Insurance POV of this accident

i don't think the van really had to move over to the other lane to complete a manoeuvre like that. And if he did the correct action would be to signal left, pull in and wait for traffic to clear with hazards as a bonus.
 
I would have said it'd get chalked up as 50/50 - no indication and unclear intentions of the vehicle in front (albeit a large vehicle swinging right should set your mind to thinking it's just finding the space for a big left hand swing) but at the same time driving straight on at/past such a vehicle is absolutely bizarre, barely 2 or 3 mph of speed shaved off in anticipation of a hazard unfolding ahead.

Someone good at making the argument could probably get it swung to favour the car driver as they've not really explicitly broken any rules but I wouldn't be holding my breath on that being successful.
 
He drove in to the back of a horse box. Drivers fault. Yes the van was in the middle of the road before turning left without signals, but being in the middle of the road should have been enough for the car driver to hang back and not try to undertake.

Generally speaking, if a vehicle in front of me is driving irratically, I stay the f away from its rear bumper.
 
unclear on the video , the lorry did look like its indicator was running but very hard to tell, as others have said would have expected the car driver to show caution , if anything wondering what the lorry was doing not just plow on .
just checked again the indicator was running as he turned , ,car driver should perhaps have anticipated a possible problem and at the least slowed down even if he thought the lorry was pulling up on opposite carriagway. imo
 
It did look a lot like it was just pulling up on the right and they weren't indicating (either way) - still undertaking someone is a bit dodgey.

Also looks like a 30 and video suggests the car was over that the whole time which probably won't help the case.
 
That’s some shockingly awful hazard perception from the camera car, but also typical shonky horse box driving.

50/50 in the insurer’s eyes I’d expect, but IMHO 70/30 driver/horsebox at fault.
 
james.miller said:
He drove in to the back of a horse box. Drivers fault. Yes the van was in the middle of the road before turning left without signals, but being in the middle of the road should have been enough for the car driver to hang back and not try to undertake.

Generally speaking, if a vehicle in front of me is driving irratically, I stay the f away from its rear bumper.
Click to expand...

Pretty much what I was going to say. The van pulling over to the right with no immediately obvious reason as to why should have been a big red flag to slow down and cover the brake until you knew what they were playing at.
 
If they were indicating then i'd say it's almost all the car drivers fault. The van has swerved in to the oncoming lane so regardless of indicators, why would you pass them on the inside without knowing what they're planning on doing?
 
It looked like they were turning towards the entrance opposite. I can't see an indicator on before they make the move.
 
Last edited:
They were indicating but their indicators are crap. Looked like they were going into the driveway/whatever it is on the RHS. 50/50 driver behind should have given more space and time.
 
I've replayed it a few times and really struggling to see the indicator. Possibly for 1 frame, but not a regular flash.

If it was indicating then car's fault, but in all honesty, I could imagine myself doing the same, if the indicators are as barely visible as the video suggests. Before the horsebox moves right you can see a layby/turn the opposite side of the road, so I really thought it was going to head that way, just turned quite early.

I don't think either are innocent and I could imagine it possibly being argued to 50/50 by either side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom