|
Я вот такой вариант объяснений приготовил, просьба покритиковать.
On Thursday, 11th of December 2008, at approximately 5:30 pm I’ve been travelling on my motorcycle to George White motorcycle shop. I've exited roundabout after a car, and followed this car up the *** Road. This road becomes increasingly wide (very shorly turning into marked 2-lane road with directions for traffic going forward to be positioned in right-hand lane), and by the bus stop its wide enough for 2 cars, and clearly wide enough for car and motorcycle. Speed limit on this road is 30 mph, and my speed was approximately 28-29 mph. Speed of car was a bit less (I would say, approximately 20-25 mph), and he moved to the left side of this road. There are no overtaking restrictions on this road, and the border of the centre of the road is broken line. As I knew there is a left turn ahead and vehicles that turn left slow down and move to the left, speed of the car was significantly slow, the road ahead was clear without any obstructions on the left side of the road, and there are no side streets on the right, where car may be turning, and he didn't indicate, I felt perfectly safe and legal to proceed on the right side of my side of the road. I haven't crossed central line and I haven't entered marked area in the middle of the road.
When I was almost on level with car, slightly behind it, car suddenly started unexpected right-turn/u-turn (I couldn't say definitely, but I presume this to be a u-turn as there are no side streets). Car driver only started indicating as he started his manoeuvre, leaving me no time to react, effectively from the time car started movement and indicating to the collision itself it was less than a second. When I've seen movement of car, I understood that collision is unavoidable and on reflexes tried to steer to the right, to make collision less frontal, and in the last hope that driver will look in his mirrors/window, notice me and stop, in which case accident could've been avoided. Another reason for me trying to move right is because his car has higher rear side and lower front side, in case I'm thrown from the bike, I would just flew over front side of his car, rather than hit rear side of his car with my head, in which case accident could've been fatal. Moreover, if he would only move to the right side of left part of the road, and not cross the road, I would've avoided his car. In fact, I believe my reflex actions in this situation helped me to avoid serious injuries and possibly saved my life, so I'm sure I couldn't have done more.
Next the collision occurred. I hit the car on its right side, just in front of the passenger door. As I managed to flatten trajectory, my bike was subsequently thrown on its side (left side). I managed to get from under my bike, and car driver also exited his car. I now know car driver to be Mr. Ian Rumbold. The first words he said "Are you OK mate? Sorry I didn't see you, it’s my fault." Then the person from bus stop, or the car in front (I'm not sure, I was shocked) came to me and offered me to go the pavement, as we were standing in the middle of the road. I now know this person to be Mr. Tim Sparrow, and I have his contact details. Tim made sure I'm OK and offered to take some photographs of the scene, which he did. He then left me his contact details, and helped me to move bike to the pavement where it was safe. Car driver phoned the police, whom, as he said, refused to attend, because road is not blocked. At this point I said to Mr. Rumbold, that I don’t question he was indicating, but he only began indicating after he started the manoeuvre and was positioned in the wrong place for this manoeuvre, and I was unaware of his manoeuvre until he started it, and he didn’t left me time to react (that is to confirm its not afterthought, I said it straight after accident because that’s what happened), to which he replied nothing. This conversation may’ve been heard by witnesses. Mr. Sparrow then left, me and car driver exchanged our details (he failed to mention that its corporate car), and when my colleague whom I called for assistance arrived, Mr. Rumbold left. Before Mr. Rumbold left, I pointed out to him that I don’t advise him to drive this car before he does safety check on it, as collision was near his front wheel and steering might be damaged. Mr. Rumbold ignored my comment and decided to drive home on potentially unsafe car. I and my colleague pushed the bike to car park, where it’s safe, and then my colleague gave me a lift home. I was completely shocked and was only in position to phone police to ask whether I need to report accident, to which they said no.
Early next morning I received phone call from Mr. Rumbold, who asked me for my insurance details, because his boss wants them. I gave my details and asked for his, but he said he doesn’t know and promised that his boss will call me back, which he didn't. Effectively, he refused to give his insurance details. He also asked me, whether I'm going to take responsibility for accident, to which I said, I'm not, because it was his fault. He started to argue with me, but I replied "I'm not going sit here and argue with you, it was clearly your fault, and I will let my insurance sort it out. Bye". I have witnesses of this phone conversation.
Then I phoned Equity Red Star, reported the accident (it was about 9:40 in the morning), then phoned theAA, again reported it, and then explained what happened to theAA Bike Legal Defence team. After inspection of the bike, I can initially conclude that left mirror is damaged, left fairing has scratches and dashboard has a crack, clutch lever is scratched, left bar end is damaged, top box on the left side is scratched, left crash bobbin is significantly damaged, the bolt which holds crash bobbin is damaged and bended (it also holds engine in the frame), and preliminary I can see that the fork is damaged as well. On the basis of my findings I can conclude, that bike is not safe to ride at the moment, and I'm waiting for your further instructions. I have also examined my helmet to determine if it came into contact with road, and I can conclude because of the scratch of the left side, that it did. Therefore, its not safe to use this helmet anymore.
I believe that this accident is 100% car driver fault for the following reasons:
The Highway Code rule 179 states that:
"Well before you turn right you should
-use your mirrors to make sure you know the position and movement of traffic behind you
-give a right-turn signal
-take up a position just left of the middle of the road or in the space marked for traffic turning right
-leave room for other vehicles to pass on the left, if possible"
Car driver hasn't followed any single point of this rule. His car was on the left side of the road in significant distance from its centre, he haven't used his mirrors, he didn't indicate until after he started his manoeuvre, and he haven't left space on his left for passing traffic, although it was perfectly possible. If he would've followed at least one of them, accident would've been avoided.
The Highway Code rule 180 states that:
"Check your mirrors and blind spot again to make sure you are not being overtaken, then make the turn."
Again, if car driver would've followed at least this rule, accident wouldn't happen.
The Highway Code rule 161 states that:
"Mirrors. All mirrors should be used effectively throughout your journey. You should
-use your mirrors frequently so that you always know what is behind and to each side of you
-use them in good time before you signal or change direction or speed
-be aware that mirrors do not cover all areas and there will be blind spots. You will need to look round and check
Remember: Mirrors - Signal - Manoeuvre"
Again, if car driver would've followed this rule, accident wouldn't happen.
It is an offence against s.3 of Road Traffic Act 1988 (as amended) to drive "without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place". I believe that car driver could've committed this offence. The reason for my belief is that in this case the reason why driver didn't see my motorcycle was one of "didn't look at the mirrors", and not "looked, but failed to see". The reason for this belief is that my motorcycle had its headlight on low beam, it’s technically impossible to switch off headlight on my motorcycle. My motorcycle is equipped with Philips Motovision bulbs that have been specifically designed to make motorcycle more noticeable on the road, they are road legal and approved for use within EU, my motorcycle passed MOT test with these bulbs. My bike jacket is white-silver-black colour and is well noticeable, so as my helmet, which is silver. Any driver would've noticed my bike if he would've looked in the mirrors, so I have certain belief that car driver didn't look at the mirrors at all, which would've been expected from competent driver. I'm prepared to press charges against car driver for this offence, if you consider this necessary.
At the same time, my manoeuvre was perfectly legal and safe.
If this road is considered to be a one-lane road, I was performing overtake, although without changing directing I'm travelling in and not crossing central line. The general rule about overtaking that I must make sure there is no danger before I begin to overtake.
The road ahead was perfectly clear. There were no side streets where car could've turned to. There were no obstructions on his part of the road in front of him. He was not indicating in either way. That’s why I felt it’s safe to perform an overtake. I only became aware of the danger when his car began his manoeuvre, and started signalling, at which point collision was unavoidable from my side (although it was still avoidable, if he would notice me). If he would've signalled earlier, I wouldn't perform an overtake as it would be unsafe to do so. And, generally, you wouldn't expect someone to do right-turn/u-turn on this kind of road (which is busy road) without signalling. If competent driver would be asked question "will you expect this car to make a u-turn in this circumstances", most likely answer will be "of course no!".
Lord Hughes in similar case of Davis v Schrogin said that "Everything depends in those cases and depends in this case on the point at which the overtaking driver was alerted or should have been alerted to the fact that there was any danger ahead". This clearly was a ratio of the case, and not obiter. From the circumstances I've described, I can conclude that I only became aware of danger when car started its manoeuvre and indicating. I wasn't aware, and couldn't have been aware of danger at any earlier stages because of the reasons above.
From the point I became aware of danger, to the collision itself, it was less than a second, so I couldn't have avoided the collision. In the similar circumstances of Davis v Schrogin case it lead to 100% blame of the car driver.
I have to specifically point out that I don't question that indicator on the car was enabled at the moment of collision. However, I'm sure that he turned on indicator at the same time he started the manoeuvre, therefore it didn't help at all in informing me about the danger ahead or about his intentions. If he would've turned it on earlier, I would slow down and let him go, so the accident would've been avoided. Also, the diagonal-marked area on my right allowed me some reserve space if car needed suddenly move to the right part of the road to avoid danger in front of him, or needed to do emergency stop, so I followed the Highway Code rule 126 re safe distance.
On the basis of the above, I can conclude that I expect 100:0 compensation for this accident in my favour, and I will not be satisfied with any different outcome and will press this case to go to court. Mr. Rumbold clearly breached a duty of care he owned me, and it lead to the damage happened.
I will provide you with the photographs of the scene of accident, once I receive them from Mr. Sparrow.
Thank you very much, and please keep me informed.
Best regards,
_________________
"Юрист, который сам меняет тормозные колодки на мотоцикле это... это страшно!" © NEO
|
Вход
FAQ
Поиск
.
