# Had an accident tonight



## Elwood (Dec 20, 2002)

SergioK said:


> You don't have to buy it... this is just the way it is:
> 
> http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21801.htm


2 fundamental rules of driving

1. Don't hit anything.

2. Stay on the road.

In that order


----------



## Dave 330i (Jan 4, 2002)

johnf said:


> That is pretty relaxed. Other states are more restrictive and expect you to turn into the closest lane. For example, here are the rules for Washington State:Turning - Where there are no signs or lane markings to control turning, you should turn from the lane that is closest to the direction you want to go and turn into the lane closest to the one you came from. This way, you will cross the fewest lanes of traffic. When making turns, go from one lane to the other as directly as possible without crossing lane lines or interfering with traffic. Once you have completed your turn, you can change to another lane if you need to.​


Crossing fewer lanes makes sense, but the way you presented the WA wording, it seems to be a suggestion, not by law. I know for a fact, in CA, the SUV (red) making a left turn has the option to enter into any available lanes to him, unless there are two or more left turning lanes. In that case, you must stay in your lane, which is maked by dashes. Otherwise, you will interfere with the other cars making legal left turns. Sonet (blue) making a right hand turn can only turn into the lane closet to the curb. It is illegal for him to make a wide turn, into the other available lanes. I don't know who is at fault, but normally, if both cars are in the right by law, then I suggest that the hitter is at fault :dunno: But, I still feel bad about Sonet getting into his 2nd accident.


----------



## SergioK (Aug 14, 2002)

Dave 330i said:


> Sonet (blue) making a right hand turn can only turn into the lane closet to the curb. It is illegal for him to make a wide turn, into the other available lanes. I don't know who is at fault, but normally, if both cars are in the right by law, then I suggest that the hitter is at fault :dunno: But, I still feel bad about Sonet getting into his 2nd accident.


True, but regardless, Sonet wasn't even at the intersection. He was still going straight. Thus, he had the right of way.

I almost got into the same type of accident as Sonet did, but this was last November. I was on my motorcycle though. In the end, it was determined that I had the right of way.


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

Dave

Maybe I'm missing something here but your image depicts an intersection. The intersection wasn't for another ~300'. The guy I hit was turning left into a driveway (see my image above).

Thanks again guys :thumbup:

--SONET



Dave 330i said:


> Crossing fewer lanes makes sense, but the way you presented the WA wording, it seems to be a suggestion, not by law. I know for a fact, in CA, the SUV (red) making a left turn has the option to enter into any available lanes to him, unless there are two or more left turning lanes. In that case, you must stay in your lane, which is maked by dashes. Otherwise, you will interfere with the other cars making legal left turns. Sonet (blue) making a right hand turn can only turn into the lane closet to the curb. It is illegal for him to make a wide turn, into the other available lanes. I don't know who is at fault, but normally, if both cars are in the right by law, then I suggest that the hitter is at fault :dunno: But, I still feel bad about Sonet getting into his 2nd accident.


----------



## Dave 330i (Jan 4, 2002)

SONET said:


> Dave
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something here but your image depicts an intersection. The intersection wasn't for another ~300'. The guy I hit was turning left into a driveway (see my image above).
> 
> ...


His fault. You had the right of way. :thumbup:


----------



## italia550i (Mar 25, 2002)

Sorry to hear this SONET. I least you know where to take it to get fixed up.


----------



## kryten21 (Mar 16, 2004)

SONET, glad you made it out ok. I've heard that there is no legal limit to the number of vehicles allowed in a single lane, so if that's true, you would not be at fault for sharing a lane and moving forward. You weren't off the road, and you did have the right of way.

That's just what I heard though, perhaps another avenue for you to pursue if you need to. Good luck with everything


----------



## liuk3 (May 3, 2004)

SergioK said:
 

> From what I can gather, anyone making a left turn in that situation must yield for everyone else that has the right of way, including you Sonet. I doubt there'd be any scenario where he would have right of way over you.


Just to reaffirm Sergio's sentiments from making left hand turns, I just wanted to add this. My younger brother when he was 17 made a left hand turn at an intersection with a stop sign on him. He ended up causing a three car accident as a guy who was going straight hit him into another car. My brother tried to make the argument that the guy was speeding in the straightaway. However, the cop said it didn't matter whether the guy was going as fast as a jet plane, he was going straight and had the right of way. The onus was up to my brother making the left hand turn. I think that you should be in the right Sonet, but I am no lawyer. This was just what happened in real life.


----------



## VDPHB (Apr 4, 2002)

Hey Sonet,

I'm glad to hear that you're ok, but bummed about your car. I used to be an auto/general liability adjuster for 3 years. In a nutshell, based on what you've said, the other driver is at fault in my book. He had to yield to any vehicles traveling in the opposite direction since you had the right of way and he had a "yield" turn to make. There may be the question of you being in an "unmarked" lane of travel that could be brought by the other party (see subsection "b" below), but in the end, a majority, if not all of the liability is on the other driver.

Here's the California Vehicle Code pertaining to right of way in this case:

21801. Yielding right-of-way by driver making left turn or U-turn

(a) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn upon a highway, *or to turn left into public or private property*, or an alley, *shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which are close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety.* 
(b) A driver having yielded as prescribed in subdivision (a), and having given a signal when and as required by this code, may turn left or complete a U-turn, and the drivers of vehicles approaching the intersection or the entrance to the property or alley from the opposite direction shall yield the right-of-way to the turning vehicle.


----------



## Spectre (Aug 1, 2002)

Sorry to hear about the accident, Sonet. When I saw this thread popup, I thought someone had resurrected the previous one. Rotten luck , but I'm very glad to hear you're all right. :thumbup:


----------



## operknockity (Apr 19, 2002)

OMG!!!! Another accident???? Not your year at all!

Haven't read through the whole thread yet, but by now you know the drill... Get yourself looked at by a physician ASAP. Even if you don;t have any obvious injuries, you'll notice things hurting after a couple of days. Some of that will be psychosomatic, others just because you are hyper alert now, and others because they will be real problems. So take it easy!!!!!!!

Hope you haven't sustained any major injuries and things work out well with the insurance companies!


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

I got the first official estimate yesterday: 

$10,019

So my $10-12K guestimate was about right. They still need to add a few things that came up after they did the estimate though (something to do with the power steering). Accidents aren't cheap; I sure hope they find the other driver to have been totally at fault on this one.

BTW thanks for the stuff off the 'books VDPHB. :thumbup:

What was the final result with your car Howard? I don't remember seeing any thread about that.

--SONET


----------



## operknockity (Apr 19, 2002)

SONET said:


> What was the final result with your car Howard? I don't remember seeing any thread about that.


 I though I had posted the final tally in the original "crunched" thread. Or maybe not.

Actually, the final final final bill has not been tallied for a couple of reasons...
1) The insurance company didn't give me full replacement cost on the window tinting for all 3 windows on the right side. Once I get them retinted, I can submit a suplimental claim for the extra $ above what the've already given me. I just haven.t found time to get it done. In the end it'll only amount to about $150 or so.
2) The rental car coverage that my insurance policy allows had not yet been paid when I turned the car in. The rental company charged me as if they had received the payments less a little bit because I complained about the condition of the rental car. I still do not know if the insurance company ever paid the rental company and I've been too swamped to check up on it (or even make sure that I wasn't charged). That'll amount to about $400.

Except for those items, the tally came to just under 11K for the repairs and 2K for the rental car. Ouch!


----------



## Raffi (May 18, 2002)

Got an update for us, SONET?


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

The cost is up just past $12,000 now and still no word from the other insurance company. They say the car should be done early next week. We'll see. :thumbup:

--SONET


----------



## Raffi (May 18, 2002)

SONET said:


> The cost is up just past $12,000 now and still no word from the other insurance company. They say the car should be done early next week. We'll see. :thumbup:
> 
> --SONET


So you're going through your own insurance company?


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

Raffi said:


> So you're going through your own insurance company?


Yup. They (Mercury) use new parts and are willing to pay for it to be done right. I figured it would be better to just get it done right away and have it done right rather than wait and wonder if they're going to penny-pinch. Then again I only have the car another few months so maybe I'm worrying too much.

I'll get my deductible back when they find out who the other insurance company is. :thumbup:

--SONET


----------



## Raffi (May 18, 2002)

Cool! :thumbup:


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

I just found out this week that the fault was entirely on the other driver. :thumbup:

Two significant accidents in 8 months... neither were my fault but I bet my insurance goes up anyway.  

--SONET


----------



## car_for_mom (Jul 15, 2002)

Arrrgh! So sorry to hear about the accident, SONET - make sure to take care of yourself, and don't let any aches and pains linger too long without having them checked out! (well, what else would you expect someone with the handle 'car_for_*mom*' to say?) :angel:


----------



## SONET (Mar 1, 2002)

car_for_mom said:


> Arrrgh! So sorry to hear about the accident, SONET - make sure to take care of yourself, and don't let any aches and pains linger too long without having them checked out! (well, what else would you expect someone with the handle 'car_for_*mom*' to say?) :angel:


Thanks! This was actually in October though. I just revived this thread with a final update. All is well now. :thumbup:

--SONET


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

rumratt said:


> I recently found out that I have an insurance "surcharge" for a zero-points ticket I received a year ago. I was speeding, but the cop gave me a zero-points "obstructed view" ticket instead (typical scheme to get me to pay the fine without going to court, so the state gets money with no hassle.) I assumed that zero points meant zero insurance increase, but I guess the insurance companies finally got sick of being ripped off by fake tickets. :dunno:


NJ insurance...


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

DougDogs said:


> were you able to transfer your State Farm policies?? judging from your  posts, I'm guessing not!


Actually, yes, I was. So I'm better off than I would have been. But it's still ridiculous. Just too much fraud and theft in this state. I bet if the greater Newark/Elizabeth/Kearny metropolitan area were in a different state, our premiums wouldn't be so stratospheric.


----------



## Plaz (Dec 19, 2001)

rumratt said:


> I'm NY. Was NJ at the time it happened.


Right... forgot. Sorry. :eeps:


----------



## FalconGuy (Sep 27, 2002)

Plaz, you mentioned Kearny, Im from Kearny. Odd, never heard it mentioned here, I also remember you had PizzaLand in your sig. Are you from Kearny?


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

SONET said:


> I just found out this week that the fault was entirely on the other driver. :thumbup:
> 
> Two significant accidents in 8 months... neither were my fault but I bet my insurance goes up anyway.
> 
> --SONET


Yeah, sucks about the rate increase. Sorry to hear.
But insurance companies don't particularly care whose fault it was. They care about how much claim you cause on them. If you live/drive in a tough neighborhood and put yourself at risk all the time (even though it's not your fault), you would statistically incur more claims than another equally skilled driver that lives/drives in an easy going neighborhood.
They'll raise your rate to compensate for that.
That said, if it was the other guy's fault, his insurance would pick up most of the bill and you'd incur only minor incidentals, no? IIRC, my insurance rate is affected only if I file claims $400 or more.


----------



## SergioK (Aug 14, 2002)

SONET said:


> I just found out this week that the fault was entirely on the other driver. :thumbup:


That's great! See, I knew you had the right of way thus the accident was not your fault. Now, I'm in the same boat as you were... I just got notice from my new insurance company (for the R100S) that I have to prove non-fault for an accident that I had on my motorcycle over a year ago. Ugh! I settled with the other guy's insurance company but I don't think they ever forward me any info for who was at fault.


----------

