 

my mother was travelling in the outside lane (the lane nearest the central white line).

 

does this change your opinion?

[crem]

crem,

 

thanks for taking the time to read this.

 

but yeah, u have mis-read my post.

 

my mother was travelling in the outside lane (the lane nearest the central white line).

 

does this change your opinion?

 

Nope. I would still consider any attempt to carry out a U turn on a 4 lane road as dangerous, especially as your mother had a car following her in the same lane in the same direction which she failed to see.

[dopeymam]

which she failed to see.

 

she didn't fail to see the car behind her, as the inside lane was clear she believed the vehicle behind would undertake her.

Instead, the vehicle behind hit her because she was failing to keep a proper lookout and tried to overtake her.

 

My questions were more originally regarding what will happen in court re TP changing stories and inventing cctv but never mind.

 

Thanks for your time crem

 

dopeymam x

[Bookworm]

I think that what Crem is trying to do is show you that it is far from being as clear cut as you and your mum seem to think, and that in itself is the answer to your questions; in other words, there are no answers, it will depend on who the judge decides to believe, but I think it is wise to prepare your mum that it may not be going to go all her way. ;-)

[borisbeaver]

I always thought that undertaking was illegal. Attempting a U-turn on a 40mph stretch of road is perilous at the best of times and could of lead to a charge of driving without due care or attention if Mr Plod got involved.

 

I think you're lucky with a 50/50 offer.

[Surfer01]

Undertaking even on a motorway is not illegal and is not written into any law book an is not a regulation either. It is not illegal either to turn right across a 4 lane road. The person behind shoudl have been paying attention and obviously was not especially if the mother indicated and then braked to to the U turn. the only time it is illegal is if at the beginning of the road there is a sign stating no U-turn or right turn. I woudl look for evidence of this before making any decision.

[dopeymam]

thanks surfer,

 

there are no restrictions on the road which prevent a u-turn or a right turn.

 

and yeah, undertaking is legal if the car in front of you indicates to turn right. i think this in itself proves that the driver behind was not paying sufficient attention to the road. i may be wrong though...

 

dopeymam x

[crem]

Whichever way you look at this, to do a U turn on a 40mph stretch of road, in front of another vehicle and "assuming" the other vehicle will realise what you are doing and pass on the nearside is at best "careless" and at worst "dangerous". Personally, if I had been the 3rd party, I would have pushed for a police attendance and gone for a report on one or the other to strengthen my insurance claim.

 

If your mother comes out with a 50/50 I think that would be a success on her part.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

Was there an actual junction where your mother tried to turn right? Or did she just slow down on a normal bit of road?

 

I am finding it hard to work out how the other car hit the door, surely to be just crossing the white line your mums car would still be facing pretty much in the direction of travel? Was the car overtaking her?

[dopeymam]

thanks for your comments.

 

we've received the TP defence today which our evidence makes a complete mockery of.

 

the defence claims that my mother was PARKED in a bus lay by with the TP travelling in the outside lane and without any warning my mother pulled out across the TP's path (accident assessors can prove this would've reulted in a t-boning style accident, complete front end of TP vs driver's side of mum's car as it was, point of impact was the front of the rear wheel arch and then the damage travels forward into the rear driver's side door with a crush depth of 17cm!?!), TP states they parked on correct side of road post collision, we have photographic evidence of them on the opposite side of the road facing the flow of traffic. TP's own report to the police states that my mother was travelling in ouside lane when she indicated right, slowed down but then moved left.

 

Solicitor believes that it will now be an open and shut case due to the lies told by the TP and the fact that they are basing their defence on such.

 

Many thanks for all your comments

 

dopeymam x