Can any BR's give me advice on the likely outcome to the following minor RTA ??
Whereabouts: a minor single lane road that becomes double lane approx 30m from where it meets a major road at a T junction, controlled by traffic lights.
There are no arrows on road to indicate traffic flow. This is because it is a busy junction at certain times of day (with bad light synchronisation) so both lanes are used to turn left.
Scenario: I approach lights on said road. There are 4/5 vehicles queuing in left hand lane, waiting for lights to change. When I'm approx 20m away, the lights change.....I move to right-hand lane, looking to turn right.
As I manouevre around, the first vehicle in the now moving "queue" in the left-hand lane proceeds to turn right (with no indication).
The inevitable occurs.
My question concerns my ability to claim against the other person's insurance for repairs to my vehicle......do I have any chance ??
Any advice appreciated.
|
So let me get this right. The person from the LEFT lane turned RIGHT into you?
Well its 100% his fault. BUT. Are you insured fully comp? you may have to try and recover your losses yourself.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
That's what happened.
I am insured fully comp. As an aside, their insurers are refusing to deal with me direct.....they only want to hear from my insurers.
I cannot afford to pay my excess to get the work done, so I think it worth while to try and get the 3rd party's insurers to pay.
Do I instruct my insurers to proceed??
|
Just to clarify, at the light there are two lanes? And it is a T Junction so you can either only go left or right? So in theory, the left lane should be for turning left, the right for turning right?
So you were in the right hand lane turning right, which is what would be expected to be the correct lane?
I take it there is not two lanes once you have turned right ie . plenty of space for two cars side by side to be turning right?
There is a junction near me that is exactly as you describe right down to the fact that both lanes are used to turn left at times!
But at the end of the day, if you were in the right lane, turning right and he hit you then I could only guess it was his fault. There is no way that turning right can be deemed to be going straight on? It is a right angle turn?
|
To clarify.........
I was in the right-hand lane turning left into a 2-lane carriageway.......an accepted manoeuvre at this junction.
The other party was in the left-hand lane and turned right.
|
Your original post:
"I move to right-hand lane, looking to turn right"
Hence the confusion.
You need lots of diagrams and preferably some photos of the junction in action at a similar time. If there are no road markings indicating left turn for right hand lane traffic is permitted and how the road is designed to work good luck.
A junction near me has a left lane permitting right turns - there are signs and road markings showing this, but drivers still use the right lane then drift across to the left after turning - I've seen plenty of collisions as a result.
|
.. You need lots of diagrams and preferably some photos of the junction in action ..
misterh could help us here by specifying exactly where this happened, as it may be covered by detailed satellite images either on googlemaps or microsoft's maps.live.com
|
|
|
|
Ah so you were in the Right hand lane turning left, and he was in the left hand lane turning right.
Well my old fruit you have no chance of any kind in getting any of your losses paid for. This is as 50 - 50 as it gets,.
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's a difficult one to answer as the specific position of the cars will be an issue in the claim. If he tried to get ahead of you and you hit him in the side or from behind you will have difficulty. If he clouted the side of your car when he pulled out then it is his fault and it would a case of driving "without due care and attention" in the words of the law.
|
It's a difficult one to answer ..
>>
as to who was to blame. for example, more details such as : need to hear both sides and know the exact positions of the cars and who hit whom and where the damage on the two cars has been sustained.
...As an aside, their insurers are refusing to deal with me direct.....they only want to hear from my insurers. ... so I think it worth while to try and get the 3rd party's insurers to pay. Do I instruct my insurers to proceed??
>>
in simplistic terms, and assuming:
1. you are convinced/certain that it was 100% the other party's fault,
2. and they are not claiming from you
3. and if theyare claiming, you are willing to pay them direct rather than use your insurance
then you do not have to go through your insurance company except to keep them fully informed - purely for information only.
your claim is on the other party. write to him/her setting out your claim. if he/she wishes to use their insurance company that is their decision. if he/she refuses to pay, you can sue them, or their insurance company direct just as if it was the other party. however, their insurance cannot force you that "only want to hear from my insurers ".
see
www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023061.htm
Statutory Instrument 2002 No. 3061
The European Communities (Rights against Insurers) Regulations 2002
<... right to issue proceedings against the insurer of the person responsible for an accident in the UK ...
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=50...8
|
|
|
Unless you can persaude one of the legal companies - such as helphire - to chase this up, then it's most likely to end up as knock for knock. Insurance companies can't be bothered to fight too hard - especially without witnesses.
I would get as many photographs as possible - is the satellite picture from google useable for this junction ?
Good luck with the claim.
|
>>then it's most likely to end up as knock for knock
Seemingly you don;t know what the knock for knock agreement is. Do a forum search on the phrase and my name, there a multitude of explanations.
It is ntohig to do wiht blame or responsibility.
|
|
|
|
depends on the road markings i think. was the main road a dual carriageway ?
As you describe it, you chose to undertake a queue of traffic on the junction ? I think that if you get 50/50 you are doing well.
|
In your first post:
"move to right-hand lane, looking to turn right"
Further down
"I was in the right-hand lane turning left into a 2-lane carriageway"
Which is it? I suspect if the former you MIGHT have a case, if the latter, you will be lucky if the third party doesn't claim off you. Since you didn't see the TP indicating (doesn't mean they weren't) I suspect the insurance co's will apportion blame 50/50.
--
RichardW
Is it illogical? It must be Citroen....
|
|
|
|
|
He turned right from the left lane - you turned left from the right lane.
Sounds 50/50 to me. I doubt it matters what is 'accepted practice' at the junction - flashing headlights, for instance, still only has one 'legal' meaning....
|
Thanks for the replies.
Apologies for original mis-type.....I turned LEFT from the right-hand lane.
This occurred in Southampton, at the junction of Whites Road and Bursledon Road.......right
outside Bitterne Police station !!
Anyone who knows it, and/ or uses it regularly, will know there are no directional arrows.....this is so both lanes can turn right.
|
Anyone who knows it, and/ or uses it regularly, will know there are no directional arrows.....this is so both lanes can turn right.
Have you made a mistake there again, do you mean so that both lanes can turn left like you tried to do?
If there is no road markings then I would doubt if there is any rule that you can turn left from the outside lane.
I'd go 50/50 blame, you were both in the wrong lanes.
|
Looking at Google Earth if I as a stranger to the area was at this junction and made an error so signalled right to get in the right hand lane to subsequently turn right I would be extremely surprised to see someone turning left from the right hand lane.
If it is a regular habit for locals to do this an e-mail to the highway engineers to improve signage and marking could be worth the bother, then at least everyone knows the rules.
If you have Google Earth look at this junction which is similar - you can see the right hand arrow on Spen Lane so no one is in doubt what each lane is for.
53°50'17.29"N
1°36'2.37"W
|
|
Here's the junction in Local Live's aerial l coverage - tinyurl.com/2szsgo - no road markings on either lane.
|
|
|
Windows local live has a nice 3D picture of the junction in question ( I think) :-
local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=sgk1r9gwm804&st...1
|
Windows local live has a nice 3D picture of the junction in question ( I think) :-
yep, that is a good picture, and not only can you zoom in further, you can also view it from different directions.
looking at spamcan61's and local-yokel's links to microsoft's maps/aerial views, it seems to me that the useage pattern at the junction as indicated by tarmac colour is that the right hand lane turns right and the left hand lane turns left.
so in the incident that misterh described, it may be a question apportioning blame depending on which car ran into which; - or did they run into one another?
|
And this image of the junction from Google Earth confirms that - the right lane is only being used here for right turns, I'd suggest.
www.hrmconsultancy.net/images/junction.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
|
"....Anyone who knows it, and/ or uses it regularly, will know there are no directional arrows.....this is so both lanes can turn right....."
I'd give up now, if I were you....!.
|
|
In the absence of any road markings, it has to be assumed that the lanes are discrete. A reasonable person would not expect either of the two actions you describe. I think you are both in the wrong. Only if you were stationary would you have any claim, in my opinion.
|
Right hand lane for turning left ?, left hand lane for turning right ?, totally illogical Captain ;-(
Is it that easy to pass a driving test these days ?.....
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 10/03/2008 at 19:36
|
|
I've lost the plot as to who was trying to go which way when the collision occurred. There seems to be too many contradictions in this post. But if it was me and if I was a stranger to the area the lack of road markings would automatically tell me (through common sense) that if you want to turn left you take the left lane and if you want to turn right you take the right lane. What the locals may or may not do is irrelevant, surely in the eyes of the insurer (or a court) then the common sense approach would be taken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say at worse it was your fault, and at best 50-50. Looking at the junction, turning right from both lanes is feasible as it is 2 lanes on the road to the right and it is reasonable that in performing that maneover you won't conflict with traffic in the right lane as they too would be turning right anyway. Turning left from the right lane is far more likely to conflict with traffic on the left, as you have demonstrated.
|
Apologies.........yet again I've managed to confuse everybody.
"Locals" have always used both lanes to turn LEFT.
Thanks again for your input.
|
It's not clear from your posts what the relative positions and directions of travel of the two cars were at the time/point of contact. If both of you were actually in the act of turning at the time it might not be clear-cut as to who steered into whom. You had as much a duty to watch the course of the other car as he did to watch yours, and to take the appropriate action. It's not as if it was a high speed collision. I think we need even more clarification to enable us to judge.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
Apologies.........yet again I've managed to confuse everybody. "Locals" have always used both lanes to turn LEFT. Thanks again for your input.
If you drive like you post there's no wonder you had an accident!
|
Trust me, even when there are clear road markings this sort of thing happens. Local roundabout, dual carriageway. Road markings show left lane for left only, right lane for left and right. Last night some filthy little chav in the left lane ignores my left indicators (I'm in the right lane) and goes right, forcing me to make a full circuit of the roundabout. Not satisfied with demonstrating his ineptitude through his driving, he makes a variety of threatening gestures and indicates I'm the one at fault.
If I'd had my gun with me at the time I think I would have used it, if only to prevent this hate filled little moron from breeding.
|
MisterH,
To get back to your original post, you asked "My question concerns my ability to claim against the other person's insurance for repairs to my vehicle......do I have any chance ??" If I was in your situation (or in fact if I was involved in any road traffic accident whatsoever) I would claim on my insurance and let them sort it. It's what I pay them to do. I don't believe in having a dog and barking myself.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Thanks to Cribbage Crisis for his insightful posting !!
L'Escargot........my insurers have now instigated "proceedings" against the other party's insurers.
There is no immediate need to get the car repaired, so I'm happy for this to happen.
I realise the chances of success are not high, but I would be struggling to afford my excess payment at the moment anyway.
|
The insurers of the other party who are refusing to deal with you direct and will only do so to your insurers are bang out of order and have no right to do this.
It is for you as a policy holder to determine if you want to claim on your insurance or not and not for the other side's insurance company to tell you what you should do.
There are circumstances where it is cheaper to settle with the other party directly rather than pay higher premiums at renewal by claiming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
