car accident

[queensclose]

I would accept blame. And not let it go to court. You can overtake on zigzags to clear an obstruction and long as it's safe to do so. The third party will say it was clear of oncoming traffic and would have been back into to correct lane by the time he executed the move reaching the crossing. The impact was in the passenger door suggesting you you should have saw him coming and stopped they will argue. Tp started the move overtaking a van that had a left hand indicator on but was stationary as he completed the move you struck the side of the vehicle.

If your insurance company thought you had a case they would have backed you up.

You will be responsible for costs unless you have legal cover but I don,t think they would back you up

 

The judgement will be in your name and not the insurance company . So you will end up with a ccj if the insurance take more then 30 days to pay the claim if you lose and your costs.

 

Don,t count on the zigzags as defence no one was charged even though county court can use proberbilty. They won't because they will argue they were clearing an obstructing vehicle

[ConnyWonny]

no. this is what i need to prove to the court

 

And how exactly are you planning on doing that?!

 

Even if you manage this feat (highly unlikely), primary liability will still attach to you as the TP had priority. You therefore should have given way, but clearly failed to do so.

[joox]

so do i just inform my ex insurance co to settle? will i be liable for anything?

[queensclose]

Just phone them up and ask them to settle. Have you received court papers.

 

Why hasnt your car been repaired. Are you third party fire an theft

[sailor sam]

It's been a while since I had a look at this so I've just gone through it all again and given further thought to it.

 

Dealing with the insurance/court side first; If you are allowing it to go to court under your initiative rather than that of your insurance co, I think that potentially you will be liable for costs if you loose. I'm sure if you do have legal protection, this will be stated in the t & c's. You havn't made clear what your insurance co's position on this is in respect of liability. Obviously the TP's insurers are convinced that you were liable otherwise they would not be taking the matter to court.

 

No back to the actual incident. I have studied the junction and road layout again and will make the following observations from a professional (PCV) and advanced driver point of view. 1) The TP is following the van along the main single carriageway which is indicating left just prior to a pedestrian crossing which has a central refuge as well as zig zags which extend from the beginning of the junction. The centre of the road is marked by chevrons up to the start of the zig zags. These features would of been visable by the TP driver. 2) The OP is attemting to turn right from the road to which the van is intending to turn into but because of the OP's presence (possibly due to the OP's car postion), the van is unable to complete the manouvre and as such the van driver indicates to the OP that he is giving way. The van is still within the flow of traffic and would not appear to be 'parked' although was still indicating left. 3) The OP begins to move forward infront of the now stationary van while being possibly in a 'comfort zone' of knowing that he is in fact within the area of the zig zag markings of the pedestrian crossing plus chevrons which he believes that there would not be a vehicle overtaking the van. 4) The TP driver recklessly (due to a lack of patience perhaps) decides to overtake the van dispite that a) the manouvre cannot be possibly be made legally due to the prescence of the zig zags and b) safely due to the central refuge immediately after the junction. As a result in both the OP and TP's actions, a collision occured between the two.

 

My opinion is therefore that the TP failed to read the road correctly and indeed committed at least 1 offence which contributed to the collision. Although the TP began to overtake the van on the chevrons, he/she would of realised that by completing that manouvre would contaviene the zig zag markings and also conflict with on-comming traffic passing through the pedestrian crossing. This was no doubt a reckless peice of driving from the TP and as such, the OP could (and should of) reported him/her for the offence of overtaking on the approach to a pedestrain crossing. My view is that there should not be an allowed right turn from this junction and the central refuge should extend across it to prevent such a manouvre and the possibility of vehicle overtaking which would pose a danger to pedestrains. HOWEVER the OP is turning onto a main road from a 'give way' side road thus making hi/her responsible for ensuring that the road is clear as the vehicle on the main road obviously have priority. Obviously the van obstructed his/her view from the right so again, the driver overtaking the van ought to have considered that.

 

I conclude that if the OP prepares his case carefully (which included obtaining relaible witness statements), then I would think the case is defendable to a point where at least he/she will acheive a 50/50 result. With a good solicitor I would suggest that you may even get a better result than that. The better solution would be to run it past your insueres again whereby they may re-vist the TPs insurers and attempt to settle out of court by sharing liability.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

Edited April 27, 2011 by sailor sam

[joox]

Just phone them up and ask them to settle. Have you received court papers.

 

Why hasnt your car been repaired. Are you third party fire an theft

 

i have been waiting to see what happens with this. since i did not request for the insurance company to replair my car i have to fork out my self now.

[queensclose]

It will something like this.

Judge . I have looked through the papers

Claimant . Thank you our key points are. My client was driving down bloggs rd. In front was a van. The left indicators were on and it stopped. The deft has confirmed this to be correct

My client stopped but had a clear view of the road ahead and could see zigzags ahead of the van and a pelican crossing. There were chevrons were the van had stopped.

The road is a red route and stopping is prohibited. My client could see no on coming vehicles. And nothing in front of the van causing any obstruction. With around 4 car lengths clear to the pelican crossing. Naturally traffic was building up behind the van.

Because there was no on coming traffic my client felt it was safe to over take and proceeded to do so. However on completing the move my clients vehicle was struck on the passenger door.

Details were exchanged

And statements were obtained

Using industry standards it was agreed the deft at fault however the deft has refused to accept his insurers advice and refused responsibility.

 

His basis the my client over took on zigzags. With respect the zigzags are purely for the pelican crossing and is no way connected to the side road.

Our view is that wether or not the zigzags were present this accident would have happened and should be viewed as that

 

My client safely overtook the van but due the deft driving without due care he hit the passenger door which is enough to show my client could not have prevented the accident

 

However the deft could have by showing some consideration

Judge. Ok ok I have read all this is the statements. Mr deft do you have anything to add other then whats in your defence statement before I make a ruling

[Dragons Dennis]

Very clearly, you are not legally trained.

[sailor sam]

It will something like this.

Judge . I have looked through the papers

Claimant . Thank you our key points are. My client was driving down bloggs rd. In front was a van. The left indicators were on and it stopped. The deft has confirmed this to be correct

My client stopped but had a clear view of the road ahead and could see zigzags ahead of the van and a pelican crossing.

 

How? She had a van infront of her.

 

There were chevrons were the van had stopped.

The road is a red route and stopping is prohibited. My client could see no on coming vehicles. And nothing in front of the van causing any obstruction. With around 4 car lengths clear to the pelican crossing. Naturally traffic was building up behind the van.

 

The Van had not stopped to contravine the red route, the van had stopped under the exemption of being prevented of proceeding as it's intended route WAS partialy obstructed in fact by the 'defendant's' car.

 

Because there was no on coming traffic my client felt it was safe to over take and proceeded to do so. However on completing the move my clients vehicle was struck on the passenger door.

Details were exchanged

And statements were obtained

 

According to the 'defendant's' account, there WAS on-coming traffic and it was due to this that the 'claimant' used the chevron area which divides the two carriageways, to avoid them and pass very closely to the o/s of the van.

 

Using industry standards it was agreed the deft at fault however the deft has refused to accept his insurers advice and refused responsibility.

 

I cannot recall seeing any expert opinion relating to this.

 

His basis the my client over took on zigzags. With respect the zigzags are purely for the pelican crossing and is no way connected to the side road.

 

With respect, yes the zig zag markings do not apply to the road to which the 'defendant' is exiting but the 'claimant' was not on any part of that road which makes that claim irrelevant. The 'claimant' was in fact on the carriageway to which the zig zag markings apply and although began the overtaking manouvre just prior to the area to which the zig zags cover, to complete the manouvre meant that the 'claimant' would have to contravene them

 

Our view is that wether or not the zigzags were present this accident would have happened and should be viewed as that

 

Hypothetical so irrelevant. You are speculating.

 

My client safely overtook the van but due the deft driving without due care he hit the passenger door which is enough to show my client could not have prevented the accident

 

Clearly not as your 'client' overtook a van which had stopped in the flow of traffic just prior to a pedestrain crossing whereby it was obviously not possible to carry out the manouvre legally and in addition, had to 'cut in' closely to the van to avoid on-comming traffic making it a reckless peice of driving. It was the latter part of 'your client's' manouvre which bought her so close back in front of the van which resulted in the collision.

 

 

However the deft could have by showing some consideration

Judge. Ok ok I have read all this is the statements. Mr deft do you have anything to add other then whats in your defence statement before I make a ruling

 

Yes, please refer to the witness statements which will clarify the above facts 'sir'.

 

Unfortunately although my 7 year old son could of done this, he was at school so I had to.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

[queensclose]

The reason I,m following this is because similar happened to me 2 years ago. I was travelling behind a bus and at 7.30 in the morning. And it stopped at a busy stop bollards prevented any overtaking. Bus started to pull off and along can some running for the bus. Driver decided to stop on zigzags for the the person. Who pointed to his partner who was way behind. I decided to be stupid and overtook on zigzags

 

Wow and behold car pulls out of side road and smacks the side of my car.

Angry driver blah blah blah. To make matters worse police station 100 yards away to officers returning to station. Angry driver talks to police. Blah blah blah. Officer says any one hurt. All replies are no. Police say exchange details if bus driver is witness get his name now otherwise were moving him on because your causing traffic. Angry driver blah blah blah. Police are you refusing to exchange details. Angry driver no. Police well do it. Police to me if you gonna taking photos do it now because were moving your car out way to clear traffic. Me do I need to make a statement.. Police only to your insurance company

Angry driver blah blah I wanna make a complaint. Police move your car you causing an obstruction the make your complainat at at rolfe st police station

Tow truck arrives. And takes car to repair centre

Call insurance. Takes details over phone. 10am. Courtesy car arrives

 

9 days later car repaired. No excess to pay

4 weeks later insurance company call and say driver is refusing to give details of his insurance company. Police confirmed at scene we both had insurance

Week later. Driver wrote in for his reasons why he his refusing. Basically saying it's my fault. Insurance company inform him it needs to be dealt via his insurer

5 months later. Insurance company renewal has knocked 3 yrs no claim off.

Called insurance and informed the case is being heard in county court and confident my no claims discount will be restored shortly and any extra premium will be refunded

6 weeks later

Claim settled in my favour

I didn,t even have to go to court and only statements I give were verbal over the phone.

To be honest I thought I was at fault but at the time I the accident I kept quiet.

When the police arrived I thought. Here we go. But they did not side with anyone. They just wanted to get the traffic going

 

I imagine he did report it to the police but never heard anything

 

When I did the verbal statement they asked. Did the police attend. And was any cautioned or charged with any offence

This is why I follow with interest

I wish you luck with which you decide to do

I think this site is a wealth of information and has helped the ordinary folk to no ends

 

52.493463,-1.954949 (Windmill Ln, West Bromwich, Sandwell B66 3, UK)

 

This is this site of the bump as you can see it's similar.

[sailor sam]

Thank you for that account, I know the area well as I used to live in Wolverhampton... and was a bus driver for West Midlands Travel. My comments are that both yoursdelf AND the bus driver made contraventions of regs involving pedestrain crossings; The bus for stopping to pick up a passenger and you for overtaking but you will no doubt know this. Ther police sometimes are very good at avoiding paperwork when it suits. In the circumstances you describe, as there were no injuries their priority would be to get traffic moving again and then deal with any offences. Most West Midland buses have been fitted with CCTV cameras (external as well as internal) for a number of years now and can be use in evidence. The 'angry' driver could of asked the police to take a statement from him to report either you, the bus driver or both. Had he had done so, the police would obliged to investigate and take the matter seriously otherwise he could make a complaint.

 

The court case (as with any) can go either way and i'm in no way saying that in the OPs case here, that he will definately sucessfully defend the action. What I am saying that based on his account and the fact he has witnesess, it is possibly defendable if the case is presented on the lines I have suggested. You will also note in my post of yesterday that I would first suggest that he runs it by his insurers first to see if there is mileage in settling out of court. You will also see that in the opening paragraph of that post, I point out the risks involvede in the OP allowing the matter to go to court under his own initiative. The post then details what is my OPINION on the matter speaking as a proffesional driver who knows a liittle about the RTA. In the OPs case there are without doubt circumstances which are far from being clear cut and I think it is a 50/50 outcome. But it is for the OP to decide how he wants to play it because at the end of the day, he was there and we wasn't.

 

Please Note

 

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

 

I would always urge to seek face to face professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

 

Please click my reputation 'star' button at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice useful.

[joox]

Hello

My claim to repair a damage to my car was approved 6 months ago but for some reasons I could not get the car repaired. I am now looking to get it fixed and ant to know how long is an approved claim valid for?

 

The garage seem to think its no longer valid. any thoughts/

[BankFodder]

I would say that the quote for the work would last a reasonable time after which it must be requoted. Could be 3 months.

If the quote has gone up then you are probably liable to pay the difference

[joox]

thanks for the reply. its the same rate as its the same job.

I will contact the insurance company but I just wanted to find out if they ever cancel a claim if it has not been paid out within 6 months.

[blackknight]

Might be the same job, but labour rates and the price of the parts may have gone up!!