ChatterBank1 min ago
Negligence and liability
Hi everyone.
Im doing some research on behalf of my Dad and would welcome people's opinion or assistance.
My Dad who has been a taxi driver for some 20 years has recently been involved in a car accident which resulted in his car being written off. Basically he was in the middle lane of 3, (the left being a bus lane until half way down), he waited for the bus lane to end and indicated left to move across in order to make a left turn. Moved across and was struck by a bus from behind before completing the manoeuvre. With the speed the bus came from behind if the manouvre was completed it could have potentially much more serious. My dad noticed in the rear view mirror that the bus driver was talking to a passenger who was stood at the front and therefore believes he was distracted and not paying attention.
He is going through the insurance process and the bus driver has 'claimed' that my dad did not indicate! This is a complete lie, he holds 11 years no claims, and is the most careful driver you would ever meet-given the responsibility of a school run for autistic children etc etc. And he absolutely 100% knows he indicated. Unfortunately there were no witnesses and the CCTV faces the wrong direction. Please could anyone offer advice as to the next steps. The bus company are not claiming responsibility even though the bus driver was negligent. Also the bus driver has not mentioned the witness that he had in the bus with him-which seems to us all a strong indication that he is lying. Our concern is that with it being a bus company I'm sure they have a panel of lawyers consistently dealing with these cases. At this point my Dad has a written off car and a rising rental car bill to pay-whilst suffering some whiplash! All he wants is the money for the car to be paid and costs covered for the hire car so we can move on. I would welcome any thoughts or advice in proving the bus company wrong or anyone who has had a similar experience.
Im doing some research on behalf of my Dad and would welcome people's opinion or assistance.
My Dad who has been a taxi driver for some 20 years has recently been involved in a car accident which resulted in his car being written off. Basically he was in the middle lane of 3, (the left being a bus lane until half way down), he waited for the bus lane to end and indicated left to move across in order to make a left turn. Moved across and was struck by a bus from behind before completing the manoeuvre. With the speed the bus came from behind if the manouvre was completed it could have potentially much more serious. My dad noticed in the rear view mirror that the bus driver was talking to a passenger who was stood at the front and therefore believes he was distracted and not paying attention.
He is going through the insurance process and the bus driver has 'claimed' that my dad did not indicate! This is a complete lie, he holds 11 years no claims, and is the most careful driver you would ever meet-given the responsibility of a school run for autistic children etc etc. And he absolutely 100% knows he indicated. Unfortunately there were no witnesses and the CCTV faces the wrong direction. Please could anyone offer advice as to the next steps. The bus company are not claiming responsibility even though the bus driver was negligent. Also the bus driver has not mentioned the witness that he had in the bus with him-which seems to us all a strong indication that he is lying. Our concern is that with it being a bus company I'm sure they have a panel of lawyers consistently dealing with these cases. At this point my Dad has a written off car and a rising rental car bill to pay-whilst suffering some whiplash! All he wants is the money for the car to be paid and costs covered for the hire car so we can move on. I would welcome any thoughts or advice in proving the bus company wrong or anyone who has had a similar experience.
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by CC-CC. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Car smashed into my right side in 3lane slow traffic. Told my ins he was negligent/dangerous driving as he was reading papers while driving. I won case!
We had no witnesses as t'was busy traffic. Maybe I won 'cause am older driver/female/no claims? No Court case (think he was scared of 'dangerous driving' claim).
Good luck - stick to your claim & include 'dangerous driving'!
We had no witnesses as t'was busy traffic. Maybe I won 'cause am older driver/female/no claims? No Court case (think he was scared of 'dangerous driving' claim).
Good luck - stick to your claim & include 'dangerous driving'!
I'm not a lawyer, but looking at the facts you have posted, it looks to me as if it is going to be the word of one person against another. It will look like the bus was in its correct lane and your Dad cut across (from lane 3 to lane 1 looks a bit drastic!) into his lane and gave him no chance. Without any witnesses, it will be very hard for Dad to prove otherwise, even if that is not what happened. The Bus driver is certainly not going to admit fault - it affects his job. The chances of finding the passenger, are pretty remote too, and there is no guarantee that they will support your Dad's version.
The character your dad displays will probably be acknowledged if it came to court but they will say anybody can make a mistake........
I think he has an uphill battle with this one! I have experience of being in a situation where somebody ran into the back of me and claimed I cut in on them - I didn't, but with no witnesses the court can make its own mind up on the balance of probabilities, even if they get it wrong, from your point of view!
The character your dad displays will probably be acknowledged if it came to court but they will say anybody can make a mistake........
I think he has an uphill battle with this one! I have experience of being in a situation where somebody ran into the back of me and claimed I cut in on them - I didn't, but with no witnesses the court can make its own mind up on the balance of probabilities, even if they get it wrong, from your point of view!
You may think this a silly statement, 1st was the near side light cluster damaged totally? If so, it is possible but costly to prove that the Indicator was flashing when the bus hit your dad, How, Forensic evidence!! (No I have not been watching too many USA police movies) 2ND, If the bus hit him there will be tyre imprints on the road surface that should indicate the position of your Dads car on impact.
-- answer removed --
The big issue here is that your father saw the bus, but continued to pull into it's path. The onus is on your father to ensure that the way was clear before he moved across.
Whether the bus driver was on the phone, speaking to a passenger, or reading a paper, your father saw the bus approaching in the correct lane and chose to make the manouver.
Indication will play little to no part in any liability argument. The facts of the matter would be that the bus was established and proceeding correctly when your father pulled across his path. Indication doesn't allow you to pull out/cut someone up, it's simply that - an indication that you will be changing position on the road WHEN IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
Equally, you can not use speed as an argument for negligence. If you can argue that the other person was speeding, then the counter argument is that you must have therefore observed them speeding and pulled out regardless. I'm fairly certain that when driving your actions should not cause another driver to have to slow down or stop suddenly.
From an insurers point of view, this would be 100% your father's fault.
Whether the bus driver was on the phone, speaking to a passenger, or reading a paper, your father saw the bus approaching in the correct lane and chose to make the manouver.
Indication will play little to no part in any liability argument. The facts of the matter would be that the bus was established and proceeding correctly when your father pulled across his path. Indication doesn't allow you to pull out/cut someone up, it's simply that - an indication that you will be changing position on the road WHEN IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
Equally, you can not use speed as an argument for negligence. If you can argue that the other person was speeding, then the counter argument is that you must have therefore observed them speeding and pulled out regardless. I'm fairly certain that when driving your actions should not cause another driver to have to slow down or stop suddenly.
From an insurers point of view, this would be 100% your father's fault.
from the account you have given it is yur dad's fault as he pulled in in front of a bus, whch must have been close by (even if it was speeding, it couldnt have been that far away when he pulled over)
you need to leave it in the hands of your insurers. if all he wants is the car repaired +hire car costs, dosen't his insurance cover him for this?
you need to leave it in the hands of your insurers. if all he wants is the car repaired +hire car costs, dosen't his insurance cover him for this?
Thanks for all above comments.
In relation driving safety this comment is borne out of the fact that he has had a clean license for 10 years and a no-claims bonus for 11, so although Im obviously going to be defensive, it is justified.
With regard to pulling across, it was to make a left turn, on this road you cannot be in the left lane until just prior to the turning. So the only option you have is to stay in the middle lane, indicate then move across after the bus lane has finished. In the incident the bus was a very significant distance behind the car, far safe enough to indicate and make the turning if all road users were diligent but because the bus driver wasnt paying attention the incident occurred. The problem as people have stated that it is going to be one version against another and difficult to prove.
Insurance company probably would have paid for it but because a solicitor is involved the insurance company is not. We were informed that it was a straight forward legal case, and not to lose the built up no claims let the soliticitor sort it out . Although this now seems extremely naive, we trusted legal advice. And I've got no doubt that the insurance would not want to get involved at this stage (or at least pay for the hire car and damage anyway).
The major problem now is that if the bus company do not accept liability (which I obviously doubt they will) and the case is lost through the initially very confident soliticitor - which is a very distinct possibility! Then that is one very large car hire bill, alongside legal fees etc.
Once again thanks for all comments, nice to have external perspective, even if it paints a negative picture!
In relation driving safety this comment is borne out of the fact that he has had a clean license for 10 years and a no-claims bonus for 11, so although Im obviously going to be defensive, it is justified.
With regard to pulling across, it was to make a left turn, on this road you cannot be in the left lane until just prior to the turning. So the only option you have is to stay in the middle lane, indicate then move across after the bus lane has finished. In the incident the bus was a very significant distance behind the car, far safe enough to indicate and make the turning if all road users were diligent but because the bus driver wasnt paying attention the incident occurred. The problem as people have stated that it is going to be one version against another and difficult to prove.
Insurance company probably would have paid for it but because a solicitor is involved the insurance company is not. We were informed that it was a straight forward legal case, and not to lose the built up no claims let the soliticitor sort it out . Although this now seems extremely naive, we trusted legal advice. And I've got no doubt that the insurance would not want to get involved at this stage (or at least pay for the hire car and damage anyway).
The major problem now is that if the bus company do not accept liability (which I obviously doubt they will) and the case is lost through the initially very confident soliticitor - which is a very distinct possibility! Then that is one very large car hire bill, alongside legal fees etc.
Once again thanks for all comments, nice to have external perspective, even if it paints a negative picture!
you say the bus was a significant distance behind...the fact that your father was unable to finish his manouvre means it simply wasnt...it takes seconds to change lanes....the fact that the bus hit your father before hed even got fully into the lane says your father is wrong ...the bus would have had to have been going ridiculously fast to have caught up that fast.
also, the claim that the driver was talking to someone also says that for your father to be able to tell that in the rear view mirror the bus must have been pretty near
and as has been stated ...indicating is just a notice of intent - not permission to just move accross an expect others to stop for you
also i think buses have cameras so it will be possible to see the driver an maybe even the accident from inside the bus...
also, the claim that the driver was talking to someone also says that for your father to be able to tell that in the rear view mirror the bus must have been pretty near
and as has been stated ...indicating is just a notice of intent - not permission to just move accross an expect others to stop for you
also i think buses have cameras so it will be possible to see the driver an maybe even the accident from inside the bus...
1 to 11 of 11
