Mrs had a car accident

elrasho said:
You mean from his stationary point away from the junction he was going to resume driving his van in second gear? :confused:
Click to expand...

No I mean change from first to second before turning therefore being ready to just floor it instead of risking making someone slow down. As opposed to first, then turning onto high speed road, then changing to second.

I drive vans here and there on evenings and weekends I can understand what he was trying to do...

By holding position wide he gave himself a chance to get into lane 1 without disturbing lane lane 2.

By holding position far he gave himself a chance to get into a smaller gap by building up more speed so as to avoid making anyone behind slow down for him.
 
Last edited:
If your diagram is accurate, am I right in thinking the van was stationary, to the right of the lane, a few meters from the junction threshhold and not indicating?

It would seem like the van driver was suffering some kind of indecision, or not completely concentrating on his driving.

Additionally, what kind of van was it? Spinter size jumbo? Or a Citroen berlingo size? Standard transit size? The size of the van would have a bearing on road positioning. Also what time of day was it? How busy, as a rule, is that dual carriageway? He perhaps was waiting for his satnav to figure out the route to his next destination and sat stationary to wait for it.

Undertaking stationary/slow moving vehicles is allowed (afaik) in the highway code. However he was not indicating, so caution should have prevailed, and it is also a single lane road, so the rules with undertaking will get a little murky.

Looking at the road on streetview, I dont see why he would need to take that road positioning when turning onto a 50mph dual carriageway unless he was in a large/extended wheelbase van like a Sprinter (if it was a vehicle that size, what asim18 is saying makes perfect sense - hook 2nd just as you hit the junction so you can accelerate into a gap without forcing oncoming traffic to jam on their anchors).

Overall, though, I think a 50/50 split is probably a likely outcome as your Mrs is not completely innocent here.

She undertook a vehicle without knowing the intentions of the driver (IE no indication) on a single lane road.

He on the other hand should have been able to see your vehicle before driving into it.

Obviously I wasnt there, but my gut is telling me the van driver was not concentrating, or driving with his full care and attention on the road but whilst he has driven into your car, I dont think your Mrs has helped the situation by her lack of forward observation.
 
She was stationary, he basically side swiped her from behind (sounds dirty lol). Yes it's a single lane but it's so wide as you get to the junction there's room for two cars, the cars who want turn right or go straight stay to the right and the ones wanting to turn left stay on the left.

If people didn't do this the queue at that junction would be a lot longer and block the side street called St Lawrence Avenue

If it is a 50/50 split will my wife still have to pay her excess?
 
Without witnesses and no admittance of guilt from either party, don't these cases always go 50/50?

What's the actual value of the damage to the car? You seem more concerned about nailing the van driver to a post than about getting the car fixed.
 
elrasho said:
She was stationary, he basically side swiped her from behind (sounds dirty lol). Yes it's a single lane but it's so wide as you get to the junction there's room for two cars, the cars who want turn right or go straight stay to the right and the ones wanting to turn left stay on the left.

If people didn't do this the queue at that junction would be a lot longer and block the side street called St Lawrence Avenue

If it is a 50/50 split will my wife still have to pay her excess?
Click to expand...

Yes she will likely have to pay her excess as it will be chalked up as a claim.
 
Dunno cost of damage, there a few dints on the driver side door more towards the middle if the car, and then some scathes from when the moron decided to reverse back after hitter her car. She should have got him to write a written admittance it was his fault and signed it and grabbed that witness.

It's a BMW so I gather it's going to cost around £800+ :(
 
elrasho said:
Dunno cost of damage, there a few dints on the driver side door more towards the middle if the car, and then some scathes from when the moron decided to reverse back after hitter her car. She should have got him to write a written admittance it was his fault and signed it and grabbed that witness.

It's a BMW so I gather it's going to cost around £800+ :(
Click to expand...

No one in their right mind would sign a written admittance of fault, as demonstrated by him changing his tune after he's had time to reflect on it.
 
Your description of the events is too vague and actually contradicts your own story, as others have pointed out.

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.
Click to expand...

He can't start behind you and then you pull up next to him. This won't help your case at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the actual events are something more like this:

- You were following a van down Whinney Lane, approaching the junction with A6119.
- Just prior to arriving at the main junction, the van positioned himself to the right-hand side of the lane and stopped.
- The van had positioned himself as if he may intend to turn right down a small lane (Yew Tree Drive), or possibly to cross the A6119 and continue down Whinney Lane.
- The van was not indicating, but had stopped approximately 10 feet before the main junction.
- As there was sufficient room to pass the van on his left hand side, you began indicating left, moved past him on his left-hand side and positioned yourself ready to turn left onto the A6119.
- You were now positioned slightly in front of the van, who was still stationary in the right-hand side of the lane, about 10 feet back from the junction.
- Without any indication the van then made a sudden movement to his left, hitting the driver's door on your car, while you were still stationary at the junction.


Something like that above would at least have made the situation a bit clearer. Whether it would help them to rule in your favour or not, I'm not sure. Without witnesses it will likely be your word against his, and if his story is slightly different, then it'll almost certainly go 50/50.
 
Last edited:
Sadly it seems like other have said and it will go 50/50, the insurance merry-go-round is not a nice thing to be on, especially coming up to Christmas if your insurance is due up soon.
 
Looking at the above diagrams the only option is to turn left?
Looks a lot like the roads at team valley up here, satnav loves asking me to turn right into oncoming traffic lol

asim18 said:
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.
Click to expand...

and there doesnt appear to be a "forwards" option either
 
To me it sounds most likely that the van positioned himself to the right-and side and back from the junction, to give himself a 'run' onto the faster moving carriageway.

You car then passed him on his inside, which he wasn't expecting on a single carriageway. He will have been constantly looking to his right, waiting for a sufficient gap, where he could then begin to build up speed and 'slip' onto the carriageway, so won't have seen (or expected) your car to be positioned to his left.

His mistake was not indicating. Your (or your wife's) mistake was passing on his inside, on a single carriageway, particularly as he was driving a larger vehicle, which often needs more room to swing out of junctions.
 
div0 said:
To me it sounds most likely that the van positioned himself to the right-and side and back from the junction, to give himself a 'run' onto the faster moving carriageway.

You car then passed him on his inside, which he wasn't expecting on a single carriageway. He will have been constantly looking to his right, waiting for a sufficient gap, where he could then begin to build up speed and 'slip' onto the carriageway, so won't have seen (or expected) your car to be positioned to his left.

His mistake was not indicating. Your (or your wife's) mistake was passing on his inside, on a single carriageway, particularly as he was driving a larger vehicle, which often needs more room to swing out of junctions.
Click to expand...

Not a large van, don't have the make and model with me but my wife described it as the ones a typical white van man drives. The original write up is pants, I'm going to write a better one.
 
[FnG]magnolia;25310192 said:
50/50 outcome I'd guess, given the "he said, she said" nature of the story.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this imo, if I've learned anything through posts like this - MAKE SURE YOU GET WITNESSES!

It sucks that people are suck ******s, but that is the case :(
 
Is this clearer?

On Thursday 14th November 2013 at around 8:45am I proceeded down Whiney Lane towards Yew Tree Drive. As I approached there was a van stationary to the right of the single lane on Whinney Lane about 10 feet away from the junction to Yew Tree Drive.

The driver of this van had no indicators on and looked as though he was going to park his van on Whinney Lane since he wasn’t close enough to the junction to use it.

As I wanted to turn left onto Yew Tree Drive I passed the van and waited at the junction with my indicator on. At this point the van was behind me in the same place where I first saw him. Some time later as I was waiting for a gap in the dual carriage way the driver then proceeded to turn left and made impact with my vehicle.
 
Definitely clearer.

Still not sure what your chances are for anything other than 50/50 though.
 
Last edited:
That does not explain how he was then next/parallel to you, the report needs to say he pulled alongside, or it just sounds like your Mrs' was not observant.
 
Haggisman said:
So a transit? That's a relatively large van...
Click to expand...

Not one you would need to to take that kind of road position with though, even in an attempt to get a 'run up'.

Additionally, the van driver should have known that a large amount of road on his near side would leave room for a vehicle to pass, so if he was planning a 'run up' manoeuvre, he should have positioned himself more centrally.
 
Often with things like this its difficult to apportion blame completely to one party, which is only made more difficult by the fact that each party staunchly believes they were in the right.

Often its a number of small mistakes in the seconds leading up to the collision that both parties are responsible for (not looking in mirrors, not indicating, not looking properly, being in a rush, going for non existent gaps etc etc). Unfortunately this makes up the vast majority of driving incidents. If I had to apportion blame on what you've said I'd probably say it's 3/5 your partners fault and 2/5 the van drivers...

... And that's without even seeing the van driver's account in which he'll no doubt say how fast your partner was going and had been tailgating him for miles or something
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom