| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I think The onus will be on the person coming out of the junction to ensure its safe to pull out, by their presence the other vehicle has swerved and crashed.
Bt look at the speed the other car was doing ....... Nowhere near the 30 speed limitOriginally Posted by GL1Blue
Whoever is driving the Audi is to blame, arseholes the lot of them, they all think they own the road.
I won't embarrass the writer of the below comment but it really is stupid.
"Whoever is driving the Audi is to blame, arseholes the lot of them, they all think they own the road."
Categorising drivers by the make of a car is an idiotic statement. The other day I was cut up by a Kia driver but I wouldn't say all Kia drivers are idiots.
What audi, that's a Ford focus and a BMW 1 series
NO SHIT
Was it Mrs Steve R’s hubby in the Focus ????
That road is actually a 20 mph nowadays. But I'm sure the insurance company will say that irrespective of speed the car that pulled out of the junction will be the one that pays
Both at fault, I would have thought, the speeding car that hit the post insurance company will claim half the cost from the other insurance company I would have thought?
Since a cyclist was deemed at fault for hitting a woman who was looking at her phone when she walked out onto the road, he should have been aware said the judge, I would have thought the fault lies with the person whose car hit the lamp post.
Difficult to prove how fast the car was going.
Easy to prove the other one pulled out in front of it
I thought cyclists owned the roads😁
Most Audi tossers wear Lycra and got a Ł3K bike in the garage, so I see where you’re coming from
I think that you might be over generalising a bit here. Lots of our fans and players must be tossers then, because there are hundreds of them in the car park on match days. Could it not just be that they are well built, reliable cars ?Presumably you think all VW owners are of a similar disposition, since VW own Audi.
Most Audi tossers wear Lycra and got a Ł3K bike in the garage, so I see where you’re coming from
Methinks, people should lighten up a tage
God help your sense (or lack of), humour when Boris takes over
In cases when one car is speeding (which is 10% of the given speed limit), then they would be at fault.
The reason is because the driver pulling out of the junction would have their made their decision based on the speed limit of the other car.
I think this may be right although I don't drive and have no idea how this kind of thing works. I've got a long story here which isn't very interesting so I wouldn't bother reading it, it's a bit vague too because it happened 25 years ago but basically I saw a very similar incident to this in Grangetown on the evening of the 1994 World Cup Final.
A car driven by an old man pulled out at a junction and caused a young woman to swerve her car, she had to brake hard which spun the car and then, somehow, she accelerated out of the spin and hit a wall. She may have hit a parked car too, I can't remember. She was screaming hysterically and all the locals came out to look but me and my lad just walked off and I thought nothing more of it really.
Until a few months later that is, when I saw a card in the local newsagents asking if anyone had seen a crash on July 17th. I realised it was the incident I'd seen and rang the number given. Within minutes a young guy was knocking on my door and telling me the story. It was his girlfriend driving the car that crashed but the problem was the car that pulled out was driven by a vicar and he, and the other respectable citizens in his car, were claiming that she'd caused the crash because she was speeding. As I understood it, his version of events was being accepted as the truth and it looked like the girl was going to be held responsible which would cost her thousands of pounds that she didn't have.
I said there was no way she was speeding, my lad was only 5 at the time and I was very conscious of that kind of thing around there, and that the crash was caused entirely by the old guy pulling out into her path. I said I'd be more than happy to write a statement to that effect which I did there and then. The guy was buzzing. He was a City fan and he was making some half-hearted attempts at small talk but he couldn't even sit down. He was just pacing around while I wrote my statement out.
Again, I thought little of it for a couple of months until there was a knock on my door one evening. I opened it and the young couple were standing there with a box of chocolates for my family. Apparently, as soon as my statement went in the vicar withdrew his version of events and admitted responsibility. The pair of them were so grateful, it was a nice moment to be honest. I kind of wish I'd said 'I've just saved you thousands of pounds and all I get is a box of f**king chocolates?' but sometimes you don't think of these things till it's too late.
I take two things from that story:
1. So much for a Christian conscious.
2. in 1994, some people struggled to scrape the money together for the price of a meal let alone buy a box of chocolates.
Shirley a box of chocolates would constitute a meal?
Maybe it was spurred on by “Life is like a box of chocolates”, it was released in 1994, so maybe there is a deeper meaning to all thisShirley a box of chocolates would constitute a meal?
But unless you can prove the other car was speeding then its no chance
Tyre marks and the amount of damage gives a clear indication of speed/velocity.
Who will go and take those measurements regarding velocity and tyre marks?
A “velocity and tyre mark measurer”, I should imagine
The police - considering this could have involved pedestrians being hit, along with at least thousands of damage to the street light, they'll presumably have attended?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote