Chat & Social > The Bar - General Chat

Who has right of way when....

<< < (2/5) > >>

landmannnn:
It is very common for insurers to agree 50:50.  They really aren't interested in paying out  court/lawyer costs unless they have to.
The other insured party may be disputing the 50:50 but I doubt if their insurers would back them.  Going to court at your own cost is a rich man's hobby with little chance that the magistrate would rule any different.

I wouldn't worry just forget about it, the worst (and unlikely) case is loss of 12 months no claims.

Terranosaurus:

--- Quote from: MudRat on October 23, 2009, 22:11:00 ---IIRC if the obstacle is on your side, then its your resposibilty to judge, pass safely.

--- End quote ---

Sorry to point the finger but - quite.

Where did this car mysteriously appear from, sounds very much like from round the upcoming (for your Mrs) corner or down a dip etc, it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to ensure that the way ahead is clear for long enough for them to get past, we've all done it and made misjudgements on other cars are travelling faster than we think etc but if you pass three abreast on any road, white line or not the car in the middle is the one at fault. I'd have though the only exception would be if you were able to prove that the oncoming car was speeding and probably would need to be excessively at that.

Yoshi:

--- Quote from: Terranosaurus on October 23, 2009, 23:46:51 ---
--- Quote from: MudRat on October 23, 2009, 22:11:00 ---IIRC if the obstacle is on your side, then its your resposibilty to judge, pass safely.

--- End quote ---

Sorry to point the finger but - quite.

Where did this car mysteriously appear from, sounds very much like from round the upcoming (for your Mrs) corner or down a dip etc, it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to ensure that the way ahead is clear for long enough for them to get past, we've all done it and made misjudgements on other cars are travelling faster than we think etc but if you pass three abreast on any road, white line or not the car in the middle is the one at fault. I'd have though the only exception would be if you were able to prove that the oncoming car was speeding and probably would need to be excessively at that.

--- End quote ---

I would point out thats wrong.  This is from experience.

bettyblue22 had a crash with a car whilst overtaking a line of parked vehicles.  She was already committed and approaching a corner.  The other vehicle was coming round the corner and failed to stop.  Now bb22 was in the middle of the road as she was overtaking.

The insurers position was that because there were no lines in the middle of the road then it was classed as 50/50 due to there being no way to distinguish who was on the correct side.

Now back to the original post, joe90 said the lane was clear:


--- Quote from: joe90 on October 23, 2009, 19:05:17 ---A few weeks back the Mrs was on her way into work, and had to overtake a parked van on an otherwise clear lane.

The lane was clear and she commited to the manouver to overtake the van. Before she could clear the parked vehicle a car coming to other way speed into the area and hit her mirror, breaking the glass and mechanism as she tried to pass.

--- End quote ---

So obviously his missus didnt commit to it to "squeeze" through.  The other person should have stopped and waited if there was no room as the overtake manouvre was already in process when they arrived at that point.

V8MoneyPit:
There are two issues here and this is why it ends up as 50/50 because it is difficult to lay blame on one party.

Firstly, your wife has to be sure that it is safe to overtake. This obviously applies whether the vehicle being passed is stationary or moving.

Secondly, the approaching vehicle has to be moving at an appropriate speed to be able to stop in an emergency. If, for the sake of example, it was coming around a bend, the driver should be doing an appropriate speed to allow himself to be able to stop if an obstruction was met around that corner. In this case, your wifes car.

This is why the insurance companies choose the 50/50 option.

joe90:
Hey Guys

Thanks for your opinions so far. The van Naomi was over taking was stationary and as already mentioned the road was clear once she had commited to the manouver. The accident was in the centre of town and Naomi had started to slow down once she saw the other car coming at her....as we have told the insureres she had no where to go and even if she had stopped the other car would have hit her by all accounts.

I personally think it its the 3rd party trying to scare Naomi into submission by threatening legal action, either way were havnt and aren't going to accept liability nor are we going to make a claim for a £50 repair job, will just leave it down to the insureres to argue out between them.

Its more frustration than anything when something like this happens. At the sceen the thrid party didnt give their insurance details and left before Naomi could give them hers, but they obviously made note of her Registration. Secondly it was a mirror to mirror strike, yet they are stating that the driver side of their car has all be scratched from the impact...yet even though our mirror glass was broken, there was no mark on the mirror paintwork!

Personally I think someone is out to get their car repaired from a previous incident at our expense!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page