car accident.. am i liable?

Forums › Off topic › car accident.. am i liable?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

17163 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#683737 10-Sep-2012 11:05

gogokr431: ........ FML might have to hang myself lol

Agree with richms. No need for any of those worries.

If you believe you are not liable - then do not agree to pay it - it is that simple. If the insurance company calls explain (1) that you are not insured and (2) do not believe that you have liability here. There is no need to give detailed reasons.

As richms says where the amount is relatively small say around 2K - most of the time an insurance company will not take the matter further in that situation.

It happens this way because it would cost the insurance company an equal amount to take this to court and after costs it is pointless for them.

wallop

367 posts

Ultimate Geek

#683751 10-Sep-2012 11:33

gzt:
gogokr431: ........ FML might have to hang myself lol

Agree with richms. No need for any of those worries.

If you believe you are not liable - then do not agree to pay it - it is that simple. If the insurance company calls explain (1) that you are not insured and (2) do not believe that you have liability here. There is no need to give detailed reasons.

As richms says where the amount is relatively small say around 2K - most of the time an insurance company will not take the matter further in that situation.

It happens this way because it would cost the insurance company an equal amount to take this to court and after costs it is pointless for them.

And we all wonder why our premiums keep going up. The intersection is straight forward (I drive through it daily). The OP is in the wrong. He should pay up.

gogokr431

77 posts

Master Geek

#683781 10-Sep-2012 12:24

just talked to the bus company, they told me to get a quote while i wait for the insurance company to get back to me.

they didnt say anything about any liabilities or who pays what.

so yeh.

mattwnz

20180 posts

Uber Geek

#683831 10-Sep-2012 13:28

wallop: >And we all wonder why our premiums keep going up.? The intersection is straight forward (I drive through it daily).? The OP is in the wrong.? He should pay up.

There you go, as you have said it, you drive though it everyday, so you don't need to think about the rules as you know them subconsciously. Just becuase you know them doesn't mean that the road is clearly marked out. The OP however said that they are new in town, so that road is new to them. There is a big difference.

mattwnz

20180 posts

Uber Geek

#683832 10-Sep-2012 13:28

Nety

2584 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683833 10-Sep-2012 13:29

gzt:
Agree with richms. No need for any of those worries.

If you believe you are not liable - then do not agree to pay it - it is that simple. If the insurance company calls explain (1) that you are not insured and (2) do not believe that you have liability here. There is no need to give detailed reasons.

As richms says where the amount is relatively small say around 2K - most of the time an insurance company will not take the matter further in that situation.

It happens this way because it would cost the insurance company an equal amount to take this to court and after costs it is pointless for them.

Or more likely they will take you to small claims court which costs them next to nothing. If the OP does believe that they are not in the wrong then they can put in a counter claim.

Media centre PC - Case Silverstone LC16M with 2 X 80mm AcoustiFan DustPROOF, MOBO Gigabyte MA785GT-UD3H, CPU AMD X2 240 under volted, RAM 4 Gig DDR3 1033, HDD 120Gig System/512Gig data, Tuners 2 X Hauppauge HVR-3000, 1 X HVR-2200, Video Palit GT 220, Sound Realtek 886A HD (onboard), Optical LiteOn DH-401S Blue-ray using TotalMedia Theatre Power Corsair VX Series, 450W ATX PSU OS Windows 7 x64

wallop

367 posts

Ultimate Geek

#683836 10-Sep-2012 13:31

And once upon a time I was new in town and still had no problem. The signs are clear and big. Also if you are coming along Montreal you go through the same sort of layout at the other end of Cranmer square (before getting to this intersection).

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

gzt

17163 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#683839 10-Sep-2012 13:39

wallop: Also if you are coming along Montreal you go through the same sort of layout at the other end of Cranmer square (before getting to this intersection).

No way. The other end is better layout by one million percent. There a free left turn, traffic islands, and the cross street - Armagh St - is not a one way feeder. Also it does not have different implications coming from each end.

http://goo.gl/maps/Vpuwj

Skolink

1081 posts

Uber Geek

#683840 10-Sep-2012 13:41

This exact same thing happen to my friend's mother. She was going around the corner into Montreal Street in the outside (left hand) lane, and guy on the inside (right hand) lane went straight ahead. She crashed into the low brick wall that was on the corner of Kilmore and Montreal.
The guy was found to be at fault.

Have a look at the markings if you are coming from the east down Kilmore - the markings / road rules are differrent, than if you came up 'Cranmer Square' from the South!

groynk

234 posts

Master Geek

#683846 10-Sep-2012 13:57

looks like two intersections to me, not one

Turn left, then some bus tries to wipe you out turning right from the left lane!

Don't worry I get it now.
But I had to look three times before I finally understood how it is supposed to work.

Be careful when driving in new cities! and have insurance.

mattwnz

20180 posts

Uber Geek

#683916 10-Sep-2012 15:31

Skolink:Have a look at the markings if you are coming from the east down Kilmore - the markings / road rules are differrent, than if you came up 'Cranmer Square' from the South!

That is the whole reason why there are no road markings or signs I think at the crash intersection, as the conditions change depending on what raod you approach the intersection. What I think they need is an automated sign at the crash intersection that changes the dirrection arrows when the traffic lights change. (eg a sign that warns that there is no going straight on if you are in the right lane).I have seen them have these on other roads, but I guess it is a cost thing that they haven't been installed? You often have these on motorways where the lanes can change in rush hour.
If they don't allow you to go straight on if you are in the right lane, there should be a proper warning sign telling you this, which I can't see anywhere on google streetview.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#684006 10-Sep-2012 17:38

Yes there is. If you come from the south its clearly marked on all the green signs

mattwnz

20180 posts

Uber Geek

#684013 10-Sep-2012 18:00

TheUngeek: Yes there is. If you come from the south its clearly marked on all the green signs

I can't see any green signs at the crash intersection, (eg the one they turn right at.) Only on the intersection before it (the one they turn left at)

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#684027 10-Sep-2012 18:19

They can't put them there, how would those coming from the east know to ignore them? The whole chain is clearly signposted a couple of times before you enter the whole complex

mattwnz

20180 posts

Uber Geek

#684042 10-Sep-2012 18:41

TheUngeek: They can't put them there, how would those coming from the east know to ignore them? The whole chain is clearly signposted a couple of times before you enter the whole complex

Yes and that is why I said they need automated signs that switch depending on which traffic lights are activated and the direction the traffic is coming from. An intersection without clear signage at the point of the required turn, is going to have problems like this, epecially if the traffic is heavy and the roads are congested. There could be a time delay of several minutes between intersections and seeing the sign at the first intersection.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9