daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
So, another legal advice abut car accident required.
Situation:
30mph speed limit industrial estate
Car A turning left with its indicators ON,
Car B turning Right with its indicators ON
Car C overtakes car A in the middle of the road where there are /// marking and hits car B.
Who would be to blame?
I thought car C as overtook car in built up area, right?
let me know if more info required.
[Edited on 05-01-2010 by daymoon]
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
|
Seany
Member
Registered: 13th Dec 06
Location: Dunfermline, Fife : Drives Astra cdti Sri
User status: Offline
|
c i would have thought, you cant overtake turning cars for this very reason
|
Matt L
Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
User status: Offline
|
C he shouldnt be on hashed road markings (i think) bin a while since i read the highway code.
|
RichR
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Oct 01
Location: Waterhouses, Staffordshire
User status: Offline
|
50/50 between B and C would be the best case, however I suspect car B would be at fault as he is turning across the path of the oncoming traffic
[Edited on 24-11-2009 by LiVe LeE]
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
Thats what i thought... the thing is car B is a BMW e36, all it had a cracked number plate... car c - a ford ka with some broken clips on bumper.... my good friend was driving the beemer and was happy to go seperate ways.. but no the idiot in ford wanted to go through insurance and drivers a brand new corsa now...
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
50/50 between B and C would be the best case, however I suspect car B would be at fault as he is turning across the path of the oncoming traffic
[Edited on 24-11-2009 by LiVe LeE]
i would totally agree if he hit car A..
|
mooney
Member
Registered: 20th Oct 05
Location: north west uk
User status: Offline
|
car b- if pulling out a junction your at fault iirc
|
RichR
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Oct 01
Location: Waterhouses, Staffordshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by daymoon
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
50/50 between B and C would be the best case, however I suspect car B would be at fault as he is turning across the path of the oncoming traffic
[Edited on 24-11-2009 by LiVe LeE]
i would totally agree if he hit car A..
thats why I said 50/50 to start with; I think both will be apportioned with blame
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
50/50 between B and C, theres caselaw on it but i cant remembver the exact case. i think best case would be 80/20 with 20% apportioned to car B and 80% to car C
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
if insurance says 50/50, and car B needing only number plate, owner says "i dont want it repaired" would he still loose NCD? seeing as it is an accident...
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
if he claims yeah, because 50% of the claim is paid by his own insurer.
|
~willow~
Member
Registered: 9th Feb 09
Location: kidderminster
User status: Offline
|
car b would be to blame as they have pulled out on a and c
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ~willow~
car b would be to blame as they have pulled out on a and c
car A was turning, and he didnt hit it, accident was with a car that was overtaking....
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
when i go to work tomorrow i'll look up the exact caselaw, definate answer then
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by lee_wee
when i go to work tomorrow i'll look up the exact caselaw, definate answer then
that would be great!
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
its powell vs moody, and it is a 20/80 split as i said earlier
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by lee_wee
its powell vs moody, and it is a 20/80 split as i said earlier
thats quite good tbh... as i understand you work with this kinda stuff? is there anything that should be said in the explanation of the accident?
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I'd say B, although C should have anticipated this and not gone for the overtake.
You are perfectly entitled to overtake a slow moving vehicle on the hatchings (because they are bordered by a broken white line)
I can't see how that exact situation arrises in car C being more to blame 
|
~willow~
Member
Registered: 9th Feb 09
Location: kidderminster
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by daymoon
quote:
Originally posted by ~willow~
car b would be to blame as they have pulled out on a and c
car A was turning, and he didnt hit it, accident was with a car that was overtaking....
yes i know that, this happened to my mate. he was the car overtaking.... went as car that pulled out of junctions fault.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
I would also consider B to be more to blame by entering the path of traffic.
You are only prohibited to enter hatchings when they are bordered by a solid line. In that case, they are broken so you can enter if it is safe and legal to do so.
Overtaking a car, in the absence of oncoming traffic, is both safe and legal.
The only possible mitigation that you have is that if B's transition through the manoeuvre was sufficiently far ahead that you can argue i) that it would be unreasonable for B to have seen C at the time he committed to pull out and ii) that B's position with respect to C when C made the decision to pull out would have rendered his decision to enter the hatchings a poor one, ie. C had oncoming traffic in the form of B.
You also should probably have a read of Highway Code 167 -
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
* approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
* where the road narrows
* when approaching a school crossing patrol
* between the kerb and a bus or tram when it is at a stop
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070314
I would be suggesting that if C had made his decision to overtake in the presence of knowledge about the side road then this too was a poor decision. It could be argued that it is reckless to overtake when your presence will be obscured by car A and you are aware of the possibility of a car being in the position that B was in.
I personally if I was car C wouldn't have overtaken, but I also never pull out even if people flash me out, you don't know what is behind or interested in passing whoever flashes you out.
[Edited on 24-11-2009 by Ian]
|
MarkM
Member
Registered: 11th Apr 01
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
B
IMHO.
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
Ian, driver of the C car was parked were the car B was pulling out from..as thats were he works... so he deffo knows about junction.
tbh when i went to the place and was explained what happened i thought it would be 50/50...
50/50 would be best outcome for both i think, but probably depends who's insurance can be arsed more...
|
deano87
Member
Registered: 21st Oct 06
Location: Bedfordshire Drives: Ford Fiesta
User status: Offline
|
I'm no solicitor but. . .oh wait.
|
daymoon
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Aug 08
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by deano87
I'm no solicitor but. . .oh wait.
carry on ... 
|
