Bump - experience of this scenario?
 

Chaps.

My missus had a fella hit the front of her car the other day whilst she was queuing / stop / starting in traffic to join motorway. Basically one of those people who didn't want to queue and went for a small gap in front our car but got it wrong. Missus hit the brakes when she saw him try to nip in from the faster moving outer lane - but he hit the front of our car with the rear quarter of his as he was trying to get into a small gap - as per diagram.

http://andrewshillito.com/oople/shells/diagram.jpg

Anyone had any experience of this kind of bump?

I spoke to the other chap - the whole thing is with the insurance companies now - he blames my missus for not stopping in time! She was just in her own lane and this chap chanced a gap and got it wrong / cut it too tight and caught our car.

Insurance company say it could be a 'split claim' as no witnesses - his word etc. Missus took good photos at the scene that show what happened.

If anyone has any experience of this kind of scenario - i'd be interested to hear :)

Cheers.

Hi Andy,

Sorry to hear about the mishap. I know that it sounds like the fault of the driver that tried to nip in front of your wife, but my understanding is that the following driver has to maintain a safe gap (which is annoying in its own right as it is this safe gap that the chancer tried to nip into).
I am not a lawyer, but AFAIK that is how it works :-(


Yesterday while trying to get from Manchester airport to Sheffield I ended up having to use the Woodhead Pass as every other road was shut. We were queuing in left lane to go straight on at a roundabout, while the RH lane had flowing traffic turning rt. At the last minute one of the cars suddenly braked and tried to nip into a gap between static cars in LH lane, meaning that the big truck following had to slam all on and slide to a halt, barely missing the rear of the car that hadn't managed to get into the gap as there was insufficient room. Had the truck hit the car it would have been the following truck's fault and not the idiot in the car

From the bump ive had, the solicitor said as clear as day " if theres a bump on the front of one car, and the rear of the other - its the fault of the driver from behind".

I was hit from behind, and had to claim through it and it went smoothly due to them accepting liability. They said the chances of the other party winning, even if they disputed it were slim.

However your best chances here without onboard footage would be a 50/50 i would think.

A few years back you'd get people coasting along, then for no reason slamming on - trying to catch the driver behind out so they could get an easy claim :thumbdown:

Cheers for the reply - yes it does look like a bit of a grey area - hence wondering of anyone has any experience of this kind of thing :)!

Thing is - she was leaving a safe gap - in queuing stop / start traffic, so there's nothing you can do if someone decides to try to nip into a gap that ins't being enough and hits the front of your car?

She did stop, but he still hit her - so he basically drove into the side of her - I suspect there was nothing she could have done differently - she braked and stopped as he tried to swing in and he clipped her.

I know all about the driver behind is always at fault sketch - but she was in her own lane - minding her own business when this chap tried to nip in and hit her - damage was to the side of his car as well as ours so i'm hoping he's deemed to be in the wrong.

Also - as he was changing lanes and she was not - he performed the manouver that resulted in the accident.

Wev'e sent pictures etc to Insurance so just have to wait now....

So he hit a stationary vehicle? :confused:

G

G - she was stop / starting, in 5mph queued traffic, she was moving when he tried to nip in - hence she had to jump on the brakes - she stopped, but as other driver was diving into a very small gap - and he cut it way too fine - he clipped our car as he tried to go into the space in front of her.

Picky of damage to cars - his is the blue one, what do you think chaps - on the bigger picky - the damage is as you would expect - mainly side and a bit to rear - as he went in at an angle.
http://andrewshillito.com/oople/shells/damage.jpg

I'd stress that she was stationary when he hit her if it was me.
I had similar on a roundabout years ago and it went 50/50.

G

Cheers G.

Yes - she said she'd stopped as he drove across the front and caught her as he tried to nip in - he was obviously trying not to run into the car in front of my missus - so we will stress that point if we get the opportunity.

Did the guy signal when moving lanes as said he switched lanes and made the manover not your wife if he had not the bump would not have happened

I think the fact as shown in the pictures is that he cut her up. His rear left damaged shows that he cut into her lane damaging her front right. It proves he was cutting across your wifes lane and he hit her. If it had been a full front and rear collision then he could claim she should have stopped in time but as it looks he cut into her safe braking space so gave her no chance. Argue that with your insurance company and accept no blame.
The pictures show the facts.

Like it Bodgit - couldn't have put it better myself :)

Davo - when I spoke to guy - he said he signalled - but who knows - as he came up the faster lane he may well have signalled for the cars behind him - but it was no use for my missus as he just shot in and clipped her.

Can't argue that because you signalled you are allowed to do something dangerous / daft and casuse an accident?

You might be all right - as I'm not sure the "car behind is always wrong" is actually true.

Illustrated by an indecent I had a few years back where I was 100% at fault!

In relatively normal running traffic, on the M3, I moved from the middle lane, to the outside lane. Sadly, there was already a car sat quite happily in my blind spot, and funnily enough, the back quarter of my car, hit her front wing. No major damage to either car fortunately.

All went through the insurance route, and my insurance paid her out. In fairness, I didn't ever try and claim it wasn't my fault, as anyone with any sense of decency would see it was me at fault. I guess that could be the difference in this case, as he's claiming it wasn't his fault. I'd have said that in any "lane changing" case, it must always be the fault of who ever is changing lane.

Cheers for the reply Matt - sounds like a very similar case.
You would expect that whoever is changing lanes would be at fault - automatically - especially if it resulted in the car changing lanes hitting another car!

If the missus had not jumped on the brakes - I suspect the damage to his car would have been all the way down the side of his car - or she may have even spun him.

I personally would go with Bodgit 100% accept no responsibility what so ever and if it was me and he'd said that to me I would of downed him then and there. People like him really piss me off sorry.
I run my own truck and see atrocious driving everywhere all day everyday, it seems people can't take responsibility for there own mistakes anymore.

I had a guy take both my mirrors off my truck the other month and didn't even try to avoid it. He hit me that hard I thought the window was going to come in with the force of the mirrors hitting it. He didn't stop but I did manage to pull his reg of the video from my camera which I woudnt be without at all anymore. I'm still trying to get my £330 back I had to pay for a new pair of mirrors 2 months later.

Cheers Peaky :)

I was not there - but I did speak to the guy on the phone that evening when she got home - he's obviously trying it on - or is just unaware of the way roads in the UK work. He said something about he indicated and my missus didn't have her hands on the wheel or something daft like that - I just got a bit annoyed and told him it was clearly his fault and he had no chance of claiming it was her fault.

God knows how he supposedly saw her mid manouver as he was clearly going for a small gap so you would think he was concentrating on the car in front - that he didn't want to run into - hence clipping ours.

PIT maneuver!

I would also say it's the car changing lanes that's responsible for doing so safely, too many people on the road these days seem to think their indicators give them instant right of way.

Peaky - which camera do you have - may be worth investing in something as she drives down the M62 most days and has said she has to avoid all kinds of incidents over the years.

Does it record each trip automatically?

Damage like that would be very easy to use as evidence to fight for a 100% claim, rather than 50/50. Its corner damage, not rear/front. As long as the position of the cars at the time of impact is recorded (she does have photos of that doesn't she?) you couldn't get damage like that (unless she'd swerved off the road and clipped him.) If it was a straight impact, you'd be shafted, and paying out.

But it's 100% the responsibility of the driver changing lanes to ensure it's clear to go. And a safe gap in a motorway traffic jam, certainly isn't even enough to even get an Aygo in!

Bloke sounds like a bit of a bully/twat trying to muscle his way in.

I have a small Road Hawk camera supplied by my insurance company, if I can't provide footage of an incident then my excess goes through the roof.
http://i1345.photobucket.com/albums/...pscm0c7jll.jpg

Is on continuous record so just loops over, it's got an 8gb memory card so will record most of a day. It's also got a memory button so if something happaens you can just store that scene.

I should really put a bigger card in but it's ok for what I need. I have been looking at getting one for my car too but I've just not got round to it.

Cheers Peaky - I had a look on Halfords site - lots to choose from and they install them for £30 so I think i'll get one fitted to her car.

Also - spoke to our insurance company now that they have the pictures - they said they would fight our corner and do what they can - and also let us know what he's claiming happened. They did say worst case is 50/50 - but they also said they can see that there was nothing else the missus could do and the chap is in the wrong. Fingers crossed....