M
If you were travelling at that speed in icy conditions then a charge of careless driving is probably sustainable.... i was driving along, 50 mph, i slipped on the road due to ice and hit the brakes ...
That sounds like sensible driving / avoiding action taking the icy conditions into consideration and the fact that your car at that stage by your own admission was out of control.... my car turned a little to the side , a car that was travelling behind me instead of braking behind me tried to go around me ...
That sounds like sensible driving / avoiding action taking the icy conditions into consideration and the fact that your car at that stage by your own admission was out of control.
Is there any chance that the vehicle behind you went out of control on the ice, struck you from behind, knocked you across the road, then rammed you in the side and turned you over?
If you were travelling at that speed in icy conditions then a charge of careless driving is probably sustainable.
If you braked from that speed in icy conditions then a charge of careless driving is probably sustainable.
.
If revenge is something you are after then I'm surprised this thread was allowed develop at all.now i want to get her back and sue her.
both cars were written off, and as my sisters car was stopped then the driver behind must have been going at quite a speed.
So in other words, you posted a made-up story here looking for help on an incident you were not involved in and did not witness.guys in all fairness. to be honest it was my sister that was in the crash - not me. i just said me to make it easier. 50mph was probably an exageration as its an extremely busy road and she is a very safe driver. the other girl involved was 18 yrs old so i really dont think that she swerved out to avoid her, when the most natural reaction in the world is to hit the brakes. an 18 yr old girl is hardly michael schumacher. ...
That is not what I meant to suggest. In no way would I encourage anyone to tailor or modify their story of the event as a possible "defence"....
Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way, if so my apologies, but the OP seems clear on what happened. This comment could be construed as suggesting he change his story.
That is not what I meant to suggest. In no way would I encourage anyone to tailor or modify their story of the event as a possible "defence".
coming traffic and she could have killed people - dangerous driving
i was driving along, 50 mph, i slipped on the road due to ice and hit the brakes. my car turned a little to the side , a car that was travelling behind me instead of braking behind me tried to go around me and hit me in the side , turned me upside down and into the ditch.
... it was my sister that was in the crash - not me. i just said me to make it easier. 50mph was probably an exageration ... other girl involved was 18 yrs old so i really dont think that she swerved out to avoid her, when the most natural reaction in the world is to hit the brakes. ... as my sisters car was stopped then the driver behind must have been going at quite a speed.=
the whole thing happened anyway cos the driver in front of my sister braked suddenly, my sis braked then and car skeeted a little and veered to the side and then the girl behind came up and hit my sister. in all fairness , my sis was back far enough not to hit the car in front of her but the other girl wasnt far enough behind my sister to stop.
the OP was refering to a post i replied to last week, i made a spelling error, i must say he was ever so polite to me when i made my errorGiven the confusion over the OP's changing story, I would recommend he/she takes the advice he/she gave in his/her post in the last week here.
From the Rules of the Road, Section 6, re Speed:
The basic rule states:
“A vehicle shall not be driven at a speed exceeding that which will enable its driver to bring it to a halt under control and on the correct side of the road within the distance which the driver can see to be clear.”
On the basis of the above, both the OP's sister and the driver behind were not driving according to the Rules of the Road. However, had the OP's sister not skidded on ice, then the driver behind would likely not have hit the OP's sister, making [imho] the OP's sister responsible for causing the accident, but not leaving the driver behind blame-free. As far as I know, an insurance settlement to the driver behind would probably have a deduction made for contributory negligence.
I hope the driver who was injured makes a full recovery. (By the way, OP, whiplash type injuries often take hours or days to show symptoms, just in case you think the person may be trying it on a bit; also I'd like to point out that the "most natural reaction in the world" is not necessarily to just hit the brakes, the Rules of the Road is full of the phrase "brake or swerve", usually in the context of advising drivers not to take any action that will cause drivers behind to brake or swerve).
Thank goodness nobody died. If this was my sister, I would be advising her to take legal advice.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?