Contesting finding of fault in a collision report

[3800Series]

Car "B" entered car "A"'s lane. Where the accident happened.

Car "B" is at fault since they merged in/threw car "A"'s lane and failed to yield.

People in their lane have right away and ultimately its the job of cars entering/going threw another lane to yield.

 

[y_p_w]

Right now I'm just hoping that our insurance sees how bogus this finding is and will fight on her behalf because they don't want to pay for the damage to the other vehicle.

 

[Inspecktor]

Be carefull- last winter the wife lent her car to her boss, who had a minor accident. No damage observed on either car, speed less than 5 mph, front bumper to rear bumper contact. Neither driver saw need to call police, so no report was filed. Two months later, our insurance company called to say other driver got a lawyer and filed a law suit for recovery of money for injuries, pain and suffering, ect. The investigator for our company got pictures of our car (no damage, not even a scuff in the paint), and said she would not pay, but we have not heard the final result yet.

 

[barkingspider]

If she has collision coverage, file a claim with her own insurance co and they will subrogate against the other driver. If she does not have collision coverage then she will most likely have to take the other driver to small claims court (<$10k) and please her case to the judge. The other driver's carrier will believe what he says and not what Ur wife says.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Right now I'm just hoping that our insurance sees how bogus this finding is and will fight on her behalf because they don't want to pay for the damage to the other vehicle.


Years ago I was in a similar situation where car B had the stop sign, but blew right through it, across the road and into my path. I hit his left rear door/fender area and did a ton of damage to my car. Guy even admitted to missing the stop sign to the police. His insurer deemed I was ~50% at fault because I should have been able to see him and had time to stop.

My insurance decided to subrogate and pay half, rather than pursue further.

 

[doitmyself]

Was your wife issued a ticket for "being at fault?"

You should at least talk to a lawyer. Here, they will do a free consultation and give you some ideas how to pursue this. There may be options you are not even aware of.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Was your wife issued a ticket for "being at fault?"

You should at least talk to a lawyer. Here, they will do a free consultation and give you some ideas how to pursue this. There may be options you are not even aware of.

I've actually been in collisions where there's clear fault, and no citations were issued. That's actually a check box on most standard collision reporting forms.

Frankly at the time it sound like a clearcut case of failure to yield. I noted VC 21802(a). It just seemed like there was no way given the other guy was making a turn from a stop sign and my wife was going straight without a stop sign. Heck - once I was on my bike and someone failed to yield getting out of a driveway. I ended up swerving way left almost to the median because I didn't think I could manage to stop without sliding out. That collision report placed the fault strictly on the driver for failure to yield. I've seen these cases quite often, and I've never heard of one where someone coming from a position where failure to yield is typically determined was exonerated because someone else might have chosen to stop. It shouldn't be any more clear than a failure to yield from a stop sign.

 

[BISCUT]

I would check the statues. I can only speak for NY as that is where I am LE. In order for any sworn police officer to cite a "violation" with exception of certain hit and run cases, the officer must have, and this is a key term, DIRECT KNOWLEDGE meaning he/she SAW the infraction. If a certified accident re-constructionist were to conduct a full investigation, then the science behind it will save u or screw u.

I'd find out what your law requires for the at fault determination to be made and go from there.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: BISCUT
I would check the statues. I can only speak for NY as that is where I am LE. In order for any sworn police officer to cite a "violation" with exception of certain hit and run cases, the officer must have, and this is a key term, DIRECT KNOWLEDGE meaning he/she SAW the infraction. If a certified accident re-constructionist were to conduct a full investigation, then the science behind it will save u or screw u.

I'd find out what your law requires for the at fault determination to be made and go from there.

Yeah - I get that they can make an educated determination that goes into the report, but that a citation must be witnessed by the officer.

The one case I was talking about was where I frankly failed to yield and made a left turn head-on into another vehicle. I was going slowly and the other driver braked, so it wasn't that bad and both vehicles were easily drivable. However, part of my distraction was that this was a short segment, left turns were legal, but there was heavy oncoming traffic from behind. Another thing was I noticed the cop on the side, who witnessed the whole thing. He was actually rather polite and calmed me down by saying it was a tricky intersection to make a left. So he saw the whole thing go down and didn't cite me. I think it was an issue with the city, since in a couple of months I noticed that there was a new left turn only lane painted at that intersection so that a driver could wait instead of feeling pressured to make the turn. If that were there, I don't think I would have been in the collision because I would have just stopped first, then look.

 

[Spazdog]

That's exactly what happened in my '85 Mustang vs Dodge Diplomat accident.

Some "investigator" came out, measured my car's skidmarks (about 15 feet - that's all the reaction time I had), referred to a worn pamphlet, and determined that I was going 60 in a 40. My speed led to him not being able to see me.

Junk science. I'm certain that pamphlet didn't account for the friction of the road surface, condition and inflation of tires, effectiveness of the brake system, brake bias, vehicle load....etc... not to mention that if I hit a RWD Diplomat at 60 in a Fox body, neither one of us are driving away. His car's K member would have been ripped off it's rubber mounts and my engine would be in my lap.

My hood was bent, two headlights on the passenger side broken, plastic bumper skin was mangled, and I had a small coolant leak. Did not get towed.

Turns out, the old duffer had macular degeneration. I literally did "appear out of nowhere" to him. I would have at 10 mph too.

 

[tomcat27]

if you get no other recourse, file a claim in small claims court. the cost is minimal. simply stick to the facts.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Go there and take a picture of the intersection from both sides. Or, give us the address and we can see it on google.

I know this intersection well. I'm not too keen on putting it out here, but I'll send you a PM.


Thanks for the PM with the google maps/images. Looks like your wife had the right of way, but the main roads was zigzagging just before the intersection and there was a speed limit of 15 MPH!!!

If one was really doing 15 MPH, the accident would be easily avoided by gentle braking. My take is both drivers were at fault here.

Sorry, but this is my honest opinion.

 

[Doog]

Your wife is not at fault...the guy at the stop sign entered a main thoroughfare and is required to yield to the existing traffic. The other guy knows the cop or someone at the department.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: Doog
...the guy at the stop sign entered a main thoroughfare and is required to yield to the existing traffic. The other guy knows the cop or someone at the department.


If you looked at the intersection, your would notice that the person entering intersection had poor visibility and would only see like 50 feet of the main road because there were series of turns before that. Bad intersection design, probably due to the coastal terrain. Both drivers should have paid attention to avoid that IMHO.

 

[y_p_w]

Finally got home and got a look at the report. I'm actually a bit insulted by it. My wife didn't grow up in this country and the report claims there was a language barrier and she spoke "very broken English". It doesn't mention that the officer conducted his interview with the other driver in Spanish.

I'm getting more of the details - apparently a dump truck which the officer seems to give a lot of deference to because of its size. My wife said it was a commercial vehicle. The other driver said that he cleared both directions before proceeding and was already in the intersection when he saw my wife's car. The reporting officer cites failure to yield to a vehicle in the intersection along with unsafe speed. He also claims inattention or distraction, although I can't see any way he determined that from any physical evidence or witness statements.

I'm not sure how anyone could fight this. I've been this way many times before, and it is a little tricky because of a blind bend, but drivers coming from the stop sign are typically very cautious. At this point I'm mostly upset because the report makes a big deal about her inability to speak English (although she has an MBA from a major American business school) but says nothing about the other driver's lack of English.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Go there and take a picture of the intersection from both sides. Or, give us the address and we can see it on google.

I know this intersection well. I'm not too keen on putting it out here, but I'll send you a PM.


Thanks for the PM with the google maps/images. Looks like your wife had the right of way, but the main roads was zigzagging just before the intersection and there was a speed limit of 15 MPH!!!

If one was really doing 15 MPH, the accident would be easily avoided by gentle braking. My take is both drivers were at fault here.

Sorry, but this is my honest opinion.

My wife claims that she braked. The report claims there were no skid marks. I don't find those two things to be mutually exclusive.

Also - it's 15 MPH through the turn, but that's only through the turn. Once there's visibility past the turn it should revert to the regular speed limit (25 around here).

I do understand that maybe she's somewhat culpable, but it assigns the other driver absolutely no fault and that just seems wrong since he was the one coming from a stop sign. I suspect he might have rolled through the stop sign with such a big vehicle.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You say a dump truck...are we talking a pickup chassis with a dump body or a tri-axle Peterbilt here?

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Also - it's 15 MPH through the turn, but that's only through the turn. Once there's visibility past the turn it should revert to the regular speed limit (25 around here).

If that 15 mph is just a warning speed through the turn, then it carries zero weight for enforcement. (unless California is unique in this regard, but I'm betting they're not)

I'd be fighting this, no question.

 

[rjundi]

Insurance companies default the actual fault the other party to see if it gets settled. Keep pressing, sorry about lack of insurance but it helps in situations like this to motivate your insurance to fight on your behalf.

Any damages to the other vehicle?

One tip. I have a 8 year old digital camera(batteries attached) in my stoarge bin for these occasions(none thus far).

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
You say a dump truck...are we talking a pickup chassis with a dump body or a tri-axle Peterbilt here?

It doesn't say on the report, but names the brand. These are fairly narrow streets, so nobody is likely getting a heavy duty truck chassis through without hitting parked cars. I think it was a medium duty two-axle from my wife's description. Maybe on a chassis that you'd find on smaller moving vehicles or larger tow trucks.