I hadn't intended to, but I guess I kind of took a holiday vacation too.One thing that happened during the holidays was Peter being in an accident. Thankfully no one was injured. The two insurance companies will now analyze and decide how much each driver was at fault. I'll give a few facts and let's see who among us is best at assigning blame.
Peter is a conscientious driver, but when I first heard what happened I was pretty sure that Peter was at fault. When I helped him type up his recall of the details I began to waver. Here's Peter's recollection. I'm guessing it is close to accurate. There are witnesses who will confirm the major points (except which lane the other driver was in).
"I was traveling north on Hadley Avenue intending to go west at Hwy 36. At the intersection with Hwy 36 the light was red. I put on the left blinker and moved left into the left-turn-only lane and waited for the light to turn green.
" When it turned green I checked out the intersection and began to move forward and to the left a little. I saw a car approaching the intersection from the north, driving south on Hadley going about 20 mph. I began to brake again until I was sure the car was turning right or west onto Hwy 36. At this time I was not at all in the oncoming traffic lane. The other car had its right blinker on and I thought it was in the right-turn-only lane, so I again started to make my turn left (west) onto Hwy 36.
"Almost immediately I realized the car was not turning right (west) but heading south so I braked again and came to a stop, but by this time my drivers-side bumper was in the oncoming traffic lane. The other car did not brake at all and did not swerve at all. Its drivers –side-front bumper collided with mine. The other car did not stop until it was 100 feet away to the south on Hadley past the intersection. My car did not move. It remained in the intersection with the front left bumper slightly in the oncoming traffic lane.
2 comments:
We will pray for you that the decision will be fair There were no witnesses that were willing to come forward in my defense in an accident that I was involved in a couple of years ago. It was clear that if the other individual would have told the truth I would have been in the right. He chose to tell a lie that indicated that I was in fact driving in the wrong lane facing oncoming traffic. If that were the fact, he would have of course been in the right. The insurance companies had to go to court and it came out as a draw. Thankfully, it was our old van but it was totaled. Unfortunately it can take quite a while to settle. We have to be superhuman to avoid an accident like the one that Peter was involved in. They happen so fast.
I was going to say it was maybe 60 : 40 against Peter, but I put a little more thought into it...
Peter should not have been in the oncoming traffic lane, but the other car could have avoided the accident by swerving, slowing or stopping.
But there are two big factors:
(1) Why did the other driver have their right blinker on and not turn? They shouldn't have had the blinker on. That makes it 50 : 50.
(2) I don't suppose you could get another witness to commit on what lane the other driver was in... If the other driver was in the right turn lane, the ratio changes to 40 : 60 in Peter's favor.
I'm thinking the other driver was a little confused/disoriented and was planning to turn right, but then changed their mind. In their confusion, they were not concentrating fully on their driving and didn't turn off their blinker.
The more I think about it, the more I'm thinking it's 40 : 60 in Peter's favor.
Post a Comment