First car crash / write off and insurance advice please

Itchytrigg said:
Fair point. Maybe there is no basis in law for this.

This is the situation I was thinking of. Mr A is not insured, Mr B pulls out in front of Mr A causing an accident. Mr B is the cause of the accident.

Mr A shouldnt have been on the road. Mr B shouldnt have pulled out on a car. Who would the law side with or is it a 50/50 because they were both in the wrong?
Click to expand...

Law would side with Mr A for the accident but then he would be done separately for driving without insurance I would have thought.
 
Just spotted you added to your post.

I see what you're saying now. So Mr A can make a claim against B as it was B's fault, he would have trouble as he'd have to do that himeself via small claims I guess, and assuming the police find out he should be prosocuted for the seperate offence of no insurance.

I think my miss-conception came from the idea that the insurance issue would be taken into account with the accident, not that it would be dealt with as a seperate incident.

Thanks for sticking with me Fox ;)
 
Itchytrigg said:
I'm not saying Mr B should get away scott free but are you saying he would be the one in trouble with the law and have to pay all costs?
Click to expand...

Yes - because the fact the Mr A was uninsured had absolutely no bearing on the accident whatsoever.

He may be charged for driving without insurance, but whether he had insurance or not, Mr B caused the accident and is 100% to blame.

It really isn't a difficult concept to grasp.
 
_Jimlad_ said:
Well I do accept it technically is my fault cos of the letter of the law, but the road is 30mph road, with cars parked either side, and he left 15 yards of skid marks before an impact that has crushed his skyline bonnet to bits.
Click to expand...

:eek: 15 yards, i suggest you measure it properly and if it really is that big then the guy must have been doing around 50-60 mph.

The vehicle's skid speed loss is between 32 and 33 miles per hour.
Click to expand...


http://www.harristechnical.com/skid33.htm
 
[TW]Fox;16489717 said:
I wonder whether the Skyline really was going fast or whether given it had a huge spoiler and a really loud exhuast people simply perceived it was going fast...
Click to expand...

This. Used to happen to me all the time in my Jap turbo-nutter stuff....
 
This "shockingly" seems to be a situation where a technicality is taken advantage of by the law/insurance.

If the skyline had enough room to leave 15 yards of skidmarks (if true) before the collision and the driver was paying attention to the road I'm pretty sure going at 30mph he would have had time to stop for the CRV even if the victim had pulled out in front of him. As this is why individual roads have individual speed limits. Therefore my conclusion is that the speeder is in the wrong.

However, since the driver "crept" out into the road and even though observing the road was still hit by this speeding vehical, the technicality that he had "not given way" by pulling out has cost him a payout even though, as proved above, the speeder was the main cause of the accident.


I for one blame both of you, firstly he shouldn't have been speeding! Secondly, you shouldn't have pulled out so far into the road to be T-boned if it wasn't clear.
 
One that always sticks in my mind is when I snapped the clutch cable on my 205 a few years ago. I had to repair it outside the house and it was facing the wrong way for me to be able to work with the door open.
So I started it up in gear (1st), drove it a few yards down the road to the wide turning point, and then the few yards back to my house. All in first gear, which, given the revs and the OMP Group N exhaust system, made a decent racket.

I'd only just got out of the car when I saw one of my neighbours actually running down the street to confront me for "going like a bat out of hell" down the road and telling me I want to watch my speed what with kids playing in the street and so on. All I could do was tell him it's stuck in first gear and can't go any quicker than about 27mph :/

Because the car was relatively loud and lairy, the bloke just assumed I was driving like a lunatic.
Click to expand...

Aaaargh such situations annoy me greatly, I hate morons like that.

I agree with fox, you pulled out without having the right of way, and the skyline probably wasn't going that fast as you thought it was. Your fault 100%.
 
DreXeL said:
This. Used to happen to me all the time in my Jap turbo-nutter stuff....
Click to expand...

I've had the same twice now in the Manta. Some silly odd sod jumped out in the road and waved me down once before berating me about my speed. I was doing bang on 30 as I had just gone past a scamera 50 yards back.
 
[TW]Fox;16489717 said:
I wonder whether the Skyline really was going fast or whether given it had a huge spoiler and a really loud exhuast people simply perceived it was going fast...
Click to expand...

+1 on that got pulled by plod once as they thought i was speeding when they were at the bus stop. First thing he said to me was "You probably werent speeding, but i have to check any way"

I havent seen any posts about the crash but it sounds as if OP was at fault anyway :confused:
 
[TW]Fox;16493948 said:
Mr A should have been on the road, but he should have purchased an insurance policy.

You do not have carte blance to just drive into people and get away with it scott free because they've not bought any insurance!

In this case the law would side with Mr A. The offence of driving without insurance is not related to the accident. He may well be charged with such an offence if the police found out - and rightly so - but this would be seperate to and have no bearing on Mr B's accident.
Click to expand...

Exactly correct. In Kate's accident in the SX she was "Mrs B".

"Mr A" was uninsured, speeding, on the wrong side of the road, "Mrs B" pulled off the driveway, she couldn't see "Mr A" until it was too late, Mr A also fled the scene and had to be apprehended by the police, but as far as the insurance was concerned, it was "Mrs B"s fault.....
 
i understand the law, and know that at the end of the day as the police pressed no chargers witnesses and so on count for nothing he could have done 100mph down there and it would be the same result, i just feel peeved as if he was doing the right speed me edging out due to the parked cars (not blindly pulling out) he would have had to slow down at best! - not 15yards of skid marks and a 30/40 mph impact. u live and learn...

unfortunately where i live u just cant see past the cars, so the letter of the law states its his right of way and i will have to pay out no doubt, i have calmed down since monday and im not from the point of thinking at least no one was seriously hurt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom