You are stuffed. Put simply its your fault. Flash or no you entered a main road from a side road.
Your man wont put it in writing, because at this very moment in time he is filling out whatever paperwork his company scheme demands and in big black letters on the form will be:
DO NOT enter into any correspondence with the other party, DO NOT admit liability
Also his insurance company will ignore his claim of liability.
|
I fear what the others have said may be right.....
However, explain to your insurance exactly what happened and they may pursue it to at least apportion part of the blame on the other side.
If you dig your heels in to a certain degree you may be lucky.
H
|
>>they may pursue it to at least apportion part of the blame on the other side.
Because if its 100% your fault you will lose bonus. Whereas if its only 50% your fault, then you will lose bonus.
Oh.
|
I think it will be said to be your fault, but I can sympathise greatly with you on this one having had some narrow misses.
Beware Volvos hitting a bump.
|
|
|
...but if it's only 50% my fault, then I might decide not to claim at all. The whole thing seems like a big gamble and, having pretty much accepted from the replies here that I'll have to accept at least 50% of the blame (I know what the highway code says but it seems unfair), I can't work out how best to approach it.
Just a thought though... I know that flashing alone is technically no reason to join the carriageway, but what about the fact that he definitely slowed down? He only speeded up again after I'd started pulling out, when he'd seen the other guy wasn't going to go. Would saying this work in my favour? Otherwise how on earth is anybody ever meant to get onto a busy main road?
|
|
It would still be your word against his and as he was already on the main road and you were joining it you would still be in the wrong.
|
|
|
Felix - on Paper when you look at the accident report you are not 50% wrong - you are 100% in the wrong.
Flashing NOT in the highway code, you might have thought he slowed down, - his story is he didnt, on paper you pulled out of a minor road onto a major road. 100% blame.
|
|
|
>>but if it's only 50% my fault, then I might decide not to claim at all.
I see what you're saying, but it probably wouldn't work. The sticking point would be the attribution of blame - firstly its difficult to see how you would escape 50% of the blame. Even assuming that you did, then presumably the deal would be that you would each then claim for your own damage. The problem with that being, is the 50% really 50% of the damage ? In which case you would have to add the two claims together and then split the amount 50:50 even though the damage may not have been 50:50. In the end the complexity would be such that if would get messed up somehow.
About the only thing I can suggest is offering to pay for his damage - but it being a company car they probably wouldn't accept. I guess you could try just telling your own insurer not to deal with it. The issue with that being that you might get sued, or simply find out that the final bill was large, and then it would be too late to get your insurer involved.
If you've damaged a body panel, for example, you might well be talking new panel, paint, trim, fixings, labour, temporary replacement car for a day or two, and thats going to be quite a few hundreds.
I would suggest a way out if I could see one - perhaps denying all responsibility, absoilutely maintaining it was his fault and refusing to accept any responsiblity and certainly not blinking first might work. But it might not.
Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Because if its 100% your fault you will lose bonus. Whereas if its only 50% your fault, then you will lose bonus. Oh.
Do you speak to your clients in that way?
|
If you are clear that the guy waved / flashed / indicated for you to proceed then fight your case (witnesses?), afterall if he did indicate for you to proceed then drove into you then he was negligent.
Though what do I know, eh Mark?
|
>>Though what do I know, eh Mark?
Ok, I'll bite - what do you know ?
|
>>Though what do I know, eh Mark? Ok, I'll bite - what do you know ?
Well, I know a rhetorical question when I see one!
|
|
|
|
If you are clear that the guy waved / flashed / indicated for you to proceed then fight your case (witnesses?), afterall if he did indicate for you to proceed then drove into you then he was negligent.
If you actually read the original post you would see that
"He apologised and said he was flashing to let someone in from the other side of the road and didn't see me"
|
|
|
If you are clear that the guy waved / flashed / indicated for you to proceed then fight your case (witnesses?), afterall if he did indicate for you to proceed then drove into you then he was negligent. Though what do I know, eh Mark?
I think you answer your own question?
From the highway code
91: If another driver flashes his headlights never assume that it is a signal to go. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.
If it went to court I can't see him admitting to "I indicated for him to pull out but drove into him".
In cases like this eye contact is essential before knowing a signal - flash, wave, slowdown etc is intended for yourself.
|
"91: If another driver flashes his headlights never assume that it is a signal to go. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully."
If someone just flashed I wouldn't assume it being a signal to go, like if someone indicates I never assume he's going to turn. But as I said, he slowed down - I'd say that's "using your judgement"!
But for all the feeling that I've got the moral high ground, I can see the law may not see it that way. Notwithstanding what Renault Family said about not entering into any correspondence with the other party, does anyone think it would be so terrible to request the other party not to mention me to his insurers (assuming he hasn't already done so), and I just withdraw my claim?
|
Felix,
There is a well-known case that may assist you here - it is Wadsworth v Gillespie 1978. Gillespie was in a side turning, and stopped at the 'Give Way' signs. She looked and saw Wadsworth approaching on a motor cycle, his flashing indicator signalling an intended left turn. In reliance on the signal Gillespie pulled out, and was hit by Wadsworth. He was unaware of his signal.
Gillespie was found to have been negligent in failing to look again to make sure that Wadsworth was indeed turning left. However, Wadsworth was also found to have been negligent, by giving a misleading signal. Liability was apportioned two-thirds to Gillespie, one third to Wadsworth.
Now, in your case it wasn't an indicator but a headlamp flash, and as others have already pointed out this is covered in the Highway Code. It could be argued that an indicator is possibly the more definite signal, and one which might be regarded as being the more reliable of the two. Furthermore, Wadsworth's signal was inadvertent, whereas in your case it appears to have been deliberate. So, as things stand, I think you do have something to go for - you genuinely relied upon a signal from anpother driver, who should have realised that a flash at that point could be misinterpreted.
It would be helpful if you have any witnesses - best of all to the flash itself, but if not then to the conversation afterwards. If you do then I suggest you make a claim against him, pointing out that you had no intention of joining the major road at that moment, and only did so because he flashed. You can make your claim direct against him or his insurers, and simply advise your own insurers on the basis of 'information only' at this stage. However, this may trigger a claim against you for his minor damage, so you have the usual choice - deal with it yourself and preserve your bonus, or allow your insurers to do so and lose part of it. There is a third option, and that is to reimburse your insurers after they have paid him what they assess his claim to be worth. You will need to make it very clear to them at the outset, however, that you will wish to be kept fully informed, and that they should take no action that will prejudice your own claim.
Just a word of warning - 'minor damage' often isn't, so don't be tempted to say you will pay for it before you know exactly how much will be involved. This is where initially allowing your insurers to assess and deal with his damage could be helpful, bearing in mind that they should see that the claim is kept to the lowest possible cost. If you then decide to reimburse them (to preserve your bonus) you should be confident that the claim has not been inflated.
Hope this helps.
CG
|
|
|
Renault Family said about not entering into any correspondence with the other party
>>
rf will correct me if i misunderstood, but i think he was talking about the other driver - that his report form to his company/insurers would warn him not to enter in to correspondence.
look at my original post again. do not blink first.
it may well be that you will be found to have been 100% to blame.
at the moment, you believe you are not to blame, you know that he admitted it was his fault.
so stick with that until the circumstances change. write to him, telling him you hold him 10% responsible and see what happens.
if he denies it and blames you, and counter-claims from you, then all the advice given by mark and others above stands. you will just have to learn from that expensive lesson and either take a hit on your insurance or fund the two parties costs privately if you do not want to use your insurance to pay the costs. you will still have to have the claim against you recorded by your insurance company.
good luck, and please do update this thread to let everyone here know the outcome.
|
telling him you hold him 10% responsible
>>
:: edit button ::
typo : should read "100% responsible"
|
"rf will correct me if i misunderstood, but i think he was talking about the other driver - that his report form to his company/insurers would warn him not to enter in to correspondence."
Correct - spot on.
Large companies are very particular about procedure with reference to this. Most large fleets insure themselves, so the company carries the risk and the payout.
Hence failure to adhere to the company policy with reference to accidents means possible loss of car, disciplinary procedures, possibly even the sack.
You can write to him all you like, he aint gonna respond - its all going to his broker/insrance department
|
>>does anyone think it would be so terrible to request the other party not to mention me to his insurers (assuming he hasn't already done so), and I just withdraw my claim?
Could you explain what you meant. Did you mean that the other driver fill in a claim along the lines of "and I have no idea how the damage happened" ?
In which case I'd have to ask why he would do that ? No gain to him, and significant risk/penalty if someone proves he did it, and almost certainly a level of suspicion anyway.
I wouldn't risk that for someone.
I would fill in my form as accurately as I could, send it off to my company dept or fleet, and let them get on with it.
I think you might have to accept that you are on to a loser here.
|
Hence failure to adhere to the company policy with reference to accidents means possible loss of car, disciplinary procedures, possibly even the sack. You can write to him all you like, he aint gonna respond - its all going to his broker/insrance department
>>
and that is the point. don't try to second guess the other driver.
that is the for the other driver to worry about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
