• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Not the best way to start the day

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by NickFitz View Post
    Traffic on the road is also supposed to avoid driving into people performing manoeuvres, who may not have spotted them. It's called "due care and attention."
    Sounds to me like the reversing car drove into the passing car who was moving around them, expecting them to stop, when they didn't.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View Post
      As I said, it's about priority, not right of way which is largely irrelevant. You are supposed to give priority and if not giving priority leads to an accident I'd say the person who failed to give priority is going to be held to blame in most circumstances. The whole point of the highway code saying who has priority in situations of conflict is so people can make some reasonable assumptions about whether they can proceed safely or not. If nobody expected people at roundabouts to give priority to those already on the roundabout or to the right, for instance, nobody would ever get anywhere!
      Important words there.
      And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

      Comment


        #33
        You need to inform your insurance of accidents regardless, otherwise they have a right to refuse future claims.

        I think you will probably find its officially your fault. They normally go with the one that was doing the manoeuvre that is at fault. I have had 3 people drive into me over the last few years (I was driving on the main road well below the speed limit or stationary in traffic they turned right into me ). Obviously a battered Mondeo is a target.
        Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
          Important words there.
          Like not stopping your reversing maneuverer when you see a car approach (you're supposed to be constantly on the lookout for vehicles when reversing).

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View Post
            Like not stopping your reversing maneuverer when you see a car approach (you're supposed to be constantly on the lookout for vehicles when reversing).
            Everybody is supposed to be constantly on the lookout for other road users, especially on residential streets.

            I thinkthe OP needs to get some expert legal advice on this one; it's not as cut and dried as some are saying.
            Last edited by Mich the Tester; 1 May 2014, 11:05.
            And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
              Everybody is supposed to be constantly on the lookout, especially on residential streets.
              I thought we'd already established the other car had seen him, so it's not really a case of the other car not looking.

              Look, OP is going to find it very difficult to convince his insurance company that the other car was liable here. If he wants to go through the insurance, that is his right, regardless of what the other driver wants. He should ring them up and inform them he was in a collision and then tell the other party to talk to their insurers.

              If the other driver doesn't want to risk their premiums going up, that's up to them. They don't have to claim anything.
              Last edited by TheCyclingProgrammer; 1 May 2014, 11:00.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by TheCyclingProgrammer View Post
                I thought we'd already established the other car had seen him, so it's not really a case of the other car not looking.

                Look, OP is going to find it very difficult to convince his insurance company that the other car was liable here. If he wants to go through the insurance, that is his right, regardless of what the other driver wants. He should ring them up and inform them he was in a collision and then tell the other party to talk to their insurers.

                If the other driver doesn't want to risk their premiums going up, that's up to them. They don't have to claim anything.
                If he's in the AA or RAC he should call their legal advice people; the other driver saw him, but then took action which could be considered rather reckless. It might not be, but none of us really know.
                And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
                  If he's in the AA or RAC he should call their legal advice people; the other driver saw him, but then took action which could be considered rather reckless. It might not be, but none of us really know.
                  There's no harm in it, but I got the impression that OP didn't really care if it went through his own insurance as it won't hit him directly in his pocket. If his insurance company doesn't think he is liable, let them fight it as ultimately its their opinion that will count.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    @doodab

                    If you have her registration number, check on askMID and you can see the status of her insurance?
                    I was an IPSE Consultative Council Member, until the BoD abolished it. I am not an IPSE Member, since they have no longer have any relevance to me, as an IT Contractor. Read my lips...I recommend QDOS for ALL your Insurance requirements (Contact me for a referral code).

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
                      Kill the witnesses

                      Much safer
                      FTFY
                      "He's actually ripped" - Jared Padalecki

                      https://youtu.be/l-PUnsCL590?list=PL...dNeCyi9a&t=615

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X