[Help] A question about driver liability in an 'accident'

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Highway Code Rule 170

not assume, when waiting at a junction, that a vehicle coming from the right and signalling left will actually turn. Wait and make sure

Case closed.

Cheers!

 

[Easy 10]

I would indicate left just before my exit the to advise my intention of leaving the roundabout

What - even if you're just going straight over ? (and there's no left turn)

 

[Prettyboyshaw]

Sorry, but I think you know the answer.

Same as someone above says, car in front does emergency stop for no apparent reason and you 'rear end' them, 'I thought the leaf was a young toddler blowing into the road', it's still your fault. Same as pulling out of a side road.

It's a bit of a pisser when you see some of the complete morons on the road, but you've been f***ed over and have to suck it up

And Insurance Companies won't give a toss as long as their 'preferred repairers' keep getting more profitable business, 'rent out' courtesy cars at outrageous prices and premiums keep going up. (I worked a bit in Insurance markets, can you tell ?)

Second that. If the other driver was on the main road and someone pulled out and hit them indicator or not fault will down to the driver coming out.

Also agree about the preferred repairers. Everyone wanted their claims and repairs authorised and done as quick as possible so Insurers let the recommended repairers authorise their own costs...licence to print money.

Now it’s one of the reasons and premiums increased but it was the moaning about getting estimates etc that lead to this so those that did can’t moan now. They’d be the first to whinge they had to get 2 or 3 estimates and the time it took. Also the amounts paid out for injury claims now is eye watering especially when most get a slight bump but are in agony for months

 

[Barrow Boy]

It's a complete bug bear of mine the amount of people on the road who either don't indicate, indicate at the last moment or turn in the opposite direction to what they're indicating. Complete ar* *holes the lot of em, one of the first pieces of advice my driving instructor gave me, back in 1971, was "all a flashing indicator means is that a bulb is working".

 

[mwrpoole]

4 years ago a pillock turned out of a rural side turning without stopping and looking taking out my week old car. He lied, but an independent witness stopped him in his tracks.

My car cost £11k to repair, his banger was a write off and the car rental bill at his insurers expense was ..... £9k. My insurers claims management middlemen and Enterprise Rent-A-Car had supplied me with a new Volvo XC70 for 6 weeks. Snouts feeding at the car accident trough.

This led to a protracted legal case between Hastings Direct (the liar’s insurer) and Enterprise Rent-A-Car. I was called as a witness at Bristol County Court, but thankfully they settled a few days before.

I had a similar incident a few years ago although my car was just bumped on the rear, a minor scrape on the plastic bumper. Repair bill was £800 which was still really steep. My insurers said I can either have standard courtesy car or as it wasn’t my fault I could have something similar to my car. I didn’t want a 2 door Ford Ka so opted for the something similar option. I had a 12 month old Merc and couldn’t believe it when a brand new one turned up next day on a trailer. I didn’t actually drive it all as I was too worried about damaging it. It was only 3 days and then a trailer turned up to take it back. The bill came to £7k, £2k per day & £500 delivery & collection. The other insurers went beserk and that was court bound. I had to give a statement that I needed a courtesy car which didn’t really stack up as I didn’t use it! It was settled out of court not sure the settlement, but my insurers were just taking the pi** really.

 

[mwrpoole]

This is all true. However X and Y were told that there is one exception. If you are the spouse then you are not insured. Small print. If X had let his pal drive his car, and his pal had his own insurance to drive his own car, he would have been insured. As X had let his spouse drive his car this made her uninsured to drive his car.

Didn’t know that!

 

[Easy 10]

Now it’s one of the reasons and premiums increased but it was the moaning about getting estimates etc that lead to this so those that did can’t moan now. They’d be the first to whinge they had to get 2 or 3 estimates and the time it took. Also the amounts paid out for injury claims now is eye watering especially when most get a slight bump but are in agony for months

Indeed.

Some stupid munter drove into the side of my motor a couple of years ago, a low-speed impact when she pulled out of a parking space without looking, stoving in my drivers side front wing and door. Once I'd called in the claim and the respective insurers started sorting it out, I was basically SPAMMED for a month+ with calls trying to persuade me into a whiplash claim. Some wanky scouse solicitors mob were particularly persistent, until I basically had to get outright rude and tell them to f*ck off.

The repair looks fine, but I now still have to "help" my electric wing mirror into fully folding back.

 

[Weststander]

I had a similar incident a few years ago although my car was just bumped on the rear, a minor scrape on the plastic bumper. Repair bill was £800 which was still really steep. My insurers said I can either have standard courtesy car or as it wasn’t my fault I could have something similar to my car. I didn’t want a 2 door Ford Ka so opted for the something similar option. I had a 12 month old Merc and couldn’t believe it when a brand new one turned up next day on a trailer. I didn’t actually drive it all as I was too worried about damaging it. It was only 3 days and then a trailer turned up to take it back. The bill came to £7k, £2k per day & £500 delivery & collection. The other insurers went beserk and that was court bound. I had to give a statement that I needed a courtesy car which didn’t really stack up as I didn’t use it! It was settled out of court not sure the settlement, but my insurers were just taking the pi** really.

The funny thing in my case was that just a day after my accident Hastings Direct (the liar’s insurer) wrote to me at home first class signed for, offering me their choice of courtesy cars. A wide array ranging from Ka’s to Merc’s, but at very reasonable daily rates. I ignored this, not wanting to prejudice or complicate a good situation for me.

I later realised of course that this was just Hastings Direct, in good faith, trying to prevent the legal racket of the £215/day Volvo XC90 hitting their insurance pot.

 

[father_and_son]

Very much this ! Indicators are no guarantee that a vehicle WILL turn in that direction..... I learned a valuable lesson in 1980 along these lines..... while riding my motorcycle behind a slow moving car that had indicated left while approaching a crossroads, imagine my surprise as the vehicle turned right instead of left just as i was about to accelerate past the " allegedly " left turning vehicle !

As my mother always said... "Just assume that everyone else on the road is an erratic nutter who can't drive a car. If you give them *that* amount of room, you'll be fine."

 

[jackanada]

But did dad take the uninsured driver to court to sue for damages? He might have done out of malice I suppose. Would he have won damages? Unlikely I would have thought. Uninsured drive possibly subjected to a separate proecution for driving without insurence, perhaps.

If an accident is your fault then there's no way of obtaining damages. The only possible exception I can think of is of the other driver has dangerously modified their own vehicle on such a way as to increase the damage and/or injury involved.
The uninsured driver has no insurer to pursue a claim for them so would need to pursue a privately(personally) funded civil claim for damages.
Besides the expense involved this has two problems. Firstly they are admitting to driving without insurance and it is more than likely the DVLA won't let that lie.
Secondly insurers HATE uninsured drivers. They would make sure the DVLA acted and in the unlikely event they didn't could fund a private prosecution. They would also effectively be the defendant to the claim and would expend huge resources to make the point that they really do hate uninsured drivers.

 

[father_and_son]

This is all true. However X and Y were told that there is one exception. If you are the spouse then you are not insured. Small print. If X had let his pal drive his car, and his pal had his own insurance to drive his own car, he would have been insured. As X had let his spouse drive his car this made her uninsured to drive his car.

The DOC extension (will show on your schedule if you have it) will provide "minimum legal cover" (slightly less than Third Party Only but you'd barely notice unless you were a lawyer) to drive another car "that you don't own".

The last bit is to stop someone with two cars just buying one insurance policy. In the case you cite would be wrong (and challengeable at the ombudsman) if a husband and spouse are respectively the sole registered keepers and legal owners of two different vehicles. In this case I would assume that although it was the wife's/husband's car, it was registered to the partner (who was driving) meaning DOC wouldn't apply.

It's not the general rule that you can't drive a spouse's car - it just has to be registered in their, not your, name.

 

[Bob!]

What - even if you're just going straight over ? (and there's no left turn)

I assume there is a 'right turn'?
So, yeah, indicate which exit I am using.

 

[Highfields Seagull]

Had a similar situation once with a driver driving out of a junction into side of me. Indicator had been on, but I'd turned it off well before the junction. Wasn't a lot of damage, so I suggested we sort it out ourselves (with him paying to fix damage to my car). He insisted it wasn't his fault but mine (because I'd indicated) so wouldn't go for it. The subsequent handling of the matter by our insurance companies proved how wrong he was.

 

[zefarelly]

I don’t think there is an ‘indicator’ defence. Indicators are merely an expression of intent you are going to do something, not a cast iron guarantee. Personally I never believe other cars’ indicators as I am not putting my life in the hands of the decision making ability of someone I don’t know.

THis, Especially as many German car don't have working indicators.

 

[METALMICKY]

Question for NSC hive mind.

If a person pulls out of a minor road (T junction) onto a main road and drives into the side of a car approaching him from his right, is the first person always at fault?

What if the first person claims the second person had their left indicator on, and the second person continued along the major road instead of turning left into the minor road?

What actually happened here is the driver of the second vehicle had indicated to turn left into the minor road, and then turned the indicator off having decided to stay on the major road, before reaching the junction. The second driver had seen the the first driver's indicator as the second driver approached from the right, then looked left and when the road on the left was clear, pulled out at some speed, driving into the side of the second driver's car.

In this case there is a concern that liability will be attributed to whoever can persuade a court that the second driver had or had not switched off their left indicator.

I'll suck up the low comedy in exchange for unequivocal advice

Just checked with Mrs Metal who worked in insurance for 25 years. Rather unfairly their is no ' he was indicating ' defence. The onus is with the car pulling out to ensure the road is clear. Seems pretty harsh when some idiot fails to turn off their indicator or changes their mind at last second.

 

[McTavish]

Just checked with Mrs Metal who worked in insurance for 25 years. Rather unfairly their is no ' he was indicating ' defence. The onus is with the car pulling out to ensure the road is clear. Seems pretty harsh when some idiot fails to turn off their indicator or changes their mind at last second.

I live near Chichester - the land of the 60mph roundabouts. If I trusted that people were going to leave at the exit that they indicated that they were going to and pulled out accordingly, I would have been dead long ago.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just checked with Mrs Metal who worked in insurance for 25 years. Rather unfairly their is no ' he was indicating ' defence. The onus is with the car pulling out to ensure the road is clear. Seems pretty harsh when some idiot fails to turn off their indicator or changes their mind at last second.

Indeed. Which is why X (or was it Y?) decided to suck it up and pay for repairs to X's car. X would not have considered pursuing the guilty party had the guilty party not brought his ludicrous court action. 'Some idiot' may be a bit harsh and is a matter for X and Y.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Indeed. Which is why X (or was it Y?) decided to suck it up and pay for repairs to X's car. X would not have considered pursuing the guilty party had the guilty party not brought his ludicrous court action. 'Some idiot' may be a bit harsh and is a matter for X and Y.

You sure it’s not W

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You sure it’s not W

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-b-WJe2nmg

 

[essbee1]

I always thought that indicators are for guidance only (and not legally binding) and you should not assume anything if a person is giving a
signal. They may have left it on from a previous turning.