Who has right of way when....

[joe90]

A few weeks back the Mrs was on her way into work, and had to overtake a parked van on an otherwise clear lane.

The lane was clear and she commited to the manouver to overtake the van. Before she could clear the parked vehicle a car coming to other way speed into the area and hit her mirror, breaking the glass and mechanism as she tried to pass.

They both stopped, both mirrors were broken, however the other person drove off and left Naomi at the sceen after a short exchange of  plesantries! Thinking nothing of it, I repaired the car for £50.00 including getting a new mirror and having it sprayed.

The other party have claimed against Naomi for smashing the mirror on her car and damaging/scratching the side panels of her car....(no other damage to Naomi's car, not even a scratched mirror casing!) The insurance paperwork has now been filled and the insureres said it would be settled as a 50/50 split which would just be the 3rd party costs as we havnt claimed.

3 weeks later, having heard nothing the insureres have told the Mrs that it isnt settled, and the other party refuse to accept a 50/50 settlement and are now threatening court action unless she accepts full responsability for the damage to the car, which we obviusly arnt going to do.

So my question is this.....

when overtaking a parked vehicle on you side of the road, such as I've described - who has right of way? and who is to blame....as far as I can work out Naomi was commited to the manouver afte checking if the road was clear, therfore as the road was clear once she set off, it was her right of way....

Any advice would be greatfully recieved on this

Cheers

Joe

[Yoshi]

Depends on wether there were white lines in the middle of the road.  If no white lines then its 50/50 as far as the insurance and law are concerned.

[joe90]

Hi mate

Thanks for that, there are no white lines down the middle of the road in question!

As mentioned we have repaired our car and have not made a claime so I assume a 50/50 split would mean her insurers pay her costs!

Thanks

Joe

[hairyasswelder]

Hi mate

Thanks for that, there are no white lines down the middle of the road in question!

As mentioned we have repaired our car and have not made a claime so I assume a 50/50 split would mean her insurers pay her costs!

Thanks

Joe

I was led to believe (my solicitor) that the total bill was split 50/50 between the 2 insurers, I fought and got 100% though.

[MudRat]

IIRC if the obstacle is on your side, then its your resposibilty to judge, pass safely.

[landmannnn]

It is very common for insurers to agree 50:50.  They really aren't interested in paying out  court/lawyer costs unless they have to.
The other insured party may be disputing the 50:50 but I doubt if their insurers would back them.  Going to court at your own cost is a rich man's hobby with little chance that the magistrate would rule any different.

I wouldn't worry just forget about it, the worst (and unlikely) case is loss of 12 months no claims.

[Terranosaurus]

IIRC if the obstacle is on your side, then its your resposibilty to judge, pass safely.

Sorry to point the finger but - quite.

Where did this car mysteriously appear from, sounds very much like from round the upcoming (for your Mrs) corner or down a dip etc, it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to ensure that the way ahead is clear for long enough for them to get past, we've all done it and made misjudgements on other cars are travelling faster than we think etc but if you pass three abreast on any road, white line or not the car in the middle is the one at fault. I'd have though the only exception would be if you were able to prove that the oncoming car was speeding and probably would need to be excessively at that.

[Yoshi]

IIRC if the obstacle is on your side, then its your resposibilty to judge, pass safely.

Sorry to point the finger but - quite.

Where did this car mysteriously appear from, sounds very much like from round the upcoming (for your Mrs) corner or down a dip etc, it is the overtaking drivers responsibility to ensure that the way ahead is clear for long enough for them to get past, we've all done it and made misjudgements on other cars are travelling faster than we think etc but if you pass three abreast on any road, white line or not the car in the middle is the one at fault. I'd have though the only exception would be if you were able to prove that the oncoming car was speeding and probably would need to be excessively at that.

I would point out thats wrong.  This is from experience.

bettyblue22 had a crash with a car whilst overtaking a line of parked vehicles.  She was already committed and approaching a corner.  The other vehicle was coming round the corner and failed to stop.  Now bb22 was in the middle of the road as she was overtaking.

The insurers position was that because there were no lines in the middle of the road then it was classed as 50/50 due to there being no way to distinguish who was on the correct side.

Now back to the original post, joe90 said the lane was clear:

A few weeks back the Mrs was on her way into work, and had to overtake a parked van on an otherwise clear lane.

The lane was clear and she commited to the manouver to overtake the van. Before she could clear the parked vehicle a car coming to other way speed into the area and hit her mirror, breaking the glass and mechanism as she tried to pass.

So obviously his missus didnt commit to it to "squeeze" through.  The other person should have stopped and waited if there was no room as the overtake manouvre was already in process when they arrived at that point.

[V8MoneyPit]

There are two issues here and this is why it ends up as 50/50 because it is difficult to lay blame on one party.

Firstly, your wife has to be sure that it is safe to overtake. This obviously applies whether the vehicle being passed is stationary or moving.

Secondly, the approaching vehicle has to be moving at an appropriate speed to be able to stop in an emergency. If, for the sake of example, it was coming around a bend, the driver should be doing an appropriate speed to allow himself to be able to stop if an obstruction was met around that corner. In this case, your wifes car.

This is why the insurance companies choose the 50/50 option.

[joe90]

Hey Guys

Thanks for your opinions so far. The van Naomi was over taking was stationary and as already mentioned the road was clear once she had commited to the manouver. The accident was in the centre of town and Naomi had started to slow down once she saw the other car coming at her....as we have told the insureres she had no where to go and even if she had stopped the other car would have hit her by all accounts.

I personally think it its the 3rd party trying to scare Naomi into submission by threatening legal action, either way were havnt and aren't going to accept liability nor are we going to make a claim for a £50 repair job, will just leave it down to the insureres to argue out between them.

Its more frustration than anything when something like this happens. At the sceen the thrid party didnt give their insurance details and left before Naomi could give them hers, but they obviously made note of her Registration. Secondly it was a mirror to mirror strike, yet they are stating that the driver side of their car has all be scratched from the impact...yet even though our mirror glass was broken, there was no mark on the mirror paintwork!

Personally I think someone is out to get their car repaired from a previous incident at our expense!

[V8MoneyPit]

Sounds a bit that way, doesn't it?

I think you're right. Just sit it out and see what the insurance companies come back with.

[beast5680]

I had a similar thing to this with a work van, we clipped mirrors on a narrow lane broke my mirror and broke the other cars mirror but no other damage, a few days later the other car owners insurance company tried claiming for a front wing both doors rear wing and bumper :shock: as i pointed out them if that much damage had been done to her car at knee level mind you not mirror level then surely my boss would have submitted a claim  [-X for me wiping out the side of the van, my insurance company asked the police to investigate for fraud  :^o and we heard no more

can you claim against the van for being parked illegally? :D
personally if the road was clear and the manouvere executed with reasonable care what more could you have done? the other person wasnt driving with "due care and attention "

[muddyjames]

I woukld keep your old mirror as proof of what damage was done to your car to show that there was no way your car could have done the damage the 3rd party said happened

[gtomo2]

iirc if she was more that 3/4 of the way passed ot obstcal than she has right of way.
Also as the other party have informed the insurance of a accident. Then report it to the police as a acident has occered and if the other party dont inform the police then they could be done with failing to inform plice of a road traffic collision as per highways act. Justa thought as with most insurance polices if the police have no record of a accident they one could not of happened.

[auf_wiedersehen_pet]

Also as the other party have informed the insurance of a accident. Then report it to the police as a acident has occered and if the other party dont inform the police then they could be done with failing to inform plice of a road traffic collision as per highways act. Justa thought as with most insurance polices if the police have no record of a accident they one could not of happened.

I thought that you are only obliged to report the accident to the Police if there was an injury. Not 100% certain though. :-k :-k

[Yoshi]

No, any accident has to be reported to the police, its just alot of people dont if its just a minor scuff etc........

[SteveGoodz]

At the sceen the thrid party didnt give their insurance details and left before Naomi could give them hers, but they obviously made note of her Registration.

Failure to provide insurance details at the scene of an accident is an offence. Did they actually stop at the scene? If not then they have committed another offence.

With my IAM Chief Observer's hat on; I would say 50/50 is the right decision by your insurance company but it might have been better if your wife had actually stopped prior to being hit by the other vehicle. You could then have justifiably claimed that the other driver was travelling at an inappropriate speed (i.e. unable to stop in the distance he can see to be clear). The onus is on the overtaking driver to be certain that he/she can complete the overtake safely, without inconvenience to other road users.

Good luck with the outcome :-)

[karlo]

Failure to provide insurance details at the scene of an accident is an offence. Did they actually stop at the scene? If not then they have committed another offence.

Is it?

As I understand it, you only have to Supply your Name, Address and Vehicle registration number,details of the registered keeper if they are different from the driver.


You do not have to give insurance details, you then send the other persons details to your insurance which generally goes on a claim form.

[Drift]

Failure to provide insurance details at the scene of an accident is an offence. Did they actually stop at the scene? If not then they have committed another offence.

Is it?

As I understand it, you only have to Supply your Name, Address and Vehicle registration number,details of the registered keeper if they are different from the driver.


You do not have to give insurance details, you then send the other persons details to your insurance which generally goes on a claim form.

Spot on,
 and the Police will only get involved if there is serious injury or risk of injury or the incident is causing a hazard to the people involved or other road users.

Always always take pictures of any damage yours and theirs at the time of the incident, it goes a long way to substantiate a true claim either way.
Most of us have camera phones so no excuse really.

A few years ago courts would not accept digital pictures but that has now changed.

[Saffy]

On a side note "right of way" is a none-term in such instances, one of you may of had "priority" though. 

[SteveGoodz]

Failure to provide insurance details at the scene of an accident is an offence. Did they actually stop at the scene? If not then they have committed another offence.

Is it?

As I understand it, you only have to Supply your Name, Address and Vehicle registration number,details of the registered keeper if they are different from the driver.


You do not have to give insurance details, you then send the other persons details to your insurance which generally goes on a claim form.

You're quite right Karlo, I misread the entry in Hughes Guide. Apologies :-)

[dxmedia]

Exactly what winch bumpers are for.

If they are going to make a claim, at least it's going to be a propper claim. ;)

Surely if the path is checed to be clear, the obstical is being passed and another car tried to fit through the remaining gap then it's due care and attention on the other driver?  Why not couter with claiming 100% back from the other driver and see how long it takes them to back down.

If it's a wing mirror they are claiming for, then it's going to be less than their excess. If it's more than a wing mirror it sounds like above and they are claiming for damage which happened in the past.

[Saffy]

No, any accident has to be reported to the police, its just alot of people dont if its just a minor scuff etc........

Dunno if it's changed since I was in apprentice college in 1989 (we had a law lesson each week for some reason by a bonafide lawyer with worn out shoes) but I recall that you are legally obliged to report an road collision within an x amount of time after the event  if a) some is injured (even if broken finger nail) b) the clothing that someone is wearing is damaged as a result of the collision (guessing that includes soiled underwear!) c) if you couldn't provide you details to 3rd party at time of accident.


here's something rather then relying on here-say and drugagled memories.. http://www.dft.gov.uk/collisionreporting/Law/default.asp

[Range Rover Blues]

IMHO, if the obstruction is on your side of the road then it is your respopnsibilty to ensure that it is safe to take the "wrong" side of the road in order to pass it.

However if you had done so, and if you were most of the way through the manouvre then I would observe that the oncoming car was travellling at speed where they were not able to anticipate the road conditions ahead and were travelling at a speed where they could not have stopped within the distance they could see to be safe.

that's driving without due care and attention.

Also do you have the details of the parked car? if it was parked illegaly or dangerously then you can argue that it contributed to the accident.

Bet you didn't take any pictures of the other car either, the one that mysteriously needs a respray now.

Also worth mentioning that the other driver was abusive and left the scene of the accident without exchanging details, as he is legaly required to do and as such accepted his responsibility at the scene of the accident.

At the end of the day you can sit and tell them to go tickle all day long, but when your renewal comes round don't be surprised if they "LOAD" your premium because of an outstanding, unsettled claim.

Insewerance companies, first against the wall come the glorious revolution.

[auf_wiedersehen_pet]

Insewerance companies, first against the wall come the glorious revolution.

 :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: