Left-turn Accident, advice please?

[FireCat]

Sorry sqrage
But you can't be sure Right? Look what's happened to JerseyFoo
and I know alot of accident that Involves unsafe left turn.

Just Look twice for another vehicles and pedestrians before turning. Thats is all

 

[Sajin]

kind of hard to look twice at something you cant see because of lack of lighting .
Solution: the American government gives every driver a pair of night vision goggles and everyone is required to use infrared headlights

 

[DDRtists]

First thing, if the dude didn't have his lights on, it is entirely his fault

Yes, but unless you can get the video, there is no way to prove if they were on or off.

second thing, you car wouldn't have been totaled in an accident where the colliding car was only going 25 miles an hour

I disagree, there are many many things that, when done to a car/bike/vehicle, instantly total it. With my insurance company at least, if there is even 1 scratch on the frame, the car/bike is instantly totaled. It could have hit it just right.

The thing that "totals" a car is the cost to repair. So if you have a rare car or something thats hard to find parts for and you wreck badly, they may total it because the cost to repair it is too much as compared to the cost of a new vehicle...

third thing, if his story is "true" which is most likely false according to the video, then why was he looking down? Most likely if he was younger, he was texting, which in my part of PA, is illegal

Once again, prove it. Unless you have a video, or more proof than "he was looking down", that will never never never hold up in court.

So if you can't get the video, plead that there is no way that the accident would've resulted in that much damage is the man had been going the speed limit

This would be the best bet if you didn't get the video.

 

[JerseyFoo]

Hello everyone, thank you for your input. I just saw the footage, and although it is bad quality, it does show the man who crashed into me was not visible at all prior. This was strange though, as the light beams from the car behind him kept going as if nothing was there. There were 2 oncoming lanes, but still, you cannot see his car in the image at all until he had his brake lights on colliding with me and thats bothersome.

The car behind him kept going, passing us on the left.

Phantom Fireworks is being very helpful and will provide me with copies monday.

get an attorney to get the video for you my advice, otherwise it might be dismissed as inadmissible evidence

What could I do to make the evidence inadmissible?

 

[Rapmaster]

Even if you have the video, what's next? Did the officer actually give you a ticket for something? Are you actually being sued or is this just for your and his insurance company to figure out?

 

[JerseyFoo]

I met with one of the police officers who were at the scene, he told me an investigation will be done.

 

[sqrage]

>>What could I do to make the evidence inadmissible?


From what I read in that previous post, getting the copies of the footage yourself will make the evidence be inadmissible. Leave it to an attorney to get the evidence so he can do it with proper procedure... you don't want to lose your only evidence because of a small mishap.

 

[JerseyFoo]

Will the police be able to pick up the evidence legally? Considering I'm not seriously injured, and both cars were low-value, I doubt an attorney would be interested.

I did call 3, they were out-of-town.

 

[Sajin]

Ask the judge to give you a lawyer, Or ask the secratary at the court house to leave him a note or something because I think talking to the judge outside of a hearing isn't allowed (i think anyhow)

 

[Dave312]

Will the police be able to pick up the evidence legally?

Certainly yes

How the system generally works in Australia is that police will investigate the crash, and provide a report to the insurance companies. The insurance companies will then debate about who is at fault and settle it that way. If both insurance companies cannot agree, then it will go to court. I assume it would work in a similar manner in the US. As such, it is really up the police to investigate whether the guy had his lights off, so you need to make sure they are aware that you are claiming this. They should also be able to prove how fast he is travelling from the tape as well.

On a side note, here in Australia if you are making a right turn across oncoming traffic at an intersection (left turn for those that drive on the right), and the oncoming car runs a red light and hits you just as you were turning, both parties are considered liable. The reason for this is because even though the other guy broke the law, you failed to give way when required to do so. This rule may not apply in the US, but it is probably something you should check out.

With any luck, the other guy should be charged with unsafe driving and deemed liable for the crash.

 

[esb]

How were the weather conditions btw? Was the road wet? That could also affect the impact/braking. But I doubt it was wet/foggy.

Also, there seem to be camera on the street lights. Maybe they only take pictures/video for giving tickets, or maybe they run video all the time.

 

[JerseyFoo]

The weather was clear, dry. It snowed the next morning.

Are you referring to the 'camera's on the traffic light itself? I asked the police officer about those and he told me they're an optical device used in emergency situations.

 

[esb]

It seems though that both parties were at fault (you and the other driver). Technically I think that you're only supposed to make a left if the oncoming traffic is clear. Obviously it wasn't. However, you thought it was clear because you couldn't see the car since its lights were off.

This might help. Maybe you've already read them.

51% Proportional Comparative Fault: The eligibility cutoff is 51% fault. If both parties share blame equally, both are eligible for damages.

* 51% rule states: New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Montana, Wyoming, Nevada, Oregon, Texas and Hawaii.

Source http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/car-accident-liability-who-is-at-fault

Proportional Comparative Fault at 51%

The states that have adopted proportional comparative fault bar recovery if you are more than 51% at fault for the accident. In other words, you cannot file a liability claim and lawsuit against the other driver’s negligence if you were more than 51% at fault. For example, Dennis hit Teri’s car while driving in excess of 25 miles per hour over the speed limit while Teri was attempting to cross the road. Even though Teri was partially at fault for not waiting until the road was completely clear before crossing, the insurance company allocated fault to Dennis at 60% due to his excessive speed. Even though Dennis suffered a broken arm from the accident, he is not entitled to recover for his injury due to the fact that he was more than 51% at fault for the accident.
States: Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

Source: http://accident-law.freeadvice.com/auto/car-accident-claim-fault.htm

(In California everyone usually waits til the green turns yellow to make a left turn )

 

[JerseyFoo]

In my opinion driving with lights off AND not paying attention is purely reckless, but the way this is going I'd be happy with 50% liability.

 

[esb]

Maybe based on the impact and video, the judge can determine if the other vehicle was speeding or not. Hire an attorney or a professional to help you out. Don't want to jeopardize that video's legibility.

By the way, have you contacted the other driver to maybe settle an agreement?

 

[JerseyFoo]

No, I haven't. I figured it would be best not to speak to him. His insurance did call the next day for a statement although.

 

[esb]

What has your insurance company said/done?

 

[JerseyFoo]

Nothing that I'm aware of.

I visited the gas station/minimart the other driver said he had just left before the accident and reviewed the footage with the manager. A jeep wrangler matching his vehicle (plates are unclear), does leave 5-6 minutes prior to the accident, with his lights off. The only jeep wrangler there, and the only car to leave with their lights off. However unfortunately I cannot find the man in the footage, and 5-6 minutes is too much time to travel a block.

It is very strange though, we should've been able to see his jeep in the video if that wasn't him. I suspect he left the bar across the street, but it's only a suspicion.

 

[sqrage]

Maybe there is some sort of time discrepancy between your personal time of the accident's occurance and the clock that the gas station was set to.

 

[JerseyFoo]

Ah that could be true. I should clarify, it's not personal time, I am going by the time the accident occurred on the other video. In fact, the clock in my car had a memory issue.

Likelihood of a security camera having the wrong time?