Another car accident

[neK]

Friends mum was driving the her CRV today and was involved in an accident.

She was on Canterbury Rd heading West bound, in the right side lane. Now she was behind several cars, but they were stopped because there was a car up ahead wanting to turn right.

Due to that car wanting to turn right and holding up all the cars in the right hand lane, my friends mum decided to go into the left lane (which she checked and it was clear).

As she is merging into the left lane, a car runs up her behind.

The damage to the CRV is all on the back, apparently the other guy has his front lights damaged and the bumper bar damaged.

Obviously the opposing driver is claiming that my friends mum is at fault, but judging from the damage of the car, i find that hard to believe.

My understanding has always been if someone rear ends you they are at fault irrespective if you are merging into their lane, because they need to give to you as you are indicating.

The only way (in my opinion) that my mates mum could be at fault is if there was side damage to both cars (which there isnt).

Btw, what should my friends mum do now? All they've done is exchange details at this point in time.

[RedLiner]

Who ever is the rammer...is at fault...

but sometimes there is morons who just accelerate..on the left lane...and have no consideration for those that are "obviously" trying to change lanes...

it is a difficult one..

never admit fault to the insurance company..

never ever ever

[neK]

What if he goes get his car fixed, and then tries to them claim against my friends mum?

What proof would we have of it then?

[RedLiner]

If he wants to claim as well for the damage...

he will not go and get it fixed

[Saiya]

This one is difficult.

The problem is your friends mum was technically disrupting the flow of traffic as she changed lanes (to the left) which blocked the on-coming vehicle coming from behind.

However if the left lane was clear and no one was there when she changed lanes it could show that the other driver was speeding.

Very difficult to prove for both sides of the fence I think.

[MR22ZZ]

she is at fault for moving out of her lane... end of story... she should have checked her blind spot, I've nearly done this myself of a number of occasions. Unless the car behind also moved out, in which case it's a questionalble case.

[BigBum]

she is at fault for moving out of her lane... end of story... she should have checked her blind spot, I've nearly done this myself of a number of occasions. Unless the car behind also moved out, in which case it's a questionalble case.

That's what I thought. I mean cars on the left lane aren't going to slow down and disturb traffic for those wanting to change lanes. Imagine if it was an 80km road with considerable ammount of traffic.

I've been in this situation a few times before (left lane going straight) with cars pulling out without looking. Had to brake pretty hard sometimes. Gotta be careful in these situations whether ur in the left lane or in the right lane.

[DHC09]

Too bad she didnt have a witness

Then someone could have had proved that she indicated and had been travelling in the left lane for example 5-10M before getting hit, and not due to failing to check her blind spot. If thats the case then im pretty sure its the guys fault for failing to slow down / give way to a turning vechical.. like those crazy buses at rush hour (just indicate and go)

[MR22ZZ]

Doesn't matter if she indicated of not, she still has to give way to ALL traffic in the lane she is moving into.

Buses have right of way when indicating by law... cars do not!!!

[CORZZA]

90% whoever hit is gonna be paying

[neK]

The guy has already lodged a claim with his insurance.

I've advised them to sit back, and when the claim comes send it there insurance company and let them do the work.

Meanwhile, leave the car in the condition it is.

In my personal opinion, she should have waited, but whats done is done,and the person hit her from behind is at fault. i inspected the car again, and the damage is on the rear bumper only (light scratching). There is no damage on the side, so im guessing they should be in the clear.

Ive advised them that its not worth it lodging a claim either way, to fix those stupid scratches on the bumper is gonna cost <$200 anyway, the bumper itself isnt actually dented, (good ol tow bar, i reckon i should invest in one of those too. LOL).

Edited August 31, 2006 by neK

[sportiv]

basic rule of the road,,, give way to the right

[mtbrider]

The guy has already lodged a claim with his insurance.

I've advised them to sit back, and when the claim comes send it there insurance company and let them do the work.

Meanwhile, leave the car in the condition it is.

In my personal opinion, she shouldnt have waited, but whats done is done,and the person hit her from behind is at fault. i inspected the car again, and the damage is on the rear bumper only (light scratching). There is no damage on the side, so im guessing they should be in the clear.

Ive advised them that its not worth it lodging a claim either way, to fix those stupid scratches on the bumper is gonna cost <$200 anyway, the bumper itself isnt actually dented, (good ol tow bar, i reckon i should invest in one of those too. LOL).

I would advise them to lodge a claim with their insurance company (one of the ones where you only notify them but don't actually go through with the claim) just in case he does lodge a claim against them. That way they don't lose their no claim bonus but have a back up just in case.

[Les]

She caused it, but he will have to pay for it.

I hate people pulling out like that.

[qkslvr]

It's a tough one. But if you look at it logically, then the "rammer" is at fault. First of all, regardless of which lane you are driving in, you should always know what's happening ahead of you in traffic. If that was the case, the car in the left should have realised that there was someone trying to turn right and that, naturally, the cars behind it would want to merge left. In this situation I would either close up the gap or slowdown and get ready for the chance that the cars ahead don't see you and pull out. It's a common enough situation seen enough for people to be able anticipate.

My general rule is: Never stay in anyone's blind spot or if you are approaching someones blind spot make sure you get ready to react to any emergency braking situation.

Edited August 31, 2006 by qkslvr

[Les]

basic rule of the road,,, give way to the right

hmmm ok ....

[MR22ZZ]

It's a tough one. But if you look at it logically, then the "rammer" is at fault. First of all, regardless of which lane you are driving in, you should always know what's happening ahead of you in traffic. If that was the case, the car in the left should have realised that there was someone trying to turn right and that, naturally, the cars behind it would want to merge left. In this situation I would either close up the gap or slowdown and get ready for the chance that the cars ahead don't see you and pull out. It's a common enough situation seen enough for people to be able anticipate.

My general rule is: Never stay in anyone's blind spot or if you are approaching someones blind spot make sure you get ready to react to any emergency braking situation.

You can should'a, would'a, could'a as much as you want, the court will hear that she moved out of her lane into the path of the other car. Irrespective of weather you have the indicator on of not you STILL have to GIVE WAY. I don't understand how you people can't see that.

It's her fault, she (her insurace) will have to pay, I recommend lodging the claim ASAP.

[neK]

You can should'a, would'a, could'a as much as you want, the court will hear that she moved out of her lane into the path of the other car. Irrespective of weather you have the indicator on of not you STILL have to GIVE WAY. I don't understand how you people can't see that.

It's her fault, she (her insurace) will have to pay, I recommend lodging the claim ASAP.

I agree with you there, i think she SHOULD have waited, and shouldnt have moved unless it was clear. So I would blame her for being a crap driver.

But my understanding is that the rammer is always at fault (even if it was caused by another driver), because the rammer should have been paying more attention.

Should the rammer been focused on the road and not speeding, chances are they wouldnt have hit (considering the damage is on the rear bumper of one car, and front bumper of another, no side damage to either).

Edited August 31, 2006 by neK

[MR22ZZ]

the car behind in only at fault if it occurs in the same lane, ie they should have left adequite distace to brake in a emergency situation to the car infront. If a car pulls into that lane without you being aware (ie filling that gap you have left) that is not your fault because as far as you are concerned there was an adequite gap for you to the car in front, the car coming out of the lane to the left or right is inconsequential.

[Blade Hunter]

You might wanna check that because apparently the rules changed a while back and whoevers bonnet was in front has the right of way.

Who ever is the rammer...is at fault...

but sometimes there is morons who just accelerate..on the left lane...and have no consideration for those that are "obviously" trying to change lanes...

it is a difficult one..

never admit fault to the insurance company..

never ever ever

[MR22ZZ]

You might wanna check that because apparently the rules changed a while back and whoevers bonnet was in front has the right of way.

what you describe is the Zipper effect for 2 converging lanes. A car blocking the road when they are turning right does not signify a convergence of 2 lanes. Blocking a lane with witches hats for road works/accident does however.