How to prove it wasnt my fault..? - Page 2

EgoXR · 15-02-2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stefan

I'd save the pain, pay the excess and learn from the mistake.

Thats a cop out. Wont be going down that road. And what mistake? make sure no idiots cut in front of me next time? Cant see how ive made a mistake. If you understood what happened you would see I havent made a mistake!

Rodp · 15-02-2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EgoXR

Thats a cop out. Wont be going down that road. And what mistake? make sure no idiots cut in front of me next time? Cant see how ive made a mistake. If you understood what happened you would see I havent made a mistake!

That may be so, you're not the first to see some boneheaded manuver on the road and you certainly won't be the last and I can understand your anger... but the most important rule on the road is to avoid collision.

I'm pretty sure I've avoided similar instances that you have through some sort of sixth sense, knowing that a driver near me is about to do something stupid. I'm also sure one day that sixth sense will fail me and we'll meet in a tangle of metal. The law is pretty feeble when it comes to portioning blame in that is simplifies it to the point that the car behind has more chance of avoiding collision than the car infront therefore the car behind is slapped with the offence.

Fight it all you want and in the end I hope you get satisfaction but if it boils down to your word vs his and you'll save a lot of time and a lot of money by bending over and taking a rogering... and no amount of arm waving or diagram drawing will likely change that. All the guy in front has to say is, 'Judge, I was minding my own business, driving patiently in traffic and this guy just crashes into the back of my car...' Case closed.

If you have a witness (and maybe I've skipped the part where you suggested that you do...) then it's a whole different story.

GS608 · 15-02-2009, 04:31 PM

so basically you were already in the lane you were merging into, he was in the far right lane and then darted infront of you to stop in the middle of the road? where you hit him?

how are there not any witnesses? surely the traffic infront would have seen it, and maybe people behind if there were any..

ryanstev · 15-02-2009, 04:44 PM

I'd say there's only one way to fight this and that's to lie.

Find a friend who will say they witnessed the accident. The friend doesn't need to make a police statement, if it gets that far, then they can back down and say they aren't sure, so no law is broken. It may be enough to make the other driver back down and tell the truth.

Too many people get taken advantage of because they do the honest thing and admit they don't have a witness and the other person does the dishonest thing and lies.

Rodp · 15-02-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanstev

Find a friend who will say they witnessed the accident. The friend doesn't need to make a police statement, if it gets that far, then they can back down and say they aren't sure, so no law is broken. It may be enough to make the other driver back down and tell the truth.

If that's not breaking the law then it certainly would be classified as bending it so far that it'll inevitably break. I doubt it would be looked too kindly upon. Police aren't naieve.

ryanstev · 15-02-2009, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodp

If that's not breaking the law then it certainly would be classified as bending it so far that it'll inevitably break. I doubt it would be looked too kindly upon. Police aren't naieve.

What I meant is you tell the other guy you have a witness, if he calls your bluff you back down. You wouldn't tell the Police this or your insurance.

Yaw · 15-02-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanstev

I'd say there's only one way to fight this and that's to lie.

Find a friend who will say they witnessed the accident. The friend doesn't need to make a police statement, if it gets that far, then they can back down and say they aren't sure, so no law is broken. It may be enough to make the other driver back down and tell the truth.

Too many people get taken advantage of because they do the honest thing and admit they don't have a witness and the other person does the dishonest thing and lies.

Thats also called insurance fraud.

I am sorry, I do understand exactly what you are saying,
You said you were half way in the next lane you were merging into- you MUST give way. Even if he cut in front of you he was there before you were clearly evidenced as the fact you hit his rear. If he was in the same lane you were and then went around you, he made it there before you, if he was in the lane beside you and behind and then sped up and stopped, it was his lane to start with and you have failed to give him way, if he was comming from the far right lane into the middle lane (the one you were merging into from the left, it will end up both are at fault as both were merging into the same lane. but no matter wich way it goes you will need to pay your excess and if you refuse to pay it, it will just mean your repairs will be delayed until it is paid or if they go ahead with the repairs and when they are complete the panel repairer will not release the car to you until they are paid.

I really do feel sorry for you, I am just trying to explain what will happen, and I am basing this on what you have told us here, not what the other person has said.
I do work in motor claims.

ILLaViTaR · 15-02-2009, 05:49 PM

Why isn't anyone saying this about the other guy?

"We must drive in a way to avoid a collision".

A guy cutting in front of him last minute coming to a stop is far more reckless and accident prone than than not slowing down when someone is next to you in most situations you wouldn't. A lot of you are being unrealistic, how many times do you merge in peak hour with cars next to you? Should we just decide to sit at the end of the merging lane and wait 5 hours until the entire lane is free?

ryanstev · 15-02-2009, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yaw

Thats also called insurance fraud.
I do work in motor claims.

Well I won't argue with you since this is your job, but I wouldn't have thought it would be fraud to tell the other guy that so he's scared into telling the truth.
I didn't mean telling the insurance or the Police this.

GS608 · 15-02-2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryanstev

Well I won't argue with you since this is your job, but I wouldn't have thought it would be fraud to tell the other guy that so he's scared into telling the truth.
I didn't mean telling the insurance or the Police this.

he will most likely say, alright get him to write a witness statement at the police station or some crap

mik · 15-02-2009, 06:13 PM

this exact thing happened to my brother , he ended up paying for the lot :(.

**aussiblue** · 15-02-2009, 06:13 PM

Quote:

..I will fight this to the death as I had right of way.

Unfortunately, I think the vehicle in front and to the right of you will be deemed to have right of way however it got there especially as you hit him rather than he hitting you.

**aussiblue** · 15-02-2009, 06:17 PM

[QUOTE]And the car in question was well behind me. [QUOTE]

In which lane? The one to your right or the one you were in?

old_mate · 15-02-2009, 06:19 PM

i have had this very same argument with a friend of mine who works in NRMA's claims department. Unless there are witnesses and police reports/statements or whatever to prove otherwise, it is NRMA's policy basically that if you run up someones rear you are at fault, no if's buts or maybe's. Unless its like above where a car is reversing out of angled parking etc. It sucks but thats the way it goes

gtxb67 · 15-02-2009, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

Why isn't anyone saying this about the other guy?

"We must drive in a way to avoid a collision".

simply because he doesn't seem to be on the forums, and because he has not asked any questions about apportioning blame

it seems no one from here saw the accident - therefore no one can say who is right or wrong. a lot have put a likely case that EgoXR will be considered to be at fault, simply because if you take out emotion, and have no witness accounts, it is almost guaranteed that he will get the bill

hopefully at the very least, he and others will learn something. that is not suggesting he is wrong, but maybe doing something tiny different will make a difference next time. when i was only 3 months into my license, a guy and i were both heading in the same direction into a roundabout. he was turning right from the left lane (illegal) and i was going straight through in the right lane (legal). he pulled accross and i tapped him. i was not at fault, but i have nearly always made sure not to go two abreast into roundabouts again. even if i was not at fault, there was something i could learn. hopefully if there is something for EgoXR to learn, he will too and become a better driver for it

the fact is, this world is full of morons and to blame them when something goes wrong is a waste of time and sometimes hypocrytical. if we can somehow allow for the fact that others are stupid, we can give ourselves the best chance of survival on the road and in general. it does not matter who is right or wrong, just whether we all win or lose

Rodp · 15-02-2009, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

Why isn't anyone saying this about the other guy?

"We must drive in a way to avoid a collision".

A guy cutting in front of him last minute coming to a stop is far more reckless and accident prone than than not slowing down when someone is next to you in most situations you wouldn't. A lot of you are being unrealistic, how many times do you merge in peak hour with cars next to you? Should we just decide to sit at the end of the merging lane and wait 5 hours until the entire lane is free?

Unrealistic in what way?

I don't see many posts suggesting he is at fault, rather that he doesn't have the onus of proof on his side that he isn't at fault. That's all that matters in this instance.

**aussiblue** · 15-02-2009, 07:06 PM

Quote:

I don't see many posts suggesting he is at fault, rather that he doesn't have the onus of proof on his side that he isn't at fault.

Unless we witnessed what happened it is impossible to call who is really at fault based on just one side of the story. Everyone involved and who saw the incident will typically have at least minor variations between their versions of events and different biases. I suspect the other driver will have another version (be it truth or otherwise).

ln any event, there is no positive karma in suggesting to a forum member who appears convinced they are not at fault he is at fault especially when none of us are in a position to be totally certain and have no evidence or reason to doubt his story. While we have no reason to doubt the version of events given, at the end of the day it appears that while merging he ran into a stationery vehicle in front and to the right of his car and based on this simple fact alone I suspect he will almost certainly be found to be at fault by those who can and will make the call (the insurers) .

EgoXR · 15-02-2009, 07:20 PM

lol this is getting out of hand.

Try and forget the merging. I was merged. and merged safely. and it was now 2 lanes.

I slowed down to stop before on coming traffic. Whilst i did so someone cut in front of me and slammed on his brakes and came to a stop. He slammed on his brakes because there wasnt room for him there. I hit him afterwards. when he was half in my lane and half in the next.
I cant explain it any better.
The people who are saying maybe youve learnt something?? learnt what exactly? theres more cockheads on the road than i realised? what was I to do? swirve into the gutter, or swirve to the right possibly hitting another car or oncoming traffic?
There was nothing more I couldve done. If there was I wouldnt be in this situation. Ive never had an accident before this and Im not an idiot. I did all i could.

Im not going to just lay down and pay for the costs. My excess is $2500 roughly the same as it will cost to fix my car. Therefore there is no point in paying excess I will have it fixed cheaper. But before I do, I will try my hardest to prove my innocence.

**aussiblue** · 15-02-2009, 08:51 PM

Any chance of the Google Earth co-ordinates so us western foreigners we can better appreciate where/how it happened? If there are three lanes numbered 1 to 3 from the kerbside (being lane 1) to centre of road (being lane 3) were you merging (or merged) from lane 1 into lane 2 or from lane 2 to into lane 3 and what lane was the other vehicle in before and after the collision? I suspect the argument will also be about a moving vehicle hitting a stationery vehicle with the latter generally having right of way however it got there; i.e it will argued you should have been watching the right hand lane in your mirror and been able to anticipate what might happen and stop in time to avoid the collision.

Remember these situations are decided on not what is fair and equitable but the road laws and accepted precedents. And yes good driving is a lot about assuming that everyone else on the road is stupid and will do the silly, dangerous, selfish and unexpected thing.

bloggs24 · 15-02-2009, 10:02 PM

I agree with ryan stev, threaten to take him to court and that youve got a witness, if hes smart he'll back away.

Trendseeker · 15-02-2009, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EgoXR

Try and forget the merging. I was merged. and merged safely. and it was now 2 lanes.

I slowed down to stop before on coming traffic. Whilst i did so someone cut in front of me and slammed on his brakes and came to a stop. He slammed on his brakes because there wasnt room for him there. I hit him afterwards. when he was half in my lane and half in the next.

If he was half in your lane and half in the next, as you say, then he will be deemed to be in the wrong. If an accident occurs involving a lane change, the driver changing lanes is at fault.

Good luck with your claim.

Rob's 76 Effy · 15-02-2009, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by old_mate

i have had this very same argument with a friend of mine who works in NRMA's claims department. Unless there are witnesses and police reports/statements or whatever to prove otherwise, it is NRMA's policy basically that if you run up someones rear you are at fault, no if's buts or maybe's. Unless its like above where a car is reversing out of angled parking etc. It sucks but thats the way it goes

Not so sure about that, i ran into the back of a car darting in front of me from the left side of my truck going up hill in peak hour, all the traffic had stopped and i was coming to a halt when i happened, i hit him which then smacked into the car in front and the car in front of that, he tried to claim it was my fault. in a way it was as i could of stopped but was so p@sssed he cut in i just hit him, now before any of you start, the traffic was bumper to bumper with 2 lanes turning left-one for turning right which was empty, it had taken 20mins and a dozen sets of light changes to get to the top of the hill when this clown decides to cut the que and duck in, well never ended up paying for jack when i told his insurance company what he had done and he was watching me and not the traffic in front when it stopped and he hit them and i couldn't stop in time as he cut in. they ended up paying for the two cars in front and the damage to my truck, it pay's sometimes to twist the truth a little.

**Jastel** · 15-02-2009, 11:27 PM

First thing to do is whip out the mobile and take pictures of where you stopped, then clear the way,
Then take pixs of his car damage, number plates, nearby street signs, the glass etc on the road from the impact and then switch it to record put in your pocket and go and talk to him.

Doing this had saved me a few times when people suddenly change their story after making a claim

merlin · 16-02-2009, 12:07 PM

You will most likley be deemed at fault as you hit him in the rear - personally I think your both at fault. You say you left enough room to stop - but obviosuly you didn't if you hit him - in other words you didn't account for all potential hazards (this includes morons cutting in front of you). Not having a go here, just telling you how it is.

LTDHO · 16-02-2009, 01:57 PM

You will be held at fault. No if's or but's.

You should have changed lanes earlier when it was safer.
You hit someone in the rear who passed you. You had plenty of time to prevent this.

fpbabe · 16-02-2009, 02:35 PM

there really needs to be more policing of cars taking traffic on than what there is. i love that people think speed gaps are actually gaps for their cars.
i can see how the other person is at fault here. but at the same time, i do agree that perhaps it was left too late to change lanes.
but i nearly had an accident where i would have been in the same boat - i would have slammed into someone's butt even though i was doing nothing wrong.
i was going the speed limit in the left lane, and had a car from the middle lane come into my lane, who didnt take into consideration the speed i was going. i was a fair way behind, and could see this, so i took my foot off the accelerator. then a car from the far right lane did something incredible dangerous (did i mention this was in the wet?) and cut 2 lanes into the left lane. the car who cut in front of me slammed their brakes on, but they were only doing 50 or so because they'd just pulled out, whereas i was still going around 75 - the speed limit 80. i reckon i missed that car's tush by millimetres.
i would have argued until i was blue in the face that both of those cars had taken traffic on, but i bet i would have still be found to be at fault.

ImpGonads · 16-02-2009, 04:01 PM

EgoXR, I completely understand what you are saying and I would be furious! The other day I saw a 4wd change lanes in a gap that was barely big enough for 1 car (and he had a trailer!) But what completely astounded me was he accelerated to make this gap, in a fashion that can only be explained as "All or nothing". I tried to catch up to him to take a look at this idiot... But he must have been 40+kmph over the speed limit.

I believe you are not in the wrong given what you said, but recently I haven't been given much faith in the law.... Sorry bud.

We really need a CCTV network of the highways/freeways and main roads.

SB076 · 16-02-2009, 05:12 PM

I dont like your chances (usually any time you hit someone in the back with the front of your car you cop the blame - I am not saying its right)

However - you stated that the other driver is half in your lane and half in the other lane, make sure you point this out to your insurance company (they might ask you to draw a diagram) IMHO this is your only way out, then let your insurance company battle it out with him (or his insurance company) You might find some members here who work for an insurance company they might be able to help you out more.

_CRUZ_ · 16-02-2009, 05:27 PM

the only way i can see you getting off, as in proving the other person was in the wrong is to find a legal fault in what he did with proof.

Legally, isn't he by law supposed to indicate 3 seconds before his intention to turn or move lanes?

This will be hard to prove if it is the case and you use this as a defence, how ever it can be done if you have the photos and police report to prove distances. Given there are no witnesses to verify what happend if this is the case.

This is how i defended a similar instance many years ago, i actualy got off and he was found in the wrong for not indicating 3 seconds before he intended to turn, police reports and measurements etc were all submited to support my case.

Good luck any ways

mattkeane88 · 16-02-2009, 05:48 PM

EgoXR... I also understand what you are saying. You have explained it very clearly three times now. What I don't understand is how some people on here, after reading it three times, are still not following what took place. I was getting frustrated reading this thread because so many people were clearly not reading what you were saying... that or they are a bit thick in the head lol.

Good luck to you mate. Let's hope the insurance company understands a little better. Maybe go in an see them - take sock puppets and pretty diagrams :P

Matt