It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Edit: Mmmm.... looking at the first photo, it appears that your rear wheel is inside the white line - i.e. you're completely in your lane, in which case, I'm talking out of my arse.
Poor choice of words perhaps.
Chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them
Donald Trump needs kicking out of a helicopter
I'm personally responsible for all global warming
You fault, no its your fault.. nope its your fault, no its yours....
eh, 50/50 and call it quits?
1. He was in the wrong. It wasn't my cutting the corner that caused the accident. It was him swinging out onto the wrong side of the road at sufficient speed that he was unable to stop before he hit me. Whereas I did cut the corner, the part of my vehicle he hit was in the position my vehicle would have been had I not cut the corner. He told me he was doing about 10mph, which is 4.5m/s. I don't think he was over the line before I stopped. And yes, @Emp_Fab , on the top photo if you look at my rear driver wheel, that white line next to it is the centre-line. My car was fully on my side, and stopped, at the moment of impact.
2. The insurance company will take my corner-cutting as an excuse to refuse the claim.
So what now? I'm going to contact my insurance regardless to advise them of the incident but should I wait for the other insurance's ruling? Will they fight the refusal or just address it as a 50/50 claim?
I've added some graphics showing the white lines, where I cut the corner and how far over his wagon was at the point of impact.
https://i.imgur.com/Jjbv7bk.jpeg
https://i.imgur.com/p9pKMWS.jpeg
Verdict 60/40 him/you imo.
It'll probably go 50/50.
The driver was manoeuvring around the bend as close as the dimensions of his vehicle allowed, if he had gone inside the line he would have hit the hedge looking at that pic. He could not have known if there was a cyclist or a pedestrian there either given the height of the hedge.
Purely as an observer of a couple of pics, with the damage toward your front end too, I’d say 50:50 might be best you can hope for.
But honestly it looks like a hasty, very early cutting across of the line into a blind corner with the consequent accident situation arising. Assumption is the mother of all fuckups.
The dash cam will be placed at the top of the lorry windscreen in the centre, won't show the front corner of the truck.
Unless you have your own dashcam footage proving the truck was well out (and tbh even then it looks like the truck couldn't have reasonably been any further in) I can't see it not being 50:50
Get a dashcam and hardwire it. Even a cheap £40 from Amazon will shoot in full HD and give you evidence in the event of an idiot crashing into you then claiming it was your fault
Chips are "Plant-based" no matter how you cook them
Donald Trump needs kicking out of a helicopter
I'm personally responsible for all global warming
So again, yeah, they'll say 50/50 based on that.
However I do maintain that I was completely in my lane and at a full stop when he hit me. The reason I stopped is because I saw him swinging into my lane. He swung out and hit me, I presume either because he was going too fast or because he didn't react soon enough, or given the position of his wheels it looks like he tried to turn away instead of stopping. I think if I hadn't cut the corner I still would have had to be more than two feet into my lane to avoid being sideswiped. The part of my car he hit was positioned relative to the centre-line as it would have been had I not cut the corner.
I get that it's necessary for other drivers to give lorries a wide berth but by the same token it was reasonable for him to expect vehicles would be turning into the road, and he should have proceeded with way more caution if he was crossing the centre-line. On seeing the situation I had time to stop, but he didn't. I realise this likely won't have any bearing on the verdict.
Drive safe, everyone.
Irrespective of fault both insurers are incredibly inefficient ,lazy and want to do as little as possible unless the evidence is extremely clear cut.
We have the other driver on film confessing his fault and apologising...........goes for nothing (16 months later he totally disputes and says he was shocked and confused at the time ..........he has also produced a witness who never surfaced until 18 months after the accident and is completely fake.) The "witness "curiously lives in the same obscure village as the other driver and is on the same facebook groups ......Insurers say it means nothing of value !
Lawyers are a basically claims processors in pro bono disguise who want to do nothing unless we lie and pretend that we have trauma injuries and other vexatious nonsense to make their percentage of a personal injury claim worthwhile !
Apparently "we must surely have sleep difficulty ,flashbacks and problems at work and sexually " !!!!!!
Insurers will not spend money going to court and between the two insurers have basically tried to agree a mexican stand-off on a 50/50 basis without liability !!!
.......basically there is zero regard for right and wrong or morality and commercialism means that they have agreed to disagree so they can minimalise their input and costs and simply close a file .