Car Accident Expertise NEEDED..

[caspa]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/v/484736_10152488308705641_1291003522_n.jpg?oh=36c03 62a1daa9c4a767df6ce6a5faf11&oe=510D56AC&__gda__=1359867620_d8d6d63db7c340c88787423cb54fe44 2

Who's at fault???
Car A had the green arrow to make left turn.
Car B had the red light to stop and yield.
Car A went into 2nd lane and got clipped in the rear quarter panel by car B as he went into the 2nd lane..

[KiLLeR2001]

Looks like Car B is a moron and Car A doesn't know how to drive. Talk this over with your insurance company, not Zilvia.

[LB 180SX]

if you had the green arrow. its your go. car B shouldn't have gone until it was clear for him to go . its car B fault. especially if car B had a NO TURN ON RED. but for the future you should always turn into the lane closest to you, its on the books to do so. to avoid things like this. always get a police report!! good luck man

[enkei2k]

if you had the green arrow. its your go. car B shouldn't have gone until it was clear for him to go . its car B fault. especially if car B had a NO TURN ON RED. but for the future you should always turn into the lane closest to you, its on the books to do so. to avoid things like this. always get a police report!! good luck man


I always thought you had to turn into the lane closest to you when making those kinda turns also. (ex: you should have turned into the left lane and he on the right lane and all will be well)

[silverarrow27]

I always thought you had to turn into the lane closest to you when making those kinda turns also. (ex: you should have turned into the left lane and he on the right lane and all will be well)

Same exact thing I was thinking. Just because you had the green to turn and the other car didn't, I'm sure the ruling would point to Car B at fault. It wouldn't matter what our opinions are though, it's all up to your insurance and police investigation to determine this for you.

[bc.]

An intersection I use every day is like this and people turn into the far right lane after a left all the time. The difference is, there is a gas station immediately after the turn on the right side. In your case it looks like you turned into a lane that was ending anyway?? Were you hookslide breakin traction?

[LB 180SX]

It wouldn't matter what our opinions are though, it's all up to your insurance and police investigation to determine this for you.

THAT IS TRUE! they're going to determine that. but it does seem your in favor of this one, just made a dumb move.lesson learned

[rybo760]

I always thought you had to turn into the lane closest to you when making those kinda turns also. (ex: you should have turned into the left lane and he on the right lane and all will be well)

I believe in California if it is a single turning lane turning into 2 or more lanes you get to pick which one you want to be in. When I lived in Wisconsin it was illegal but here I think it is legal.

So I would assume the red light turner would be at fault. But i'm no law expert.

[Future240]

Insurance agent here. I handle claims like this all the time.

Both parties are at fault, though green arrow is less. I would put the green arrow 20% at fault and the red arrow 80%.

The green arrow had the right away, however you are supposed to turn into the left most lane. Since the red arrow hit the green arrow in the rear qp that means the green arrow was an object to be seen and had the driver maintained a proper lookout he would have saw the green arrow.

[OrangeVirus1]

it depends, if you are turning left, but you turn into the far right lane, you could be at fault, because you are not suppose to, BUT if the person who did a right turn turned when it was no right turn on red, or yield for traffic, they are automatically at fault.

if the person who turned right turned into the outer lane and not the following right lane, they are at fault, that is incorrect driving.

[Future240]

it depends, if you are turning left, but you turn into the far right lane, you could be at fault, because you are not suppose to, BUT if the person who did a right turn turned when it was no right turn on red, or yield for traffic, they are automatically at fault.

if the person who turned right turned into the outer lane and not the following right lane, they are at fault, that is incorrect driving.

Most of your post is incorrect. Just because someone pulls from a yield sign does not mean they are automatically at fault. I know because I have handled many claims just like this.

OP like I said in my previous post 80/20. Though some companies do 75/25.

[OrangeVirus1]

if there is oncoming traffic and you are at a yeild sign and you pull out and get hit it is your fault.

[Future240]

if there is oncoming traffic and you are at a yeild sign and you pull out and get hit it is your fault.

Hmmm one of us handles claims and works for one of the top 5 insurance companies in the country, the other does not. I wonder who knows more about fault in an accident?

You are partially right. for the most part if someone pulls out it is their fault, however in the OP's situation it will most likely be a percentage. The red arrow is majority however the green arrow still should have pulled into the correct [left] lane

[OrangeVirus1]

Hmmm one of us handles claims and works for one of the top 5 insurance companies in the country, the other does not. I wonder who knows more about fault in an accident?

You are partially right. for the most part if someone pulls out it is their fault, however in the OP's situation it will most likely be a percentage. The red arrow is majority however the green arrow still should have pulled into the correct [left] lane

wow... that is exactly what I said.. the left turning party should of turned into the correct lane..

[Future240]

wow... that is exactly what I said.. the left turning party should of turned into the correct lane..

I misread your post. My apologies :bow:

[FRpilot]

I believe in California if it is a single turning lane turning into 2 or more lanes you get to pick which one you want to be in.

I remember reading the CA DMV issued driver's guide to study for my test when I was a teenager. It had pictures and diagrams of how you should turn and I recalled it said something along the lines of "when making a left turn, you should turn into the lane closest to you, but you MAY go into the outer lane ONLY if it is safe to do so."

So you are right, you can pick which lane you want to be in, but only if it is safe to move in.

[Aroddalobster]

1. Left turn from a two-way street.
Start the turn in the left lane closest to the middle of the street.
Complete the turn, if safe, in
either lane of the cross street
(shown by the arrows).

sourch: p. 37
http://apps.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/dl600.pdf

Looks like in your case, you're legally allowed to turn into either lanes. But a right turn, you have to turn into the right hand lane.

[FaLKoN240]

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/077/424/JCNID.jpg?1318992465

[BarrigaS14]

As a Officer in Az, I would have cited both. Car A is suppose to turn into the closest lane to them. Car B, was fully stopped and made a legal right hand turn into their closest lane to them but did cause an accident.

Not saying who is at fault, but both get cited, insurance companies figure it out and people can argue about it in court.