Had accident!!!

[Snooze]

Actually, whether he was > or

 

If he was going too fast to stop in the event of a car legitimately (ie. without being able to see him) pulling out of a side junction, then he was travelling too fast - the actual speed limit is irrelevant.

 

However, this is applied judiciously, so that a reasonable speed can be legitimately maintained.

 

That's why I would suggest that you state that you could not see him when you pulled out (which you did at a slow, careful speed, attempting to avoid the oncoming vehicle as soon as it was visible), and that the road down which he approached was narrow and full of parked cars blocking visibility (ie. try and imply that even 30mph was too fast for the conditions).

 

tbh, I personally wouldn't send the insurance that first photo, as the road looks pretty clear in it.

[supracharged]

Quote:

Originally Posted by edd_t

You may not like the results of this dude:

 

http://www.claimstar.net/main.taf?p=9,4

 

There are plenty of other skid mark calculators if you search google...

 

 

40 ft, dry - asphalt - travelled = 28.6mph

 

28.6 MPH is the amount of speed that he would have 'lost' or slowed whils skidding and not nessaceraly the speed he was doing when the brakes were applied.

if he was travelling at 28.6 MPH after those skid marks the car would have come to a stop. in this case it was still going fast enough to write off your supe (probably)

 

so if that amount of damage was consistant with an impact of 20 MPH (just a gues) add the 28.6 speed lost from the calculator he was doing close to 50 MPH in a 30 which could be argued as reclas driving if you ask me.

 

dont fancy your chances though, sorry.

glad know one was hurt though.

[dangerous brain]

The guy was driving too fast for the conditions. Thats not gonna have any bearing on the insurance though. For my liking if that car couldn't stop for a car pulling out then if a small child ran out that child would be dead simple as that. Also what the other chap said about the stopping of the car in that distance is all well and good if the car didn't impart a tonne of its energy into your car to assist its stopping so unless you know the your cars absorbtion ability you will never really predict that cars speed. For me I would say it was well above a sensible speed.

[Soop Dogg]

Don't go saying to the insurance company that you couldn't see enough of the road when you pulled out - this will screw you for sure.

 

If you don't have enough view of the road you're entering, they'll simply say that you shouldn't have pulled out and crossed the road at all. The other parties insurers will see your statement and say that you shouldn't attempt to cross the junction until you can see that it is clear.

[Guest BLACK SUPRA]

Thanks for all the advice guys. Iv just been to the repair garage and iv been told its a rite off so im not pleased to say the least. I guess its up to the insurance to decide who was at fault now, but i will say this..

 

If he was travelling at 30mph, would he hav left 40ft long skidmarks and made the impact that he did on my car??

I did not know that breaking hard at 30 mph would cause 40ft of skidmarks More like he was doing about 40-50 and breaked so hard that he left skidmarks that long and caused the damage he did!

 

Imagine if my car was not there and he had breaked when he had, how long do u think the skidmarks would hav been if there was no car to stop him!

 

i appreciate ur views. THX

[tbourner]

TBH it's suprising how much damage can be done at low speeds, what was the state of his car? And what car was it?

[Guest BLACK SUPRA]

He had a p reg green golf gti and wasnt as badly damaged as mine.

[TRD-Rob]

this mite be helpful at the bottom of the page

 

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.htm