Mrs had a car accident

elrasho said:
Everyone does this though, I've seen people do it and I do it myself. It's one of those common things people do.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant really when it comes down to the law/an insurance claim, isn't it.

In addition to this I hadn't even twigged the dual carriageway malarky, the drivers positioning is not helping at all, that is for certain, but she's completely mis-read the situation.

elrasho said:
This accident was purely the van drivers fault for the following reasons:

· The van was in the right hand side of the lane which means the drive either wanted to go straight on or maybe turn right
· The van didn't indicate to turn left at any point
Click to expand...
These points really do not help your wife's claim.

· The van driver did not see me causing the accident

For these reasons the van driver is at 100% fault for this accident. Attached to this write up is a diagram showing where the vehicles were at the time of the accident.

After the accident the van driver admitted his van went into my car'[/I]
Click to expand...
I'm not really sure what this third bullet point means, but saying the driver admitted fault won't really help the claim, I shouldn't think.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Poorly written. I'd dismiss it!

Having said that, you seem to explain, without much clarity, that the van was behind her, so should have seen her. You then say that it was in front of her later in the thread, which is pretty confusing.

The fact is that the van wasn't indicating and drove into the side of her car, which shows a lack of due care and attention. If he actually was behind her, he's clearly an imbecile and is probably at fault.
 
If she was cutting him up so to speak, then surely she would have gone into the side of him as he turned? The fact that he has gone into the side of your Mrs suggests 1) she was ahead of him, and 2) he turned into her... Normally the person going into the back of someone else is at fault, I don't really see how this is different (obviously it is, but the fact he went into your Mrs suggests he is at fault, regardless of wether she cut him up, no?)
 
elrasho said:
As I approached the junction of the dual carriage way the van was in the right hand side of the lane behind me. As I was going to turn left I indicated left and pulled up to the left of the van.

...

Mrs rang the van driver this morning and he's changed is story saying she cut in on his left hand side and is claiming against her! Surley it's his fault right.
Click to expand...


The first part is contradictory - how can she pull up beside a van that was behind her? If that is the exact wording of her statement her position is not strong since "I indicated left and pulled up to the left of the van" corroborates the van drivers statement that your wife "cut in on his left hand side".
 
elrasho said:
The Van driver was to the right of the lane but not quite at the junction, as though he had suddenly stopped. Mrs drove past him and stayed to the left of the lane indicating left. So the at this point the Van driver is behind her to the right, like in the picture I drew.
Click to expand...

Makes sense now.

Van driver was poised short of the threshold, ready to build up speed to take a swift and wide left turn at the first opportunity. He was obviously looking right, looking for a gap.

Mrs comes along on the left out of nowhere. Van still looking right, sees gap, floors it, hits Mrs.
 
As people have said re: not two lanes and your Mrs effectively undertaking him it doesn't sound great.

Though he should have checked when he decided he wasn't or couldn't turn right.
 
The van was already there near the junction to the right of the single lane, Mrs drove up the road saw the van there. She wanted to turn left so proceeded past the van and she stopped at the junction to ensure the dual carriage was clear for her to turn, at this point the van is not behind her to her right. He then decided to turn left and hit her car, how could he not have seen her!?
 
asim18 said:
Makes sense now.

Van driver was poised short of the threshold, ready to build up speed to take a swift and wide left turn at the first opportunity. He was obviously looking right, looking for a gap.

Mrs comes along on the left out of nowhere. Van still looking right, sees gap, floors it, hits Mrs.
Click to expand...

If he's going to turn left he shouldn't be at the right of the single lane NOT indicating, at least be in the middle like normal people. It's a tough one this but it's a joke if it goes 50/50.
 
Surely if it's one lane, it's one lane? Positioning is an indication, but not a guarantee, of a driver's intentions...
 
elrasho said:
If he's going to turn left he shouldn't be at the right of the single lane NOT indicating, at least be in the middle like normal people. It's a tough one this but it's a joke if it goes 50/50.
Click to expand...

Have you driven a van before? You need to take turns wider. Especially in this circumstance, since he was turning on to a fast moving carriageway.

The fact he wasn't signalling doesn't mean he's going to turn right I'm afraid.

I would like to side with you but I just cant see it. Sorry.
 
Skillmister said:
Maybe it didn't cross his mind there would be a car next to him in a single lane road?
Click to expand...

I see what you mean, any decent driver would look before they turn though.

asim18 said:
Have you driven a van before? You need to take turns wider.

The fact he wasn't signalling doesn't mean he's going to turn right I'm afraid.

I would like to side with you but I just cant see it. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Google Maps doesn't show the length and breadth of the roads in question, you don't need a wide turning for this.
 
asim18 said:
Makes sense now.

Van driver was poised short of the threshold, ready to build up speed to take a swift and wide left turn at the first opportunity. He was obviously looking right, looking for a gap.

Mrs comes along on the left out of nowhere. Van still looking right, sees gap, floors it, hits Mrs.
Click to expand...

That makes the most sense.

Its a shame you don't have the witness as I think they'd of helped a lot to confirm of lack of indication etc..

He should have seen her, for sure - However, she also shouldn't of gone on the inside of a one lane junction. Tis a tricky one!
 
elrasho said:
I see what you mean, any decent driver would look before they turn though.
Click to expand...

Checking that a car has magically appeared to your left hand side on a single lane road while looking right to check for a gap in the fast moving traffic. Sure, he should have but entirely believable not to.

elrasho said:
Google Maps doesn't show the length and breadth of the roads in question, you don't need a wide turning for this.
Click to expand...

It does rather

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=25310197&postcount=8

http://goo.gl/maps/tyuFI
 
Skillmister said:
Checking that a car has magically appeared to your left hand side on a single lane road while looking right to check for a gap in the fast moving traffic. Sure, he should have but entirely believable not to.
Click to expand...

This is what I cant seem to get through, his Van wasn't even at the junction he was before the junction just sat there to the right of the single lane of the side street. He wasn't neat the junction of Yew Tree Drive, he was about 10 feet away from it. My wife could have honked her horn or flashed at him to ask 'what are you doing, are you going or what?' but tbh it looked like he was going to park up on Whinney Lane. If he was already at the Junction then yes I see your point, but it's not like her car magically appeared to his left, she was in front of him to his left.. he could have seen her using his peripheral vision even!
 
Are you sure the Van driver wasn't indicating to go down the little road on the right? (also called Yew Tree Drive)













;)
 
sbi5ar said:
Are you sure the Van driver wasn't indicating to go down the little road on the right? (also called Yew Tree Drive)
;)
Click to expand...

Nope no indicating at all, the accident happened at the Junction of the dual carriage way. If he was indicating as the Mrs drive down the road she would positions her car behind his van and this wouldn't have happened.
 
elrasho said:
This is what I cant seem to get through, his Van wasn't even at the junction he was before the junction just sat there to the right of the single lane of the side street. He wasn't neat the junction of Yew Tree Drive, he was about 10 feet away from it. My wife could have honked her horn or flashed at him to ask 'what are you doing, are you going or what?' but tbh it looked like he was going to park up on Whinney Lane. If he was already at the Junction then yes I see your point, but it's not like her car magically appeared to his left, she was in front of him to his left.. he could have seen her using his peripheral vision even!
Click to expand...

He probably wanted to hit second gear before he started turning.
 
There are plenty of junctions similar to this where people make two lanes when there is only one but that doesn't make it right and technically it's undertaking. Was your good lady actually moving when the accident happened? If she was stationary it will likely go in your favour but if moving it might be a little more complicated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom