Been pranged

[chr15gb]

I've been searching for any footage of my crash, although nobody stopped to act as witness, I was hoping some dashcammer caught my crash and uploaded it.

I didn't find mine but I found one pretty identical, although I was a lot further forward so I couldn't see the guy turning into me.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/watch-abbey-wood-roundabout-crash-80694

[Texas]

Good get out by the South Glos Spokesperson.

A South Gloucestershire Council spokesperson said: “The Abbey Wood (MOD) roundabout has a very good safety record. Within the last three years, our accident record database does not show any cross-cutting injury accidents occurring within the vicinity of the roundabout junctions.

yes you are right there won't be any INJURY accidents but dozens of vehicle damage accidents at these low speeds...nice spin...

paul m.

[Linas.P]

12 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

OK, again as devil's advocate...

The OP was in the Turn Left lane, yet after the incident, accelerated into the Turn Right lane, yet the turn right lane existed  prior to the incident? The other driver continued in the Turn Left lane. Who was in the wrong lane at the time of the incident? What was the OP's intention going forward, what was the other driver's intention?

Just to be clear, original OP situation is completely different from situation in my video, it just happened that I got hit the same day I said to OP "consider fitting dashcam next time".

I will answer your question in more details later, with road layout etc...  

Just quickly - it looks like roundabout, but in fact it is crossroad with traffic lights. First question to ask is why he was where he was? If it was green for me it was clearly red for him (possibly entered through yellow towards reddish), secondly he was not braking (check brake lights), nor indicating (check indicators) and actually cut from 3rd lane straight across to first (without indicating) and finally did not stop. Not good start is it...

To play devil's advocate on myself, the only unconformable question I have to answers is - why I didn't stop myself?! Ideally I should have stopped and called police from there, I am almost certain they would not come for it (as it is not emergency) and the only real difference would be the stated place of my location when reporting the accident... To this one I don't have any reason, nor even good excuse - it was split second decision, I did not hear or felt any impact (not good excuse) and the other driver did not stop (quite clearly), hence I assumed it was "near miss". Technically I can still be done for "failing to stop", but my intent is clearly shown by calling police 18:03 to report it (~4 min later), obviously not stopping was not in my interest anyway. So my hope is that a judge would take it considering all circumstances and not the fact in isolation (that is how they should do it, though reality is sometimes different)... from situation overall it actually doesn't really matter if I have stopped or not, because offending party didn't. That would be completely different story if offending party would stop and I didn't - even it was their fault, they would likely get away with nothing and I would be in for "failing to stop".

My hope in short is that this won't go to court, it would seem reasonable to assume that based on clear video evidence the other driver will plead guilty for failing to stop - fact and for causing damage - fact, trying to settle with me out of court would seems good option as well, because then he can get away with fixed penalty+3 points+ repairs for my car. If he pleads not-guilty to police and chooses to go to court then it will be very messy - he will be done for causing damage and failing to stop, 6 points + £1000, but as well likely to get into the category driving without due care and attention a.k.a careless driving, because of jumping lights, not indicating etc. In such case I would likely be witness in the courtroom and it is very unlikely that I would be charged with anything unless they would find me lying under outh (prejury - criminal offence) on the flip side they might dismiss my case for damages on the basis of my damages cannot be proven "beyond reasonable doubt" as I have not stopped myself (theoretically I could have damaged the car after the incident... in that 4 min period). So my bet is on settlement out-of-court, because going to court can mean ending-up without anything at all. By the way I am not going through insurance - I just made notification for them without intention to claim.

[chr15gb]

Assessment has been done.

New Front Wing
Bumper sanded/repainted
Door mirror surround/casing to be replaced
Wheel to be removed, checked and either replaced or refurbished.

Heard nothing from the Insurance yet.

He did notice something with the wing which I hadn't noticed, it is out of alignment with the drivers door. He said the whole wing has bowed.
Busy now but I'll upload a picture in a couple of days.

[Farqui]

Gutted to read about this as the lanes clearly show the other driver cut you up.  

The assessment doesn't mention any structural or suspension damage, which is kinda good provided he's taken a look underneath.

Since the accident, does the car pull to one side, brake oddly or have any vibrations?

[dougie175]

18 minutes ago, chr15gb said:

Assessment has been done.

New Front Wing
Bumper sanded/repainted
Door mirror surround/casing to be replaced
Wheel to be removed, checked and either replaced or refurbished.

Heard nothing from the Insurance yet.

He did notice something with the wing which I hadn't noticed, it is out of alignment with the drivers door. He said the whole wing has bowed.
Busy now but I'll upload a picture in a couple of days.

 The door and a pillar also want blending for colour match unless your car is a solid colour?

Also a wheel alignment must be carried out in a senario like this without doubt. Any impact to a wheel justifies an alignment

Just out of interest how are they checking the wheel a visual check i assume? As a bare minimum it need to be checked it isn't buckled but ideally it wants to be x rayed for cracks

[chr15gb]

He asked me about the handling which is still stright and true, I haven't noticed anything different accelerating, driving or braking. No vibrations either.

He did say about blending the colour to the door and also full wheel alingment.
He didn't go into detail about how they check the wheel.

The colour is Satin Black, I've been looking for a touch up pen for a while but none of the usual places have it, I'm sure Lexus will but I haven't gone there yet.

[dougie175]

If the car feels the same 90% of the time there is probably no suspension damage but you just never know a wheel alignment will soon show any issues though.

Wheels are virtually impossible to check, but providing it is has not gone out of balance, chances are the wheel is fine if the alloy is balanced up fine

[Linas.P]

36 minutes ago, chr15gb said:

He asked me about the handling which is still stright and true, I haven't noticed anything different accelerating, driving or braking. No vibrations either.

He did say about blending the colour to the door and also full wheel alingment.
He didn't go into detail about how they check the wheel.

The colour is Satin Black, I've been looking for a touch up pen for a while but none of the usual places have it, I'm sure Lexus will but I haven't gone there yet.

Lexus Satin black is 202, same as Toyota Astral Black 202 - halfrauds has both pens and spray cans (just not expect them to be marked as Lexus)

[rayaans]

17 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

OK, again as devil's advocate...

The OP was in the Turn Left lane, yet after the incident, accelerated into the Turn Right lane, yet the turn right lane existed  prior to the incident? The other driver continued in the Turn Left lane. Who was in the wrong lane at the time of the incident? What was the OP's intention going forward, what was the other driver's intention?

None of that is relevant

The OP was in lane, the other vehicle moved from another lane into the OP's lane without indicators. If it wanted to go into the 1st lane on the left, it should have been done at the first instance, not later on unless indicating.

Additionally, what OP did after the incident doesn't matter - he may have changed his mind, he may have gone into the other lane to pull a finger at the driver etc.

 

[NemesisUK]

It's all argument that could be used to counter/discredit/muddy the accusations. 

 

[rayaans]

5 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

It's all argument that could be used to counter/discredit/muddy the accusations. 

 

Yes but would be put to bed almost immediately 

[NemesisUK]

The insurance statement that roundabout claims are 50/50 would suggest not?

[Linas.P]

24 minutes ago, NemesisUK said:

The insurance statement that roundabout claims are 50/50 would suggest not?

Insurance is fraud in itself, they will do anything not to pay out. There is some truth in the claim in case of poorly designed roundabouts without clear markings - drivers should follow common sense on these and as such the responsibility is 50/50. In OP case roundabout is clearly marked and other driver made invalid maneuver based on the markings - it is same like driving through the red light.. 100% responsibility.

[chr15gb]

Still nothing heard back from Insurance.

As promised, here is another picture showing the misalignment with the door. The gap between the door and wing is far greater than the other side (you can also see where the top of the wing is bent)

 

[dougie175]

Yeah the wing is all over the place, definitively justifies a new wing

[Linas.P]

What is your insurance provider? I must say I was using budget insurances (esure and bell), but even they are better than that..

[dougie175]

Just now, Linas.P said:

What is your insurance provider? I must say I was using budget insurances (esure and bell), but even they are better than that..

Esure, are you sure? Debatable hehe

[Linas.P]

That they are budget or that they are better than that? 

[dougie175]

Just now, Linas.P said:

That they are budget or that they are better than that? 

Oh they are defiantly budget I was meaning that they are better than that, esure actually leave the majority of the claim handing to the repairer so if it is dealt with well it because you luckily got a good repairer!

[Linas.P]

You probably know better, but at least in terms of communication or deciding on whose fault was the crash I have no negative comments about them. The guy ringed me next day and was 100% in agreement with me that it was totally third party fault and nothing wrong from me. Now obviously, I am not claiming from them as that wouldn't make much sense and situation would probably be different if that would be "no-fault" claim from my side.

[IS200D]

On 07/08/2017 at 10:27 PM, chr15gb said:

I have been kicking myself about not fitting it yet, I had one for years in my old 5 Series.
It is still sat in my garage, I just haven't worked out exactly how to fit or connect it up yet.

This is how it fitted in my BMW, nice and discreet, no suckers on the windscreen, cables routed to a usb in the glovebox.
I don't want a sucker on the screen but can't see any obvious way of fitting it without on this car.

I see,  would something like this do the job.... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mirror-GT550S-LS300W-Camera-Additional/dp/B00KM9A5F4/ref=sr_1_6?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1502465165&sr=1-6&keywords=rear+view+mirror+dash+cam+mount. 

 

[madasahatter]

To be honest mate i bought one of those they are rubbish. Mine is a 3m fixed plate converted to fit a dod 300 camera.

[Spacewagon52]

On 06/08/2017 at 0:15 PM, Monocle said:

 

Would it not make sense that insurance companies would benefit from sharing blame? Not just to reduce the burden of the payout, but also to remove the no claims bonus of both parties. I'd love to do the maths on that.

This seems to make sense. Knock for knock - both parties lose their excess and no claims bonus. I find reading this thread very depressing. It does make you wonder about owning a expensive car. After reading Dougie175's posts I will NEVER buy a CAT C or D car, that is for sure.

That airbag video was very sobering.

[dougie175]

1 minute ago, Spacewagon52 said:

This seems to make sense. Knock for knock - both parties lose their excess and no claims bonus. I find reading this thread very depressing. It does make you wonder about owning a expensive car. After reading Dougie175's posts I will NEVER buy a CAT C or D car, that is for sure.

That airbag video was very sobering.

Good, I'm glad it helped people realise the dangers of repairing/ incorrectly repairing cars!

I too would never personally by a Cat D car and I know how to repair them correctly! Unless it was written off for something completely none safety related such as damage to an expensive exhaust system that can easily be replaced with a cheaper alternative that is safe.

The airbag video completely changes the way you think about repairing cars!