Hit from behind after right on red

[lbmarie]

I really appreciate those taking the time to understand. Sorry I made it confusing. I guess it seems clear to me since I know the intersection. let me try to answer your questions. I hope this makes it easier to understand. Thanks.

1. How many lanes in both the north/south and east/west roadways? Separate left turn/right turn lanes? north/ sout has four lanes east/west have two lanes

2. Which compass direction was your daughter going before she reached the intersection?
she was going west

3. What lane was she in before she entered the intersection? right lane

4. Which compass direction did she turn? north

5. What compass direction was the other driver going before his left turn? the other driver was going north ( I mentioned the green arrow for those turning left coming from the north direction)
6. What lane was he in before he entered the intersection? right lane

7. Which compass direction did the other driver turn? the other driver was going straight, meaning north

8. Did both vehicles drive outside the intersection boundaries before colliding? yes If so, how far did they travel to the point of impact? It was the distance to a telephone pole, which is about 200 feet

9. Were both vehicles traveling in the same direction at the point of impact, crossing or opposing one another? same direction

 

[moburkes]

I may be wrong, but my understanding of what he wrote was that his daughter was travelling northbound before reaching the intersection and intended to turn east. The striking vehicle was southbound, also intending to turn east. His daughter had a redlight, but turned right on red. The other driver had a green arrow allowing him to turn left (or east).

Again, I may be wrong, but this fits his statement that the striking vehicle had minor damage to it's right front bumper area.

Obviously, the 200 ft estimate is open to question. That's why the police accident report will be important. The two keys to deciding this will be two or four lanes, and how far from the point of impact was from the intersection.

OH, shoot. In that case, I didn't understand the OP at all.

 

[GulfBreeze]

The reason I asked the speed limit was the 200 feet! It is possible that the driver that hit her was traveling north bound all along and timed the light. She may have seen a green light but by the time she began her turn the light may have started to change. If the speed limit were a relatively slow one like 25, then the driver would have had no excuse for hitting her. However if it were say 55, then it may have been difficult for them to slow enough to avoid the car that had just pulled out in front of them! Your daughter said the coast was clear, but most accidents that result from someone pulling out in front of another driver, the at fault person will say they didn't see anyone coming!

is there an intersection that has a 55 mph speed limit in that area?

 

[lbmarie]

Sounds like she turned right against the redlight, in front of a vehicle travelling straight northbound. The collision occurred when the N/B driver tried to avoid your daughter's car by evading to the left, correct?

Depending on the speed limit on the north/south roadway, 200 feet is probably not enough distance for N/B traffic to avoid her when she turned, if it's a highway type road.

Unless the green arrow you describe was for N/B and S/B left turn only and unless the other driver definitely had a redlight, the other driver clearly had the right-of-way.

This one is probably going to be your daughter's fault.

Yes, the collision occured when the N/B driver tried to avoid by turning to the left lane.

The arrows to turn left for the N/B and S/B were green, therefore the other driver's light was red.

 

[lbmarie]

is there an intersection that has a 55 mph speed limit in that area?

No there is not. I'm actually going to go back to the intersection to see everything again and measure the distance from the intersection to the point of collision.

 

[lbmarie]

So you're saying the other driver ran the redlight?

Check the accident report. See if that's the cop's conclusion as well.

No, I'm not saying the other driver ran the redlight. What I am trying to say is that her light must have just turned green after my daughter made the turn. I say that because the N/B and S/B left turning lanes had a green arrow, which means nobody could be going staight at that point in time. The other driver's light probably turned green during or shortly after my daughter finished the turn. I hope that makes sense.

I spoke with the police officer shortly after the accident. He was only able to tell me what was told to him. The other driver couldn't remember if her light JUST turned green. I really think she was distracted because she is not clear about the details, or she is clear and doesn't want to say. I'm anxious to see what the insurance person has to say on Monday.

 

[moburkes]

We can tell that you're anxious. However, no amount of "investigative" work that you perform will have any bearing on the insurance company's decision. Their adjusters do this investigating for a living. Seriously. Calm down.

 

[lbmarie]

We can tell that you're anxious. However, no amount of "investigative" work that you perform will have any bearing on the insurance company's decision. Their adjusters do this investigating for a living. Seriously. Calm down.

Thanks for the advice. The bottom line is what the adjuster has to say. I'm just nervous because a few months ago my son had an accident. He was listed as 100% at fault. I was told because he hit someone from behind it was his fault, regardless. It was on the same road, but miles away. He was coming south (left lane), an elderly woman makes a sudden stop to make an illegal left turn. She makes her turn and has no idea what followed. Cars 1 and 2 hits the brakes. My son was the third car and hit the second car. The driver was an immigrant working here for the summer and did not have a driver's license. The car he was driving was leased by US Steel. Not that that means anything, but I found it kind of ironic. Anyway, my son hit from behind so he was at fault.

 

[alnorth]

Your description affirms my opinion, the other driver should be at fault. Your daughter made a legal turn while the other driver had a red light (which may have turned green shortly after the turn), so she did not "pull out in front of" the other driver. In that case, the other driver should have been able to avoid the accident even if it was 20 ft after the intersection since at the moment of the turn, the other driver had a red light and needed to be ready to stop at the intersection anyway.

Regardless of all that, even if the other driver had green all the way from before the turn, 200 feet should have been plenty of room to avoid the accident with the speed limits that were described.

 

[lbmarie]

I really appreciate all of the replies, thanks everyone. I will have to come back and post the decision from the insurance companies. This is a nice forum to learn about these type of situations.

 

[alnorth]

Thanks for the advice. The bottom line is what the adjuster has to say. I'm just nervous because a few months ago my son had an accident. He was listed as 100% at fault. I was told because he hit someone from behind it was his fault, regardless. It was on the same road, but miles away. He was coming south (left lane), an elderly woman makes a sudden stop to make an illegal left turn. She makes her turn and has no idea what followed. Cars 1 and 2 hits the brakes. My son was the third car and hit the second car. The driver was an immigrant working here for the summer and did not have a driver's license. The car he was driving was leased by US Steel. Not that that means anything, but I found it kind of ironic. Anyway, my son hit from behind so he was at fault.

In this situation, he was at fault because the rear driver needs to keep enough distance to avoid a collision in case of a sudden unexpected brake. If you cant avoid a sudden panic stop from the driver in front, you are following too closely.

 

[lbmarie]

In this situation, he was at fault because the rear driver needs to keep enough distance to avoid a collision in case of a sudden unexpected brake. If you cant avoid a sudden panic stop from the driver in front, you are following too closely.

You're right. That's what he was told. So of course, having been told that, that is why I believe my daughter not to be at fault. She completed the turn, traveled a short distance and then was hit. Oh well, I'll know more Monday.

 

[JustAPal00]

You're right. That's what he was told. So of course, having been told that, that is why I believe my daughter not to be at fault. She completed the turn, traveled a short distance and then was hit. Oh well, I'll know more Monday.

There's a big difference between a person stopping suddenly in front of you and a person suddenly pulling out in front of you. There is no excuse for hitting someone that stops suddenly in front of you. However when someone pulls out in front of you, the speed being traveled and the distance to react will all have an affect on your ability to avoid them! An average sized car traveling at 40mph should be able to stop in 160 to 180 feet. So if your daughter actually traveled 200 feet before the impact, then I would say it should be the other drivers fault!

 

[lbmarie]

When I went back to measure the point of collision, it was about 220 ft, so basically it's still 200 ft. I don't think the other driver was going very fast because of the damage. I think she just misjudged when trying to go around my daughter's car. Oh well, I can guess until I'm blue in the face. I'll post what I'm told tomorrow.

 

[lbmarie]

Just an update. The adjuster just left. The only thing he said was that it looks as if the back of the car was sideswiped. I have to call the claims handler to see who is at fault.