Indicating, laws, etc...

**liviy** · 9th July 2007, 17:33

I've just got off the phone with my insurance company about an accident I was in almost 2 weeks ago.

What happened was the guy was coming towards me, was indicating left, maneuvering towards the left hand side of the road n slowing right down. I was indicating right and I was sure he was stopping so I went and then he suddenly decides it was the wrong place so started coming straight again.

We hit on front right hand corners and that was that.

Apart from the fact that he said at the scene to let him know what damage there was and then he'd sort me out, he's now telling my insurance company that he had no intentions of turning left there and was going to stop on the other side of the junction (which is crap but anyway) and I was cutting the corner on him (a blind corner, so commit me now because I'd have to be insane to do so).

The lady from the insurance company reckons that it doesn't matter that he was indicating left or anything as an indication is just an indication and doesn't have to mean anything.

I always thought it was a case of, if you're indicating to do something and then don't then that's a huge no no...especially if all other factors seem to point to the fact that he was going to do as he was indicating. She just says, it's a big grey area in the law...

Sorry if it's a bit of a ramble but I'm pretty pissed off as this adds insult to injury and just thought I'd get some other thoughts, probably better than mine on the situation.

**janno** · 9th July 2007, 17:43

I was walking to work once when an indicating car went straight through the intersection instead.

Caused a smash, injuries were minor luckily.

The cop on the scene interviewed me as a witness, I told her the car at fault had been indicating and then said "I suppose the other car should have been sure she was turning though" and the cop said, no, if she had her indicator on she was at fault.

Bear in mind this was 15 years ago, things may have changed or the cop may have been wrong.

If the cop was correct, makes you wonder about people who drive along leaving their indicators on, could be liable for a whole heap of trouble if they are ever in a crash.

**judecatmad** · 9th July 2007, 17:45

I was always taught that it doesn't matter what the indicators are saying - always wait until the indicating vehicle actually starts to make a move before you make your move.

I know my dad ticketed people in the UK for indicating and not making the move they were indicating ('driving without due care'), especially driving along motorways, but the rules here may well be different.

From the sounds of it, your guy DID start to move and then changed his mind - but it will be your word against his unfortunately

Hope it works out for you.

**liviy** · 9th July 2007, 17:52

I'm trying to find something on the web about the whole law thing, if it's illegal for them to indicate before a junction or not to try n blow his made up story out of the water too because otherwise I also have to stump up an excess until it gets sorted.

**Hitcher** · 9th July 2007, 18:57

"Right of way" is something other motorists give you. If they don't give it to you, you haven't got it, irrespective of whether the Road Code is on your side or not.

Assumption is the mother of many intersection accidents. If you're to assume anything, assume all motorists are trying to kill you and don't be fooled by those games they play to entice you into their killing zone, such as erroneously indicating or not indicating at all.

**roogazza** · 9th July 2007, 19:08

Originally Posted by Hitcher

"Right of way" is something other motorists give you. If they don't give it to you, you haven't got it, irrespective of whether the Road Code is on your side or not.

Assumption is the mother of many intersection accidents. If you're to assume anything, assume all motorists are trying to kill you and don't be fooled by those games they play to entice you into their killing zone, such as erroneously indicating or not indicating at all.

So true Hitch , After all these years and learning the hard way I treat everyone as an idiot. Signalling just means they have their blinker on. Gaz.

**janno** · 9th July 2007, 19:11

Agreed, roogazza and hitcher, but I'd be interested in what the legalities of it are, rather than the "ride to survive" side of things.

ie who would win in a court of law.

**TLMAN** · 9th July 2007, 19:37

Look at it this way, if you were in a car would you have done the same thing?? Probably not.

**liviy** · 9th July 2007, 19:41

I do understand about not trusting the indicator but everything else he was doing was strongly suggesting that he was turning and giving way.

Something I'm always conscious about is that being on a motorbike, pretty much anything I hit or hits me, I'm gonna come of second worst so I'm always very wary...so that's how sure I was that he was doing what he was indicating.

What I'm more interested in currently is (because I already found out the hard way that he's a tard), as janno said...the legality of the situation, I mean if you caused an accident by not indicating at all then surely causing an accident by signaling incorrectly would be the same...failure to indicate correctly?

I mean, I believe he already stated to my insurance company that he was indicating prior to the junction and slowing down because he was going to stop just on the other side.

Just a footnote but I'm thankful of one thing, my insurance company is immediately suspicious as he claims it's my fault and yet he's not claiming for any damages to his vehicle, they said it does sound like he's just trying to get out of paying for the accident as he has no insurance.

**liviy** · 9th July 2007, 19:42

Originally Posted by TLMAN

Look at it this way, if you were in a car would you have done the same thing?? Probably not.

Am afraid I don't quite understand what you mean, maybe my concussion is worse than I thought! lol

**Chickadee** · 9th July 2007, 19:53

In McJim's recent ding he made damn sure the cops showed up and there were a fair few witnesses to add weight to the facts.

Then the person at fault cannot recant their story when challenged by the insurance company.

They are likely to change their story based on the cold light of day and advice from pub lawyers (a friend of mine says.....).

**TLMAN** · 9th July 2007, 20:17

Originally Posted by liviy

Am afraid I don't quite understand what you mean, maybe my concussion is worse than I thought! lol

I dunno, the bourbon is taking over a lil bit. It sounded like a valid point when I made it. What I was trying to say is that if you were in a car then would....... oh I dunno fk it. Yore all in one peice though thats the most important thing.

**liviy** · 9th July 2007, 20:21

If I was driving a car I would have done the same thing as was 100% sure he was turning n giving way.

Yeah, I am still here...and I'm thankful for that...glad to see my 7 month old again!

When I saw him change direction towards me, I thought it was game over!

**discotex** · 9th July 2007, 21:32

Originally Posted by liviy

The lady from the insurance company reckons that it doesn't matter that he was indicating left or anything as an indication is just an indication and doesn't have to mean anything.

I always thought it was a case of, if you're indicating to do something and then don't then that's a huge no no...especially if all other factors seem to point to the fact that he was going to do as he was indicating. She just says, it's a big grey area in the law...

Sorry if it's a bit of a ramble but I'm pretty pissed off as this adds insult to injury and just thought I'd get some other thoughts, probably better than mine on the situation.

Gotta love insurance companies don't you....

I'm no lawyer but if you had witnesses that they were giving way then basically decided to drive into you you're probably in the right. I'd guess it'd also depend on where you hit them (or they hit you).

From what I've seen insurance companies will go with the path of least resistance (and least cost) so whatever you do don't accept what some phone rep says. Ask them to provide evidence of the law/road rules that apply and see what happens. If they can't do that then they obviously haven't checked and assumed that because you're on two wheels you must have been in the wrong.

Oh and if they still say it's a grey area then push them to pay out based on that. Surely if it's not clear then you aren't in the wrong......... Best of luck!

**janno** · 9th July 2007, 21:41

Originally Posted by discotex

Oh and if they still say it's a grey area then push them to pay out based on that. Surely if it's not clear then you aren't in the wrong......... Best of luck!

Great points in your post that I hadn't considered, thanks - hopefully I'll never have to call upon my new found knowledge . . .