Insurance/Accident Issue

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Insurance/Accident Issue

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

I fix stuff!
1928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1373893 25-Aug-2015 14:30

I have only just started reading this thread, but found this page.

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/roadcode/about-driving/giving-way-at-roundabouts/

One of the paragraphs I note in the double lane round about section is:
Not all roundabouts are marked the same way, so take extra care – especially at the exits. If you need to cross from one lane to another near an exit, give way to any vehicles in the lane that you want to enter.

Also this:

give way to all vehicles that will cross your path from your right as you enter the roundabout.

In your case since you were in a separate lane, the give way to the right probably doesn't apply.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1373896 25-Aug-2015 14:35

DizzyD: I have been following this thread with lots of interest.

Very interesting argument you have there.
Despite there being 2 lanes on part of this roundabout I guess the question is going to be asked as to who entered the roundabout first.

If you entered the roundabout first, I guess this can go in your favor, and car 2 would have done an illigal lane change.

If you entered the roundabout second, well then you did not follow the basic rules of a roundabout. Yield to your right. it does not matter which lane the other car is in.

Judging from your image, it looks like car 2 would have had to be travelling at quiet a high speed to have entered the roundabout after you. Your car is very close to the roundabout entry, which tells me that there is a strong possibility that the other car may have already been inside roundabout.

If this was me I would also factor speed into my primary argument, and indicate that you were already inside the roundabout before the other car entered.

It's hard to illustrate the distance. It does seem like quite a long way in the diagram. I will be factoring in speed and especially their comments made on the night regarding the birthday party and being late.

The rule is yeild to your right, but the Hilux had to make an unsafe lane change in order to exit and struck Katy from her side. If Katy truly failed to give way, then the damage would be to the front of her vehicle, but it's not. This is going to be my counter to their obvious argument that she failed to give way.

I've already told Katy the likelihood is, fault will be adjudicated and fault will be given to both parties.

DizzyD

523 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1373900 25-Aug-2015 14:38

DravidDavid:
The rule is yeild to your right, but the Hilux had to make an unsafe lane change in order to exit and struck Katy from her side. If Katy truly failed to give way, then the damage would be to the front of her vehicle, but it's not. This is going to be my counter to their obvious argument that she failed to give way.

Just keep in mind

give way to all vehicles that will cross your path from your right as you enter the roundabout.

Put lots of emphasis on the other vehicles speed.

Sounddude

I fix stuff!
1928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1373904 25-Aug-2015 14:44

DizzyD:
give way to all vehicles that will cross your path from your right as you enter the roundabout.

I would agree with you, if Katy's car wasn't in another lane. (One lane roundabout). The other car crossed over lanes without giving way. Which in my view trumps having to give way to her right

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1373932 25-Aug-2015 15:20

I think the other vehicles speed is going to be the major factor - the message to drive to the conditions is pushed enough and the other party was obviously not.

I've been in a similar situation where I entered a very large, multi-lane roundaround and there was not another vehicle in sight when I entered and yet I ended up in a collision with this other vehicle and I was judged to be in the wrong - even though the other driver couldn't tell what speed they were doing or where they entered the roundabout from!!! I was really young and judged to be in the wrong. Woo Hoo.

Good luck - I hope someone sees sense.

lucky015

743 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1373974 25-Aug-2015 16:20

Looks like I'm late to the party but here is the way I look at it.

Both cars enter the roundabout which they are both entitled to do as it is a multi-lane roundabout.

Blue car failed to take care correctly when changing lane.

Blue car could have continued round the roundabout in its own lane but failed to take care entering the second lane.

jarledb

Webhead
3257 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1374004 25-Aug-2015 16:27

lucky015: Looks like I'm late to the party but here is the way I look at it.

Both cars enter the roundabout which they are both entitled to do as it is a multi-lane roundabout.

Blue car failed to take care correctly when changing lane.

Blue car could have continued round the roundabout in its own lane but failed to take care entering the second lane.

That would be my take on it too.

Should have had a dashcam I think.. :)

Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1374184 25-Aug-2015 20:29

jarledb: Should have had a dashcam I think.. :)

It's on my birthday wish-list. That's for damn sure!

DizzyD

523 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1374232 25-Aug-2015 21:38

lucky015: Looks like I'm late to the party but here is the way I look at it.

Both cars enter the roundabout which they are both entitled to do as it is a multi-lane roundabout.

Blue car failed to take care correctly when changing lane.

Blue car could have continued round the roundabout in its own lane but failed to take care entering the second lane.

The problem I have with this is that blue car has to change lane to turn right. (exit roundabout)

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Good luck. Hope it works out in your favour. I seriously think it can if blue car was traveling too fast, and/or you can somehow prove/explain that you were in the roundabout first, and when you entered it there was no sign of the other car.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1374292 25-Aug-2015 23:45

DizzyD:
lucky015: Looks like I'm late to the party but here is the way I look at it.

Both cars enter the roundabout which they are both entitled to do as it is a multi-lane roundabout.

Blue car failed to take care correctly when changing lane.

Blue car could have continued round the roundabout in its own lane but failed to take care entering the second lane.

The problem I have with this is that blue car has to change lane to turn right. (exit roundabout)

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Good luck. Hope it works out in your favor. I seriously think it can if blue car was traveling too fast, and/or you can somehow prove/explain that you were in the roundabout first, and when you entered it there was no sign of the other car.

I see exactly what you're saying. The issue isn't exactly that Katy wasn't at fault, I just think she is less at fault. Which is why I believe fault will end up being split.

If I push speed and damage to the car, I could "prove" or "convince" speed was a factor as I have three or four different arguments that allude to excess speed in poor conditions as well as direction of impact.

I took Triangle road (where blue car came from) this afternoon and had an "accident" in my head as another car going straight cut in front of me as Katy would have. I "struck the car" in my head as I tried to exit and it felt quite easy to do, with the impact being in a very similar place to where Katy was hit on the roundabout. My nose was also behind the driver's seat of the other car. Although, it's not very scientific it didn't seem to require as much speed as my diagram suggests.

In summary I'll argue:

- Driver was traveling too fast for the conditions on a low speed road appliance (backed by damage to car if I can get it)
- Failed in his duty of care to prevent an accident
- Failed to merge safely according to the road code

I will mention:

- Hilux struck Katy, not the other way around
- Damage was on Katy's blind side
- Position of broken glass in cabin and on road
- His expression of lateness at the time
- Bad temper/verbal abuse towards Katy
- The fact that no emergency services attended the scene

I keep thinking "Nobody will buy the he said, she said stuff, it's pointless bringing it up". But every single time I find myself going back to my brother's case and remembering the teens entire defense was pretty much he said she said with no basis and won.

Ouranos

118 posts

Master Geek

#1374337 26-Aug-2015 07:37

Key to your argument is that the Hilux driver was travelling too fast.
What was Katy's speed when she entered the roundabout?

doublek69

36 posts

Geek

#1374355 26-Aug-2015 08:11

DravidDavid:
DizzyD:
lucky015: Looks like I'm late to the party but here is the way I look at it.

Both cars enter the roundabout which they are both entitled to do as it is a multi-lane roundabout.

Blue car failed to take care correctly when changing lane.

Blue car could have continued round the roundabout in its own lane but failed to take care entering the second lane.

The problem I have with this is that blue car has to change lane to turn right. (exit roundabout)

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Good luck. Hope it works out in your favor. I seriously think it can if blue car was traveling too fast, and/or you can somehow prove/explain that you were in the roundabout first, and when you entered it there was no sign of the other car.

I see exactly what you're saying. The issue isn't exactly that Katy wasn't at fault, I just think she is less at fault. Which is why I believe fault will end up being split.

If I push speed and damage to the car, I could "prove" or "convince" speed was a factor as I have three or four different arguments that allude to excess speed in poor conditions as well as direction of impact.

I took Triangle road (where blue car came from) this afternoon and had an "accident" in my head as another car going straight cut in front of me as Katy would have. I "struck the car" in my head as I tried to exit and it felt quite easy to do, with the impact being in a very similar place to where Katy was hit on the roundabout. My nose was also behind the driver's seat of the other car. Although, it's not very scientific it didn't seem to require as much speed as my diagram suggests.

In summary I'll argue:

- Driver was traveling too fast for the conditions on a low speed road appliance (backed by damage to car if I can get it)
- Failed in his duty of care to prevent an accident
- Failed to merge safely according to the road code

I will mention:

- Hilux struck Katy, not the other way around
- Damage was on Katy's blind side
- Position of broken glass in cabin and on road
- His expression of lateness at the time
- Bad temper/verbal abuse towards Katy
- The fact that no emergency services attended the scene

I keep thinking "Nobody will buy the he said, she said stuff, it's pointless bringing it up". But every single time I find myself going back to my brother's case and remembering the teens entire defense was pretty much he said she said with no basis and won.

Again, I think making the primary basis of your defence as;
- Katy had right of way through a marked lane (this is objective)
- Other driver failed to merge safely into this lane, due to the fact they hit Katy's rear door
- Other driver is therefore at fault and you seek full repair costs for Katy's vehicle, in addition to any demonstrable costs you have incurred as a result (hire car, paid expert advice etc)
- Secondary to this, present other factors that you believe contributed to the accident (speed, late for an event thus distracted etc). These are subjective and will HELP your case but shouldn't be your primary.
I would recommend calling the Ins Coy involved and ask them what their reasoning is for proceeding with this claim under the basis that fault has been implied to Katy. What you are doing here is getting them to lay out their entire basis for their case, so you know what you are defending. Do not give them the same in return. In reality, the Claims person/team handling this is following their own internal process around progressing a claim to DT, unless there is a clear risk of losing (their party rear ends another party = there is no defense). They may not even have prepared their case and may not do this until a week before the DT is set down.
You are currently up against a BIG MACHINE, which will be a person or persons, following a set down process with the clear reasoning that it is a numbers game and they know they will win some and lose some. They generally win the ones where the other party fails to prepare a meaningful defence.
If you do end up going to DT, have your supporting material (the photos showing the path of the cars is excellent) all prepared. You are presenting to someone who will no doubt will be hearing or will have heard countless tales of woe, so you need you version to be clear and irrefutable.
As I said before, research if there is an expert (non-lawyer) on traffic road code that can assess your version of events and provide a summary that supports.
I hope this helps - the best of luck.

Sounddude

I fix stuff!
1928 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1374395 26-Aug-2015 09:07

DizzyD:

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Road code says otherwise. Blue car has to give way since its has to change lanes.

BlueOwl

85 posts

Master Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1374472 26-Aug-2015 09:57

Sounddude:
DizzyD:

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Road code says otherwise. Blue car has to give way since its has to change lanes.

I live down the road from this roundabout and pass through it daily. There is currently no lane markings within the roundabout area, haven't been any since it was resealed about a year ago.

It is a fairly dangerous one - there's a driveway exit from the shops right on the roundabout itself, and many drivers will do a "shotgun pass" straight through it. I don't think the driver of the Hilux is innocent here - they certainly would have seen Katy in front of them and were probably moving fast - but you can't prove that and all evidence suggests Katy just failed to give way. Sorry, but I don't think you can win this one.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek

#1374494 26-Aug-2015 10:20

BlueOwl:
Sounddude:
DizzyD:

Red car does not get right of way simply because blue car needs to change lanes to get out of roundabout. I drive a similar roundabout every day (as red car) Just because there are cars coming from my right, changing lanes in front of me to get out of the roundabout, it does not give me right of way.

Road code says otherwise. Blue car has to give way since its has to change lanes.

I live down the road from this roundabout and pass through it daily. There is currently no lane markings within the roundabout area, haven't been any since it was resealed about a year ago.

It is a fairly dangerous one - there's a driveway exit from the shops right on the roundabout itself, and many drivers will do a "shotgun pass" straight through it. I don't think the driver of the Hilux is innocent here - they certainly would have seen Katy in front of them and were probably moving fast - but you can't prove that and all evidence suggests Katy just failed to give way. Sorry, but I don't think you can win this one.

I sway back and fourth as to whether or not I will "win". I certainly don't think I'll win outright. But regardless of markings in the middle, the Hilux effectively merged in to the side of Katy on exiting and that's how I'll play it. How effective it will be, I have no idea.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5