Flipping over is one thing but to travel 25 yards, hit a barrier (which will absorb some of the speed) flip over, travel across the road to the other side with enough force to flatten a barrier there suggests to me an entry speed to the roundabout of 50 or 60, possibly les if you assume he never touched the break, but come on the first thing you would do is stand on the break so across the roundabout and 25 yards down the road I'd have expected to scrub 50% of the original speed by this point. 25 yards is enough to stop a car from 30mph.

The second barrier (which has a large deformation - still standing but in a bad way) on the other side of the road is around fifteen metres from the first barrier. I would love to know why the other driver did not brake - the missus says that he was driving towards the other road after clipping her (which he ended upside down in), when he went out of control and hit the first barrier.

Did he lose control of the other car, by swerving at high speed, and why are there tyre marks on the front of our vehicle?

As others have said, I am just glad that nobody was injured.

(i'm talking from 10 years experience as a Forensic Collision Investigator).

I am amazed by the number of people who have ignored this and continued to argue that te car 'must have been' doing 60/70/etc. ok maybe it was, but the simple fact that it's gone upside down and clobbered Romeo barriers doesn't guarantee that.

So my tuppence worth:

1) the accident is wife's fault, pretty much irrespective of speed I the other car. Unless she was stationery she has hit another car which had right of way. Any offence committed by the other driver may have contributed to the accident.

2) Wife appears to have left the scene. Inconvenient parking isn't an excuse - Especially given that it sounds like other cars 'stopped to assist' and therefore I see no reason for her not waiting for the police to arrive. If she did that, then they can obviously decide to tell her what to do with her vehicle and whether to hang around or saunter off to work and come in when she wants.

3) the main thing is BOTH drivers are ok. We don't know if the other guy was driving like a wotsit or not, but even if he does I'm sure we've all done it once in our lives.

The above doesn't mean I have no sympathy for the OPs wife - on the face of it, common sense and a compassionate view would say that she is the victim and that because she was in shock her mistake of leaving the scene was understandable. However me (and I suspect blackrat) are looking at this in a more detached, non emotive manner, and it is this 'black and white' approach which would be taken if this ends up in an insurance dispute or if either driver were to face prosecution for traffic offences.

It sounds like a hot hatch, and he may well have been driving fast, but flying?

Talking as a layman, if he'd been travelling at a sensible speed, and merely clipped your car, there's no way he should have lost control as he did

Glad SWMBO was OK apart from the shakes

I am wondering if he went so fast, that as he swerved, he got the NS rear wheel off the ground, because swerving at 30MPH in a well sorted modern car in the dry shouldn't cause anything to happen.

As I said before, there were no paint marks on either vehicle.

So my tuppence worth:

1) the accident is wife's fault, pretty much irrespective of speed I the other car. Unless she was stationery she has hit another car which had right of way. Any offence committed by the other driver may have contributed to the accident.

Can you describe what you mean by "pretty much irrespective of speed"?

Depending on your answer to that question, you MIGHT be suggesting that if the OP's wife was driving with all due care and attention, did all the checks, concluding that it was safe to continue, then got tw@tted by an @rse who literally appeared from nowhere, that it would be her fault

I think not

I am amazed by the number of people who have ignored this and continued to argue that te car 'must have been' doing 60/70/etc. ok maybe it was, but the simple fact that it's gone upside down and clobbered Romeo barriers doesn't guarantee that.

So my tuppence worth:

1) the accident is wife's fault, pretty much irrespective of speed I the other car. Unless she was stationery she has hit another car which had right of way. Any offence committed by the other driver may have contributed to the accident.

Sorry, but after that opening point I cannot take your views seriously. It is like saying, that if you turn right out of a side turning (with a blind bend around 50 metres away), and you are hit by another car travelling at twice the speed limit say 60MPH in a 30MPH limit, then the speeding driver is not too blame!

Can you not see, that a car which was not previously in view, but is speeding, then alters the whole perspective?

As pointed out above.

You wife pulled out and caused an accident,

She left the scene as there was no safe place to stop but yet others managed to assist the other driver.

And the driver of the other car...

Exactly my thoughts.Nobody seemed to care about him.

He can go to hell for driving like a ****

Some attitude to have.

I have been in several accidents through my life..

Touch wood not one of them was my fault.

The last one I had was a woman heavily rear ended my car.

I had the decency to go to her car even though my car was in the middle of the road ofter the impact and ask her ( the other driver ) if she was ok and to make sure her passengers were ok.

Then again I could have taken your attitude and go back to her and say "F**K you B**CH"

It would not have helped anyone would it?

Edited 8 September, 201213 yr by vectra1

I have been in several accidents through my life..

Touch wood not one of them was my fault.

Was no-one sure then?

I thought you touched wood for things which might happen in the future

Was no-one sure then?

Huhh??

I thought you touched wood for things which might happen in the future

Exactly

Touch wood that I wont be the cause of one. *May the luck of the Irish with me*

As pointed out above.

You wife pulled out and caused an accident,

She left the scene as there was no safe place to stop but yet others managed to assist the other driver.

Exactly my thoughts.Nobody seemed to care about him.

Firstly, I was glad that nobody was hurt and so was my wife.

Secondly, the person who stopped was on another road leading on to the roundabout (a minor road, whose other carriageway was blocked by the crashed car). She could of course have left her car in the roundabout for other vehicles to negotiate. When she was there, a couple of other vehicles beeped at her.

You also seem to be another person who fails to see that speed can be a cause of an accident, and that people who speed - particlarly in 30MPH limits do not give others time to react - - - - -- approach give way line, look to the right and pull away after checking it is clear - - -- - - BANG! - - - -- - WTF was that, where did he come from?

That is how it happens, that is the reality of the situation, people speed, they enter roundabouts without stopping because - "They have right of way" - they believe that it is up to other people to get out of their way even when they are speeding.

I'm pleased everyone got out ok

I think this needs to looked at from two different points of view.

Firstly the OP's wife has caused the accident by entering the roundabout and not giving way to the vehicle already on it, regardless of the speed of the other vehicle. This is what the insurance company will look at. The crash obviously was quite severe if one vehicle ended up on it's roof (although it is very easy to do).to have been if the most use to any attending police officers, the wife's car shouldn't have been moved. She has committed offence of leaving the scene of an accident. On the plus side she has reported it.

Secondly in minor Injury RTCs, the police are not going to call out any crash Investigation team. The officers could and probably should send out witness questionnaires to any I dependant witnesses to build a case for careless driving against the other vehicle.

Without knowing any details of the account from the other driver it is very difficult to give any sort of positive advice. In my experience both drivers are going to give a version of events which will be inadvertently twisted towards the outcome they want.

Firstly, I was glad that nobody was hurt and so was my wife.

Secondly, the person who stopped was on another road leading on to the roundabout (a minor road, whose other carriageway was blocked by the crashed car). She could of course have left her car in the roundabout for other vehicles to negotiate. When she was there, a couple of other vehicles beeped at her.

You also seem to be another person who fails to see that speed can be a cause of an accident, and that people who speed - particlarly in 30MPH limits do not give others time to react - - - - -- approach give way line, look to the right and pull away after checking it is clear - - -- - - BANG! - - - -- - WTF was that, where did he come from?

That is how it happens, that is the reality of the situation, people speed, they enter roundabouts without stopping because - "They have right of way" - they believe that it is up to other people to get out of their way even when they are speeding.

I'm in total agreement with that, other than the fact that there is a legal requirement for you to stop at the scene of an accident, sod whether or not other vehicles are beeping at you

It might be in your best interests to leave your car in situe until the police arrive, as it's likely to give more information to accident examiners to come to a conclusion what happened

I thought if you decided it wasn't safe you had an amount of time to show at a police station to report it.

I thought if you decided it wasn't safe you had an amount of time to show at a police station to report it.

Sec 170 RTA 1988 creates two separate offences, failing to stop and failing to report, subject to circumstances

I'm in total agreement with that, other than the fact that there is a legal requirement for you to stop at the scene of an accident, sod whether or not other vehicles are beeping at you

It might be in your best interests to leave your car in situe until the police arrive, as it's likely to give more information to accident examiners to come to a conclusion what happened

The police officer who interviewed us, advised us that in that particular location, the car was better off being moved. Last year a police officer in a Fluo jacket was killed very close to where this happened as he attended an accident. Put quite simply, it would have been incredibly dangerous for her to leave the vehicle where it was and go to the side of the road, with other cars speeding around her.

I thought if you decided it wasn't safe you had an amount of time to show at a police station to report it.

Exactly right, and that is what we were told by the police officer - it is in fact 24 hours, so 45 minutes is a very short space of time.

It's easy to say now but I'd have probably pulled over to the left as far as possible, switched on the hazard lights and exited the vehicle.

If I felt intimidated by other motorists I'd have stood at a distance away from the car until the emergency services arrived and took control of the scene.

Firstly, I was glad that nobody was hurt and so was my wife.

Secondly, the person who stopped was on another road leading on to the roundabout (a minor road, whose other carriageway was blocked by the crashed car). She could of course have left her car in the roundabout for other vehicles to negotiate. When she was there, a couple of other vehicles beeped at her.

You also seem to be another person who fails to see that speed can be a cause of an accident, and that people who speed - particlarly in 30MPH limits do not give others time to react - - - - -- approach give way line, look to the right and pull away after checking it is clear - - -- - - BANG! - - - -- - WTF was that, where did he come from?

That is how it happens, that is the reality of the situation, people speed, they enter roundabouts without stopping because - "They have right of way" - they believe that it is up to other people to get out of their way even when they are speeding.

I am not disputing your post but My point was,

She moved her car which would have been safer stopped in situ with hazards flashing and a little consideration for the wellbeing of the other driver.

Might I also point out that you were not there when the accident happened so everything is hearsay to you.

I know she is your wife but..But..

As well as that.

The Part of your post I put in bold..

Could that by any mere chance have been what your wife did?

The joys of Google Maps.

This is just an example but a look at the junction in question might help..?

Exactly right, and that is what we were told by the police officer - it is in fact 24 hours, so 45 minutes is a very short space of time.

The 24-hour period is a bit of an urban myth, since it is preceded by the words 'as soon as reasonably practicable'

As your wife reported within 45 minutes, she has no problem, but it isn't an automatic right to run to 23 hours 59 minutes if you could have done it before

Have a read of the requirements in Sec 170 Road Traffic Act 188 here

If a junction is relatively blind, speed WILL make a contributory factor as the driver pulling out can only see as far as the field of vision and the designated road speed will indicate this prior to the turning. If a road from the junction is designated as a 30, it indicates that it is adequate time for a driver to safely pull out having seen there is nothing coming. If a vehicle is driving well in excess of that speed, there is a possibility of the driver doing everything correctly yet still being part of a RTC.

It's very possible for a motorbike especially to be doing well over double the speed limit on a particular stretch of road which would leave absolutely no chance for the driver quite correctly pulling out and having no time to change their path before collision. If the police felt this was a possibility, they would work out what the speeds were. Unfortunately, they can't always be @rsed, but this normally tends to happen only if there is personal injury! Fella slammed into the rear quarter of our fire appliance when we were pulling out of the station, WITH A SQUAD CAR TWO VEHICLES BEHIND HIM, and the police who got out literally 15 seconds later said he was probably doing 60 on a 40 road, but cos everyone was okay, they didn't measure it and took his statement that he thought he doing just under 40 for their report. End of. Bloke got off with nothing but his smashed up clio!

Work that out!

The police officer who interviewed us, advised us that in that particular location, the car was better off being moved. Last year a police officer in a Fluo jacket was killed very close to where this happened as he attended an accident. Put quite simply, it would have been incredibly dangerous for her to leave the vehicle where it was and go to the side of the road, with other cars speeding around her.

I though the road was suppose to be 30mph. that bit looks a lot faster then 30

The 24-hour period is a bit of an urban myth, since it is preceded by the words 'as soon as reasonably practicable'

As your wife reported within 45 minutes, she has no problem, but it isn't an automatic right to run to 23 hours 59 minutes if you could have done it before

Have a read of the requirements in Sec 170 Road Traffic Act 188 here

In general terms, the provision under the Road Traffic Act is for when you hit a parked car or object in the road such as a lamp post where there is no one to give your details to. If you read the wording of 170(2) you will see that in ALL cases you must stop at the scene. 170(3) is only a provision for when you have stopped but not exchanged details. It gives no 'get out clause' for not stopping.

As pointed out above.

You wife pulled out and caused an accident,

She left the scene as there was no safe place to stop but yet others managed to assist the other driver.

Exactly my thoughts.Nobody seemed to care about him.

Some attitude to have.

I have been in several accidents through my life..

Touch wood not one of them was my fault.

The last one I had was a woman heavily rear ended my car.

I had the decency to go to her car even though my car was in the middle of the road ofter the impact and ask her ( the other driver ) if she was ok and to make sure her passengers were ok.

Then again I could have taken your attitude and go back to her and say "F**K you B**CH"

It would not have helped anyone would it?

Sorry but anybody rear ending me would be flat on their back end of

Behold the Internet Warrior!

In general terms, the provision under the Road Traffic Act is for when you hit a parked car or object in the road such as a lamp post where there is no one to give your details to. If you read the wording of 170(2) you will see that in ALL cases you must stop at the scene. 170(3) is only a provision for when you have stopped but not exchanged details. It gives no 'get out clause' for not stopping.

What I said