My Car, Post-Crash

[bnjyn]

Is that the Foxhunter carvery?

Looking at the road markings in the photo of the accident site it shows two lanes merge just before the junction - that might have been a factor.

Edited 14 December, 2010 by bnjyn

[Chris Berry]

Can you googlemap the junction?

Would like to see the position of your car & the direction the other car was coming.

Also, is there any CCTV cameras around, you never know you could get it on camera?

[wja96]

It looks/sounds like you pulled out and the front of your car caught the back of theirs as they went past you. The fact that yours was spun around indicates that yours was hit from the side nie. turning into the road and the fact that they carried on indicates that they were travelling in a straight line.

From what I can see, it looks like your fault as they had right of way. Whether he changed lanes or not is irrelevant as you should have waited until the road was clear before turning.

[kwacka]

I think you know in your own mind that you're on a sticky wicket, and have posted for sympathy & support, of which you don't seem to have a great deal so you're staying in denial. My adult sons and I have almost 60 years of driving experience, with several accidents along the way, so can offer you the following advice:

1. As the road is clearly merging into two carriageways and is bending to the left, it is reasonable to expect a car to move from lane 3 into lane 2 and then lane 1 at that point. If you are local, you should be aware of that.

2. It was 1230 am, so presumably very little traffic around, why could you not have waited for another second or 2 before proceeding?

3. I am not surprised that the third party wanted you breathalysed, I probably would too.

4. I would be surprised if the police have any further involvement, unless there is an allegation of bad driving or injury caused.

5. If you do not have legal expenses cover, this could turn into a long drawn out battle between insurance companies.

6. Now for the bad news - IF you have undeclared modifications, (like wheel trims and colour coded grill), then your insurers have the perfect opportunity to refuse to insure you. That could then result in you being sued by the third party and possible prosecution. I have taken such action against an uninsured river.

7. Best case scenario for you is a knock for knock settlement, learn from your mistake and move on.

I know you don't want to hear any of this, but as I said in my first post, you live to fight another day!!

Edited 14 December, 2010 by kwacka

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

Must dash, gotta declare my hubcaps to my insurance co

matt

[VRS Goldie Jon]

Did you make sure you declared the VRS badge on it???? Lol!

[Moniar]

Oh I would also suggest mentioning that a claim of whiplash may be falsely made as she was complaining of pain at the scene. Whiplash does not normally develop until later so I think she was a big fat faker. Sadly all you do is go to a doctor, tense your muscles and go "ouch" when he prods you and you have a medically certified record that you have whiplash though which is very difficult to defend against.

I agree - and would suggest to your insurance company that it wa spossibly an injury scam. Whiplash does not start feeling painful straight away - mine was 24 hrs later after I was shunted (luckily was in large company car and not furby!), and then painful for 2 weeks. To me it does sound they deliberately swiped you, and may have been cruising for such an opportunity? There are gangs about that do exactly that - and the fact that there were three of them = more witnesses - is convenient for them making a claim - also three possible injury claims in one accident. I would ask your insurance copmany to check out their previous records as part of the investigation.

Edited 14 December, 2010 by Moniar

[anewman]

Must dash, gotta declare my hubcaps to my insurance co

Holy crap, got to declare my magic tree air freshener hanging from the rear view.

[kwacka]

Must dash, gotta declare my hubcaps to my insurance co

matt

Did you make sure you declared the VRS badge on it???? Lol!

Holy crap, got to declare my magic tree air freshener hanging from the rear view.

You guys are making the mistake of shooting the messenger, insurance companies will use any excuse to avoid payout. When you take out a policy thay ask if there is any modification from standard manufacture. I know of many claims that have failed for the most (apparently) ridiculous reason.

I am also a biker, and know that they even regard the fitting of stickers on the fuel tank as a modifcation.

I am surprised at your derisive comments; your posts are normally sensible.

Just telling it like it is.

Edited 14 December, 2010 by kwacka

[VRS Goldie Jon]

I was more laughing at the fact it's not a vrs and it has a vrs badge on the front.

[kwacka]

I was more laughing at the fact it's not a vrs and it has a vrs badge on the front.

Looked more like a p1ss take to me

[danv7191]

So this won't help you whatsoever, but at just before 1am I was driving back from Nottingham (university) and detoured through Leicester (as I forgot J19 to the A14 is night time closures) - so could very possibly have been... so close. Nearly could have been your witness. Sorry bud, hope you get it sorted :/

[gurney92]

Is that the Foxhunter carvery?

Looking at the road markings in the photo of the accident site it shows two lanes merge just before the junction - that might have been a factor.

Yeah it's the fox hunter. And its a dual carriageway all the way down to the next island (2 miles up the road).

And ****** Goldie, I couldn't afford the ***** vRS, which is the car I wanted to buy, I worked my ***** nuts off for that car, then worked even harder to get it in top nick again. That's why I'm so ***** off, and there is no ***** way it was my fault because I wouldn't take the risk. Why would I spend over 100+ hours sorting the paintwork/body out, just to have it smashed to bits by some **** who was in a rush?

I've still got my old hubcaps just I replaced them because they were damaged. And the grille is coming off seeing as its damaged anyway. It has happened, but I was looking for some support in the fact that it was not my ***** fault and the evidence is stacked against him, and it did make me wonder if they were part of these insurance scam groups because the guy was so calm and knew exactly what to do, along with all the other people in the car. We've had alot of them around here..

EDIT: Also I believe the 3 of them were Londoners, the driver definitely was. Yet they were driving a Nottingham registered car, which led me further to believe they did it purposely.

Edited 15 December, 2010 by DGW
Multiple violations of swear word filter and personal abuse edited.

[kwacka]

Yeah it's the fox hunter. And the lanes DON'T merge, its a dual carriageway all the way down to the next island (2 miles up the road).

Had a look on Google maps, unless they're out of date it shows 3 lanes merging to 2

[kwacka]

So are we agreed then, 3 lanes merging to 2?

[gurney92]

Had a look on Google maps, unless they're out of date it shows 3 lanes merging to 2

They're out of date mate, the roundabout was changed last year or the year before. It's definitely 2 lanes coming off the roundabout.

[kwacka]

They're out of date mate, the roundabout was changed last year or the year before. It's definitely 2 lanes coming off the roundabout.

My apologies, but I still stand by my reasoning that you should have assumed that someone would take 'the racing line' on a left hand bend, especially as you knew the road was originally designed as 3 lanes going to 2.

[gurney92]

My apologies, but I still stand by my reasoning that you should have assumed that someone would take 'the racing line' on a left hand bend, especially as you knew the road was originally designed as 3 lanes going to 2.

I totally know that someone would do, especially when theres no traffic. but the guy was in the 2nd lane all the way up til where that arrow (in the 3 lanes picture) is, then moved across. In honesty I thought he was in that lane waiting for me to pull out.

[kwacka]

I totally know that someone would do, especially when theres no traffic. but the guy was in the 2nd lane all the way up til where that arrow (in the 3 lanes picture) is, then moved across. In honesty I thought he was in that lane waiting for me to pull out.

OK, you don't have to convince me, but in my job I work on facts which is what the insurance companies try to do. In the absence of independent or police witnesses, they must come to some sort of agreement if the facts are in dispute.

The best advice I can give you is be honest and present all relevant facts.

All the best, please let us know how you get on, but remember it's only a bit of steel!!

[JLneonhug]

My apologies, but I still stand by my reasoning that you should have assumed that someone would take 'the racing line' on a left hand bend, especially as you knew the road was originally designed as 3 lanes going to 2.

+1 :( I would not call it 'the racing line'. If vision is clear, coming back onto the left lane is not a problem at all, it is what you should do if your not overtaking. If you like to stretch it it can be called straight lining, but its near impossible to prove against that.

I would be on the outside lane for better vision of exiting bend, come back into left lane as I am not overtaking. That ofc if there was no traffic.

Edit: After reading a few posts, I also would not need to signal left otherwise that would indicate I want to turn left! I am merging back into the left lane.

Unfortunately OP, I would not have came out if I was in your situation, esp when it is not busy (12:30am), what was the issue of waiting for the car to go past first? Do you perhaps see why he thought you was intoxicated?

Anyway, like others say, its only materialistic items, least everyones ok and if something doesn't kill us it makes us stronger (and wiser hopefully).

Edited 15 December, 2010 by JLneonhug

[scottk18]

but I was looking for some support in the fact that it was not my f-ing fault and the evidence is stacked against him,

sorry you wont get it from me, you pulled out it to his clear path, end of story.

[Johnny50]

EDIT: Also I believe the 3 of them were Londoners, the driver definitely was. Yet they were driving a Nottingham registered car, which led me further to believe they did it purposely.

What a load of rubbish !

I drive a Northamton registered car, yet i live in Edinburgh, so if i crash into someone, does that mean i done it on purpose ? No !

But back to your original question, looking at the facts, i think you were mostly at fault, although the other party obviously didn't help things by changing lanes, but i still feel you should've waited another 2-3 seconds before pulling out.

[Martin|G|Allen]

From the limited pictorial evidence, it all points to it being your fault. You've got front end damage, and the other party has rear damage. The insewerance company are likely to look at those facts rather than any hearsay without independant witnesses.

Sometimes the facts just don't explain the full picture, but facts are what they will use to assign blame.

Martin

[Simonbt]

I'm at a loss to how this isn't clearcut. You saw him coming, assumed he would stay in his lane and pulled out. Its that assumption that unfortunatly lays most of the blame with yourself :( Other drivers on the road are unpredictable, each time you assume you know what they are going to do you take a risk, and this time that risk didn't pay off.

The bottom line is you drove your car into the side of his, after admitting that you saw him coming. As its a dual carrageway you would (should) have only been looking right towards him for almost the whole manuever with maybe a quick glance left to check for nutters coming the wrong way. He could have ploughed his car straight into the side of yours and you would still have a problem proving it wasn't your fault. Possibly if you could prove he wasn't indicating you might have a case but just remember how angry you would be if someone pulled out and drove into the side of you writing your car off in the process. As far as his stopping distance goes, its unlikely that he would have slammed the anchors on after it happening. 250meters after an accident like that isn't unusual, its probably going to take half that distance at 40mph to realise what just happened. Sorry for being so blunt about it but this is very likely how the insurance company will view it.

Moral of the story? People are unpredictable, the safest way to drive is to assume that if there is a stupid thing another driver can do they will invariably do it.

[Stunts]

Unfortunately I think the blame will lie squarely at your door. You pulled into the path of an oncoming vehicle forcing said vehicle to either change direction or brake - specifically a point in the Highway Code if memory serves :(

Glad no-one was more seriously injured - had it been a motorcyclist the story could have so easily been a major tragedy.......