Crash! Boom! Bang! - Car accident, who's at fault?

[NothingOnButTheRadio]

Had a car accident earlier. Wondering what your thoughts are.

Car A had slowed down to turn into the first road on the right and was indicating.

Car B was turning left .

Not unusual to have a steady stream of traffic (lights further up the road.

Car A began turning. Car B ploughed into the side of Car A. Both drivers accusing the other. Both vehicles I'd think are write-offs.

Obligatory drawing - yes, I'm shit at drawing!

Car A

@Ironmanrocks

Not if they both turned at pretty much the same time, with B pulling out quickly to get speed up on the carriageway and A slowing down whilst she was waiting for a gap.

Car B (as someone who used to work in solicitors who dealt with car accidents and personal injury!). Also, the other thread mentioned earlier is a totally different poster and (they said hypothetical) situation, whereas OP says this situation actually happened to them.

Ah. With the new information sorry to say car a at fault.
Hope you recover quickly.

Did anyone actually read the information? If car turns left then they are on the main road going in the opposite direction to car A. If car A is crossing that lane to turn into a side road and Car B goes into the side of them then obviously Car A will be at fault for crossing in front of an oncoming car.

Which side of A did B hit? And where on the road did the collision take place?

If B hit the nearside (passenger side) of A on the main road it implies that B was already on the main road and A turned in front of B, so it was A's fault.

If B hit the offside (driver's side) of A, at the entrance to the road that B was turning out of, then it implies that B drove out of the side road into A, so B's fault.

As it looks as if A was turning into a road to the left of B, B must have been on the main road by the time A crossed, ie, first scenario.

@NothingOnButTheRadio after your drip feed im even more sure you're at fault. A transit van hardly has the acceleration to smash into you by surprise. If the roads are 3m apart then that is essentially the full length of his vehicle established on the main road. He may well have checked his left (if I remember from driving when turning left you check right-left-right) and you weren't 'trickling across the lane when he did. Indicating doesn't mitigate your need to give way, surely by the time you committed to turning right you would have seen him already on the road.

In future you need to come to a stop and wait until you can complete your manoeuvre safely, none of this slowly inching across a lane of live traffic because its the 'done thing'.

I am so sorry OP l hope you will be on the mend very soon , imho you will be proved not the guilty party .

I think he was looking right trying to nip out and just didn’t look left at all

@NothingOnButTheRadio

Op needs to clarify who moved when and how close the junctions were!

I was trickling forward - it's a done thing as it's a busy road. He would've seen this, and my early indicator.

So, IMO, he wasn't paying attention. The distance between the two roads is around 3m.

Sorry you’re injured and hope you recover soon! Yes his fault then - that’s no distance and he clearly didn’t look. He must have given you a hell of a bash to injure you so badly.

Car A had right of way.
If they were indicating then car B should have waited.

Car B- surely Car A wouldn't have been able to see them pulling out from the next road?

We all know the rules OP. You don't pull out on the basis that a car is indicating, you prepare for it to turn but wait until it actually starts to turn. He was chancing it, in too much of hurry, got it wrong and took it out you. I hope you recover soon.

If car A were a pedestrian would you advise it to move from the safe position of the "island" in the middle of the road when it can see a car is about to turn left from a side road? Car B will clearly accelerate along the main road that it has right of way along. Or would you advise the pedestrian to you stay put until Car B had passed?.

I'd stay put otherwise you'd have to do a run across the road and could trip etc ie. "risky". Car A's manoeuvre was risky.

So what did the police say or indicate at the scene ?

But you must have also seen him indicating

Except he *wasn't indicating". It's purely dangerous and turning from a side road is pure folly. It's a busy road then observation is an important trait. Yet millions of people across the country manage to adhere to HC, and pay attention when driving.

Car B can only have hit car A in the side if already on the main road whilst Car A turning in front of them.. As car B on major road at time of crash Car B has right of way over Car A trying to cross in front of them.
BUT... sounds like car B was at fault, speeding, looked one way and not the other and drove straight into Car A but without witnesses this will end up 50/50.
Car B must have been going at super high speed to cause such bad injuries in 3m of road.
Get well soon.

B was wrong. Unless, unlikely, you were going at the speed limit and started a last second turn at full speed without indicating so he couldn't have seen/anticipated your actions. Hope you recover soon.

Policeman partner says (assuming your in the UK) car B is at fault.

He came out the side street and smashed unto you.

Sorry for your injuries

Sorry to hear about your injuries, OP, that sounds really nasty. The van obviously hit you bloody hard which makes me wonder if he was still accelerating when he hit your car.

In terms of fault, I'd say it depends on who was on the left-hand carriageway first. If car B had already crossed the give way lines when car A started to turn, car A is in the wrong. If car A had already started the turn and was all or part on the opposite carriageway when car B crossed the give way lines, then car B is at fault.

Like PP's, I bet the van driver was looking right to see if he had a big enough gap to pull out into, and didn't look left until it was too late. But he will say that you crossed his path.

The position of the damage on both vehicles may give a good indication of who is at fault, but I rather suspect the insurers will settle 50/50 because it's easier than arguing the toss when it's not clear cut.

And now comes the classic MN question: do you have legal expenses cover on your household insurance? The damages for your injuries, if the other driver is found liable, could be significant.

Hope you get better soon.

Oh gosh I hope your ok ,
If you were in left hand land turning left and he was turning left were you both turning at the same time ?
I can't see how the hell he whacked into your car without seeing you , he clearly didn't look a parked car , child anything could of been there .
Hopefully the way he reacted was shock but do not in anyway except blame .

BUT WHICH SIDE OF CAR A WAS HIT?

Sorry left hand land turning right the other car was turning left .

Sorry to hear you got hurt OP.

Yes, car B (transit) definitely at fault. I hope the police prosecute him.

I think you're underestimating the distance between the 2 junctions. 3m is approx 3 kerb lengths....that's not enough space for anything.

Car B was at fault as they turned into the main road, car A was already on the road and turning

Leave it to the insurance company to sort