Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat

Road Traffic Act Question for our friends in blue

(1/2) > >>

Evilgoat:
Anyone know the exact part of the road traffic act that says responsibility for backending a third party belongs to the person that ploughed into the back of the other veichle?

Bunnie's Solicitors are being useless so I'm giving them a literary reaming.

Tailendcharley:
:)  :) It's called quite simply....'driving without due care and attention'...
tell your brief to cut the crxx and get on with it.....

 :)  :) Terry Smith :wink:  :wink:

Evilgoat:
This is a good point. Might have to reword that bit of the letter.

Boggert:
Being a serving officer I would say, unless you are in reverse on the wrong side of the road, I would have said it was not your fault. The driver behind should have left enough room between you and him for the road conditions.
Again “ Driving with out due care”

He has not go a leg to stand on.

Range Rover Blues:
It's open to interpretation unfortunatley, if a driver stops violently and for no foreseable reason he may have to accept some fo the blame for being rear-ended.   I know someone who succesfully claimed against the car she hit because he stopped in the middle of the road to shake his fist at a car that cut him up!

So, were you parked or in a queue of traffic? what signs/signals were you showing? was it dark? etc etc.

Chances are it's as simple as driving without due care, if you were stationary well before you were hit, provided your car was either parked or being driven within the law.

For example if a stationary car was parked at night outside a 30 limit, or facing the wrong way at the side of the road, then a driver that hits it could claim against the owner of the stationary car.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page