User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:19:58 AM EDT
In Jan I was in a car accident. What I say happened is that it was a huge snow storm and I had just turned right onto the road I was on. Traction was extremely limited so I was taking it slow. I was in the right hand lane of the road and the other guy was in front of me in the left of three lanes. He was weaving a little and when I got close he swerved to the right to enter into the parking lot on the right hand of me. I hit him with my driver corner into his rear passenger door in front of the rear axle. We slid into a fire hydrant at that point.
His story is that I hit him in the right side while he was traveling straight causing us both to slide to the right and into the fire hydrant. I was in a VW Jetta. He was in a Yukon XL. My insurance has tried to contact the police officer who filed the report, but he has never returned any phone calls. Here is his report image.  Am I wrong in thinking that basic physics does not make this a possible outcome? If we take the image shown and the description, if I was to hit him like that wouldn't we continue forward and slightly to the left? After all this wasn't a pit maneuver. And there was almost no traction. We are talking a vehicle that weighs about twice what my car weights. I had snow tires on and ABS didn't even kick in because all 4 wheels locked up equally when I hit the brakes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:26:33 AM EDT
[#1]
After looking at the diagram and looking at the statement made by the officer, it would appear that you turned left into the car. Due to the limited traction due to the snow I would assume the cars would have gone into the median according to the officer. Another possibility is due to the placement of the impact and limited traction, the vehicle in the left lane would spin to the right and go off the road to the right while your car would go straight or into the median.
After reading your statement, that seems the highest probability of happening and going into the hydrant. The officers diagram IMO looks FUBAR. If he cut in front of you and you were straight I would think that the angle of impact would place it where you said. EDIT: I am no physics major and awaiting the answer from someone who would know best 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:30:07 AM EDT
[#2]
The physics are correct to the image unless there was absolutely zero traction. His vehicle is heavier than yours to where he will determine where both of you end up. As he merged right and you making contact with his rear quarter, that caused his vehicle to veer right and carry you with him. At least that's what I can determine by the outcome the image reflects. But who am I to say?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:30:39 AM EDT
[#3]
I agree with your assessment if there were zero traction possible. He could argue that you hit him, his rear slid, then his vehicle recovered traction, headed for the FH while simultaneously redirecting your vehicle due to the weigh differential.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:32:46 AM EDT
[#4]
1) If you hit the other driver I would think you both would have ended up in the median, not off to the right.
2) Get a dash cam, for under $50 you could have had proof of your story. 3) Never try to pass a vehicle having trouble in the snow unless it is truly stuck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:34:10 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
After looking at the diagram and looking at the statement made by the officer, it would appear that you turned left into the car. Due to the limited traction due to the snow I would assume the cars would have gone into the median according to the officer. Another possibility is due to the placement of the impact and limited traction, the vehicle in the left lane would spin to the right and go off the road to the right while your car would go straight or slightly left. After reading your statement, that seems the highest probability of happening and going into the hydrant. The officers diagram IMO looks FUBAR Officer never learned vector math. I actually gave a class to three state troopers on it while I was in college. I used to work nights at a gas station and did my homework there. Cops stopped by all night since I was right off the highway. One night while doing calculus work, one of them was complaining he didn't understand it for an accident reconstruction class he was taking. After starting to explain it to him, he called in his buddies so I could show them all. Official report claims you made the initial contact, that's what the insurance company will go with, rather than explain the fucky physics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:45:35 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Officer never learned vector math. I actually gave a class to three state troopers on it while I was in college. I used to work nights at a gas station and did my homework there. Cops stopped by all night since I was right off the highway. One night while doing calculus work, one of them was complaining he didn't understand it for an accident reconstruction class he was taking. After starting to explain it to him, he called in his buddies so I could show them all. Official report claims you made the initial contact, that's what the insurance company will go with, rather than explain the fucky physics. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: After looking at the diagram and looking at the statement made by the officer, it would appear that you turned left into the car. Due to the limited traction due to the snow I would assume the cars would have gone into the median according to the officer. Another possibility is due to the placement of the impact and limited traction, the vehicle in the left lane would spin to the right and go off the road to the right while your car would go straight or slightly left. After reading your statement, that seems the highest probability of happening and going into the hydrant. The officers diagram IMO looks FUBAR Officer never learned vector math. I actually gave a class to three state troopers on it while I was in college. I used to work nights at a gas station and did my homework there. Cops stopped by all night since I was right off the highway. One night while doing calculus work, one of them was complaining he didn't understand it for an accident reconstruction class he was taking. After starting to explain it to him, he called in his buddies so I could show them all. Official report claims you made the initial contact, that's what the insurance company will go with, rather than explain the fucky physics. The insurance company has already said they claim responsibility. But I just got a letter saying that he is suing for more then my insurance covers and now it because a bit more important to argue this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:46:16 AM EDT
[#7]
Unless OP snapped due to Obama bumper sticker and this was a failed pit maneuver I just can't see it not happening exactly as he described.
I really want to know if fire hydrant busted and spewed water everywhere like on TV? If so, that would be awesome and more than make up for the poorly executed pit maneuver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:46:52 AM EDT
[#8]
There are physics arguments that I could explain for both possible causes. They get complex and center on:
1. Knowing what the contact patch would be for each axle on each car. If his car was already rotating - that could be explained. There is also a realistic explanation for your car rotating as you began the pass, contacting his right rear causing him to rotate and then your car rotates clockwise because of the contact. 2. A careful examination of the contact damage might shed some light - but that assumes that that contact area was not subsequently damaged as you left the road. Courts seldom get to that level of forensic examination without felony charges. This incident underscores why I never drive when the roads are bad with snow - despite great snow tires and a LOT of skidpad time every year. Other people's mistakes can collect you and you are just as screwed as if you caused it. I don't need to get anywhere that bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:47:29 AM EDT
[#9]
For both vehicles to strike the fire hydrant, OV had to be heading in that approximate direction unless the force of the collision caused his rear wheels to rotate around that vehicle's center of motion, and it was under propulsion (i.e. the engine was supplying effective power to the driven wheels). In a low speed, low traction event that's extremely unlikely. In all probability, he was changing lanes directly in front of you, and the force of the collision altered your path into the fire hydrant. Several points. I assume the officer did not see the collision. If the road was wet, it's unlikely he had much to do a reconstruction with except the rest position of the vehicles and what you and OV told him. Officers will look for the length and direction of skid marks and debris patterns, which can often establish an initial point of contact. My guess is that he liked the other guy's story better, and that's why he effectively adopted his version.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:48:44 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Unless OP snapped due to Obama bumper sticker and this was a failed pit maneuver I just can't see it not happening exactly as he described. I really want to know if fire hydrant busted and spewed water everywhere like on TV? If so, that would be awesome and more than make up for the poorly executed pit maneuver. Sadly, no. I was actually slightly disappointed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 10:50:12 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For both vehicles to strike the fire hydrant, OV had to be heading in that approximate direction unless the force of the collision caused his rear wheels to rotate around that vehicle's center of motion, and it was under propulsion (i.e. the engine was supplying effective power to the driven wheels). In a low speed, low traction event that's extremely unlikely. In all probability, he was changing lanes directly in front of you, and the force of the collision altered your path into the fire hydrant. Several points. I assume the officer did not see the collision. If the road was wet, it's unlikely he had much to do a reconstruction with except the rest position of the vehicles and what you and OV told him. My guess is that he liked the other guy's story better, and that's why he effectively adopted his version. 3-5 in of snow on the ground. And continuing to snow heavily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:01:04 AM EDT
[#12]
he has no grounds for his lawsuit and based on where the impact happened and the vehicles ended up, it's almost impossible for his version of the events to have occurred.
even less likely that he will win due to the fact that his insurance payed for the damages to both vehicles. now, he could argue that you tapped him a couple times initially, causing him to "weave" prior to the impact that you describe, but there would be multiple impact points on his vehicle if that were the case.. he's still going to sue you though.. so you'll have to go through the process of defending yourself (your insurance company will not defend your interests, only theirs) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:05:19 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: he has no grounds for his lawsuit and based on where the impact happened and the vehicles ended up, it's almost impossible for his version of the events to have occurred. even less likely that he will win due to the fact that his insurance payed for the damages to both vehicles. now, he could argue that you tapped him a couple times initially, causing him to "weave" prior to the impact that you describe, but there would be multiple impact points on his vehicle if that were the case.. he's still going to sue you though.. so you'll have to go through the process of defending yourself (your insurance company will not defend your interests, only theirs) My insurance based on the cops report has paid for everything so far. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:28:15 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My insurance based on the cops report has paid for everything so far. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
he has no grounds for his lawsuit and based on where the impact happened and the vehicles ended up, it's almost impossible for his version of the events to have occurred. even less likely that he will win due to the fact that his insurance payed for the damages to both vehicles. now, he could argue that you tapped him a couple times initially, causing him to "weave" prior to the impact that you describe, but there would be multiple impact points on his vehicle if that were the case.. he's still going to sue you though.. so you'll have to go through the process of defending yourself (your insurance company will not defend your interests, only theirs) My insurance based on the cops report has paid for everything so far. oh.. in that case, you're gonna get raped in court.. unless you have a physics teacher come and testify as to how it's (quite literally) physically impossible.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:29:47 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: oh.. in that case, you're gonna get raped in court.. unless you have a physics teacher come and testify as to how it's (quite literally) physically impossible.. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: he has no grounds for his lawsuit and based on where the impact happened and the vehicles ended up, it's almost impossible for his version of the events to have occurred. even less likely that he will win due to the fact that his insurance payed for the damages to both vehicles. now, he could argue that you tapped him a couple times initially, causing him to "weave" prior to the impact that you describe, but there would be multiple impact points on his vehicle if that were the case.. he's still going to sue you though.. so you'll have to go through the process of defending yourself (your insurance company will not defend your interests, only theirs) My insurance based on the cops report has paid for everything so far. oh.. in that case, you're gonna get raped in court.. unless you have a physics teacher come and testify as to how it's (quite literally) physically impossible.. That is kinda what I was thinking about doing. It might be less expensive to hire a Professor of physics to be an expert witness then to pay this fuck. What would be nice at that point is for my insurance to reverse all the "We claim responsibility" shit and make him pay for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:31:46 AM EDT
[#16]
You need a lawyer OP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:31:46 AM EDT
[#17]
double
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 11:55:25 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is kinda what I was thinking about doing. It might be less expensive to hire a Professor of physics to be an expert witness then to pay this fuck. What would be nice at that point is for my insurance to reverse all the "We claim responsibility" shit and make him pay for it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
he has no grounds for his lawsuit and based on where the impact happened and the vehicles ended up, it's almost impossible for his version of the events to have occurred. even less likely that he will win due to the fact that his insurance payed for the damages to both vehicles. now, he could argue that you tapped him a couple times initially, causing him to "weave" prior to the impact that you describe, but there would be multiple impact points on his vehicle if that were the case.. he's still going to sue you though.. so you'll have to go through the process of defending yourself (your insurance company will not defend your interests, only theirs) My insurance based on the cops report has paid for everything so far. oh.. in that case, you're gonna get raped in court.. unless you have a physics teacher come and testify as to how it's (quite literally) physically impossible.. That is kinda what I was thinking about doing. It might be less expensive to hire a Professor of physics to be an expert witness then to pay this fuck. What would be nice at that point is for my insurance to reverse all the "We claim responsibility" shit and make him pay for it. Had an old boss that spent a good portion of his professional career reconstruction/investigating collision and due to such, an expert witness in court. It was neat the few tidbits I got from him. When to one collision where a young TCU college kid at 2am left the road and his vehicle ended up in someone's house. Got there a day or two after it had been cleaned up. Boss went to where you could see his tire tracks running across the first yard. He asked me if I thought the grass was laid over or tore out. "laid over, why?" Well if he wasn't passed out, wouldn't he have been on the breaks, thus tearing the grass out. He did acknowledge with ABS it is a little harder to tell. He then went to the end of the tire marks and stared back at the direction the diver had come from and started walking that way. It was a curved road and we ended up on the other side of the street. Again me "what are you looking for" He pointed out the fresh tire mark on the opposite, inside curve of the road, then pointed out how nice a line it made with where he would have been when the road straightened out. He then concluded the kid was drunk and passed out. (knowing that he ran from the scene directly afterwards, this seemed reasonable) I asked what he was going to do with this information. He laughed and with a big grin said "we are just engineers, I'm sure the police will figure it all out." I pulled the collision report sometime later. Just an accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 12:37:48 PM EDT
[#19]
My $0.02 worth:
1. Police diagram screwed you as it shows your car headed to the left, striking the Yukon. 2. As stated, accident could not have occurred as depicted unless the Yukon was traveling the the right (even if you were traveling to the left). If Yukon was going straight and you hit him you both should head to the left. Any security cameras in the area? Good luck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 12:46:45 PM EDT
[#20]
You could have been turning left, BUT for the cars to end up in the position that they did there would have to have been a force going to the right that counteracted the leftward force.
nearly Simultaneous forces or right hand force only |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 12:54:50 PM EDT
[#21]
Now, how do I go about proving this to the insurance companies? I need to science the shit out of this. Anyone recommend a good book on it?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:04:16 PM EDT
[#22]
Real lawyers will have to chime in here, but I don't think any ole physics professor/teacher can qualify as an expert witness.
Bottom line is, you're kinda fucked. Is the other driver suing you in small claims or civil action? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:07:11 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need a lawyer OP. Agreed. A lawyer is going to be a lot more helpful than someone with a PhD in physics. Prosecutor: Your honor, this gentleman is not a certified accident reconstructionist, and I object on the grounds that any technical testimony is conjecture based on the very limited information recorded in the police report. Judge: Agreed. or Prosecutor to PhD: So, isn't it possible that the defendant first bumped into the other vehicle, rotating that vehicle into the 1 o'clock position, and if that vehicle's tires caught more solid pavement, that momentary traction was enough to direct both cars off to the right hand side of the road? PhD: Yes, that is possible. The police report isn't to scale. Were there any real measurements, any noted changes in direction of the slide marks (which I'm sure were obliterated by subsequent traffic)? A lawyer is what you need, OP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:14:40 PM EDT
[#24]
It is common for the driver of the vehicle struck in the side to involuntarily turn into the impact.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:15:04 PM EDT
[#25]
If your insurance company has already admitted liability, then the only area remaining to be argued is damages that the victim allegedly incurred.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:19:39 PM EDT
[#26]
That would be a "No fault" accident here and each prospective insurance company would be tasked with taking care of their policy holders.
Judge would throw it out of court and claim both parties are to blame for not adjusting their driving habits due to road conditions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:21:09 PM EDT
[#27]
If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road.
Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:32:15 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road. Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:43:07 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need a lawyer OP. I don't disagree with this but it's pretty standard to get sued past your insurance amounts and in the end they get a little more out of it. Wife was involved in a minor accident(she was broadsided at an uncontrolled intersection) and the other party sued, the other party's spouse sued for "loss of services" and lost wages to care for their spouse. They sued for $250,000 over my coverage and in the end they got 8 grand [I/]total.[/I] And FWIW(of course take this with a grain of salt) when we heard we were being sued for over our coverage I talked to a good attorney/worked at my job) who said it was standard and I didn't need an attorney. He said wait and see what the insurance company does. They'd be a good indicator as to whether you'd need one. We also had a MVA report that made my wife look bad, even though she was the one that was hit. I think because they sued first made a bit of difference. Regardless, drop a few hundred buck to talk to an attorney to see if you need one. Most LE agencies allow to have an amended report submitted. Hell, in NYS you're required to submit your own if there's significant damage or injury. You don't say if the other party is claiming injury but to actually get real money like over your limits awarded there generally has to be proven significant injury. Any ambulance chaser will take a case like this on a contingency to get a couple grand for a couple hundred bucks in filing fees. It'll never go to trial. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 1:50:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Now, how do I go about proving this to the insurance companies? I need to science the shit out of this. Anyone recommend a good book on it? You can solve the equation for who did what...solutions to things colliding are done all the time, but you'll need a physics or engineering guru to help you. The solutions goes like this: 1. Evaluate damage to vehicles from fire hydrant yields approx. impact speed with both vehicles traveling together. You can make an initial guess based on your estimate of how fast you thought you were going. 2. Evaluate damage to vehicles from impact with each other yields approx. relative velocity at impact. Again, you might know or can estimate how fast you were going at time of impact. 3. Real world collisions are somewhere between perfectly inelastic (like billiard balls bouncing off of each other; kinetic energy is conserved) and perfectly inelastic (like two blobs of clay colliding and continuing on as one; momentum is conserved) and typically much more like the latter. 4. Estimate a high/probable/low value for coefficient of friction between tires and the snowy road and off you go. 5. You also know, at least approximately how fast you were going and how fast he was going so that can be used to "seed" the equations. Do you have the ability to download any speed data from your vehicle? If so you could prove you were going X mph; one less variable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 2:17:14 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can solve the equation for who did what...solutions to things colliding are done all the time, but you'll need a physics or engineering guru to help you. The solutions goes like this: 1. Evaluate damage to vehicles from fire hydrant yields approx. impact speed with both vehicles traveling together. You can make an initial guess based on your estimate of how fast you thought you were going. 2. Evaluate damage to vehicles from impact with each other yields approx. relative velocity at impact. Again, you might know or can estimate how fast you were going at time of impact. 3. Real world collisions are somewhere between perfectly inelastic (like billiard balls bouncing off of each other; kinetic energy is conserved) and perfectly inelastic (like two blobs of clay colliding and continuing on as one; momentum is conserved) and typically much more like the latter. 4. Estimate a high/probable/low value for coefficient of friction between tires and the snowy road and off you go. 5. You also know, at least approximately how fast you were going and how fast he was going so that can be used to "seed" the equations. Do you have the ability to download any speed data from your vehicle? If so you could prove you were going X mph; one less variable. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Now, how do I go about proving this to the insurance companies? I need to science the shit out of this. Anyone recommend a good book on it? You can solve the equation for who did what...solutions to things colliding are done all the time, but you'll need a physics or engineering guru to help you. The solutions goes like this: 1. Evaluate damage to vehicles from fire hydrant yields approx. impact speed with both vehicles traveling together. You can make an initial guess based on your estimate of how fast you thought you were going. 2. Evaluate damage to vehicles from impact with each other yields approx. relative velocity at impact. Again, you might know or can estimate how fast you were going at time of impact. 3. Real world collisions are somewhere between perfectly inelastic (like billiard balls bouncing off of each other; kinetic energy is conserved) and perfectly inelastic (like two blobs of clay colliding and continuing on as one; momentum is conserved) and typically much more like the latter. 4. Estimate a high/probable/low value for coefficient of friction between tires and the snowy road and off you go. 5. You also know, at least approximately how fast you were going and how fast he was going so that can be used to "seed" the equations. Do you have the ability to download any speed data from your vehicle? If so you could prove you were going X mph; one less variable. Sadly no. But I really need to buy a dash cam because this would all be a non-issue if I had one. Fucking hell. I figure once I figure out angles, friction, mass and such I can just play with speed to show that it really doesn't matter how fast I was going. In fact if I HAD been speeding he would have just gone further into the median not to the right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 2:24:42 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
In Jan I was in a car accident. What I say happened is that it was a huge snow storm and I had just turned right onto the road I was on. Traction was extremely limited so I was taking it slow. I was in the right hand lane of the road and the other guy was in front of me in the left of three lanes. He was weaving a little and when I got close he swerved to the right to enter into the parking lot on the right hand of me. I hit him with my driver corner into his rear passenger door in front of the rear axle. We slid into a fire hydrant at that point. His story is that I hit him in the right side while he was traveling straight causing us both to slide to the right and into the fire hydrant. I was in a VW Jetta. He was in a Yukon XL. My insurance has tried to contact the police officer who filed the report, but he has never returned any phone calls. Here is his report image. http://i.imgur.com/ffFTHeH.jpg Am I wrong in thinking that basic physics does not make this a possible outcome? If we take the image shown and the description, if I was to hit him like that wouldn't we continue forward and slightly to the left? After all this wasn't a pit maneuver. And there was almost no traction. We are talking a vehicle that weighs about twice what my car weights. I had snow tires on and ABS didn't even kick in because all 4 wheels locked up equally when I hit the brakes. That boy needs him some collision reconstruction school. EDITED for niceness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:25:59 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sadly no. But I really need to buy a dash cam because this would all be a non-issue if I had one. Fucking hell. I figure once I figure out angles, friction, mass and such I can just play with speed to show that it really doesn't matter how fast I was going. In fact if I HAD been speeding he would have just gone further into the median not to the right. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Now, how do I go about proving this to the insurance companies? I need to science the shit out of this. Anyone recommend a good book on it? You can solve the equation for who did what...solutions to things colliding are done all the time, but you'll need a physics or engineering guru to help you. The solutions goes like this: 1. Evaluate damage to vehicles from fire hydrant yields approx. impact speed with both vehicles traveling together. You can make an initial guess based on your estimate of how fast you thought you were going. 2. Evaluate damage to vehicles from impact with each other yields approx. relative velocity at impact. Again, you might know or can estimate how fast you were going at time of impact. 3. Real world collisions are somewhere between perfectly inelastic (like billiard balls bouncing off of each other; kinetic energy is conserved) and perfectly inelastic (like two blobs of clay colliding and continuing on as one; momentum is conserved) and typically much more like the latter. 4. Estimate a high/probable/low value for coefficient of friction between tires and the snowy road and off you go. 5. You also know, at least approximately how fast you were going and how fast he was going so that can be used to "seed" the equations. Do you have the ability to download any speed data from your vehicle? If so you could prove you were going X mph; one less variable. Sadly no. But I really need to buy a dash cam because this would all be a non-issue if I had one. Fucking hell. I figure once I figure out angles, friction, mass and such I can just play with speed to show that it really doesn't matter how fast I was going. In fact if I HAD been speeding he would have just gone further into the median not to the right. Did LE mark the POI and final wheel positions with paint? There aren't any measurements listed on the diagram. Where are you getting measurements from? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:34:06 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road. Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. Something is fishy, I have been in 2 major accidents in CO, the other driver was at fault and my ins companies took care of the medical. Their insurance companies took care of the settlement for for injuries. I was told the law was such so you would be sure of getting the care you needed without having to fight with the ins company, no matter who was at fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:36:40 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did LE mark the POI and final wheel positions with paint? There aren't any measurements listed on the diagram. Where are you getting measurements from? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now, how do I go about proving this to the insurance companies? I need to science the shit out of this. Anyone recommend a good book on it? You can solve the equation for who did what...solutions to things colliding are done all the time, but you'll need a physics or engineering guru to help you. The solutions goes like this: 1. Evaluate damage to vehicles from fire hydrant yields approx. impact speed with both vehicles traveling together. You can make an initial guess based on your estimate of how fast you thought you were going. 2. Evaluate damage to vehicles from impact with each other yields approx. relative velocity at impact. Again, you might know or can estimate how fast you were going at time of impact. 3. Real world collisions are somewhere between perfectly inelastic (like billiard balls bouncing off of each other; kinetic energy is conserved) and perfectly inelastic (like two blobs of clay colliding and continuing on as one; momentum is conserved) and typically much more like the latter. 4. Estimate a high/probable/low value for coefficient of friction between tires and the snowy road and off you go. 5. You also know, at least approximately how fast you were going and how fast he was going so that can be used to "seed" the equations. Do you have the ability to download any speed data from your vehicle? If so you could prove you were going X mph; one less variable. Sadly no. But I really need to buy a dash cam because this would all be a non-issue if I had one. Fucking hell. I figure once I figure out angles, friction, mass and such I can just play with speed to show that it really doesn't matter how fast I was going. In fact if I HAD been speeding he would have just gone further into the median not to the right. Did LE mark the POI and final wheel positions with paint? There aren't any measurements listed on the diagram. Where are you getting measurements from? Nope, none of that was done. It was snowing like crazy that night. I think we ended up getting 8 in that day. The only measurements would be from my memory on where the vehicles were. The firehydrant is back in place, and I remember where his vehicle ended up and where mine was at. He was just beyond the hydrant hole by about 5 ft, I was on the curb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:37:26 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Something is fishy, I have been in 2 major accidents in CO, the other driver was at fault and my ins companies took care of the medical. Their insurance companies took care of the settlement for for injuries. I was told the law was such so you would be sure of getting the care you needed without having to fight with the ins company, no matter who was at fault. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road. Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. Something is fishy, I have been in 2 major accidents in CO, the other driver was at fault and my ins companies took care of the medical. Their insurance companies took care of the settlement for for injuries. I was told the law was such so you would be sure of getting the care you needed without having to fight with the ins company, no matter who was at fault. My understanding is that his laywer is suing for lots, and is trying to find out how much I actually have when it comes to medical insurance for the crash. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 5:58:36 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need a lawyer OP. No OP, needs the best PI lawyer in the area...OP, a good lawyer will hire reconstruction experts that will prove what happened..did the cop take any pics of the tracks and debris? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:04:20 PM EDT
[#38]
Looking at the diagram the officer shows you at fault as if you tried to go into the left lane, rather than the Yukon crossing in front of you.
Your description matches where the vehicles ended up, not the drawing. If I was on the jury, I would not believe the diagram for the initial contact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:13:11 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Something is fishy, I have been in 2 major accidents in CO, the other driver was at fault and my ins companies took care of the medical. Their insurance companies took care of the settlement for for injuries. I was told the law was such so you would be sure of getting the care you needed without having to fight with the ins company, no matter who was at fault. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road. Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. Something is fishy, I have been in 2 major accidents in CO, the other driver was at fault and my ins companies took care of the medical. Their insurance companies took care of the settlement for for injuries. I was told the law was such so you would be sure of getting the care you needed without having to fight with the ins company, no matter who was at fault. I don't know about CO.. but I am going thru the same basic thing..guy that hit me is a lawyer without a pot to piss in... as has been explained to me, if all the damages exceed his insured amount he can be sued for the difference....those amounts are figured by damage to property at current value, medical bills, lost wages, lost enjoyment, pain and suffering(which here is figured by multiplying total medical by 2-3 times depending on severity of injuries), future lost/lower wages, and future medical and pain and suffering( again based on any long term medical issues which would limit, life,work enjoyment.... it can hit big money quickly.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:18:10 PM EDT
[#40]
OP, you need to check, but your insurance should be required to pay for an attorney to represent you..and it should be your choice on who it is....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:20:25 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If OP hit the other driver as the report described, the other car would likely have just spun out and ended up backing into the right side of the road. Why didn't the cop believe your side of the story at the scene? What more is the other driver suing for? Sounds like a low speed fender bender and sounds like your insurance already fixed his car. Is he making up some 'whiplash' or chiropractor BS? He has supposedly maxed out my 50k per person medical insurance from the accident. after this your first step should be to up your coverages. medical care can be VERY expensive. I even carry more than the minimum on my bike. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:21:01 PM EDT
[#42]
There isn't enough information to solve this. Did your car have enough energy, at enough angle, to push the larger, heavier, vehicle into the median? Or, did he react to being struck, counter steer, and run over you, ending up at the hydrant?
Maybe, on a dry road, there would be enough evidence to determine the point of impact. Otherwise, lane change/sideswipe crashes are difficult to prove. He apparently sold it better than you. Notice that the report states that the cars struck one another. Around here, if the officer is able to determine fault, it is stated in the report. For example, the report might read, "The driver of unit 1 changed lanes unlawfully, causing unit 1 to strike unit 2." Reading that report seems to leave the cause ambiguous. By the way, there are no accidents. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 6:49:07 PM EDT
[#43]
Insurance adjuster for me replied to me asking if they had pictures of the other car or anyone who knew vector physics in the office.
"We do have the pictures of the other vehicle. Based on the points of impact and the diagram on the police report the accident the impact could have caused his vehicle to move off the road in the manner it did, especially due to the road conditions at the time of the accident." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 7:09:11 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope, none of that was done. It was snowing like crazy that night. I think we ended up getting 8 in that day. The only measurements would be from my memory on where the vehicles were. The firehydrant is back in place, and I remember where his vehicle ended up and where mine was at. He was just beyond the hydrant hole by about 5 ft, I was on the curb. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did LE mark the POI and final wheel positions with paint? There aren't any measurements listed on the diagram. Where are you getting measurements from? Nope, none of that was done. It was snowing like crazy that night. I think we ended up getting 8 in that day. The only measurements would be from my memory on where the vehicles were. The firehydrant is back in place, and I remember where his vehicle ended up and where mine was at. He was just beyond the hydrant hole by about 5 ft, I was on the curb. "From memory" isn't going to cut it for the initial conditions for an accident reconstructionist. The good news is that the police diagram "is not to scale". Meaning that nothing can really be inferred from it in court. In a criminal case, a diagram like that wouldn't even be admissible; I don't know about civil. Sounds like the attorney is gambling on medical - which is a hedged bet since many people would have something like $300,000 in coverage. Contingency on a $300k settlement could secure a certified accident reconstructionist on board for the plaintiff, but anything he presents is solely based on conjecture: no skid marks; no police measurements; not even the slightest reliable friction assumptions because of the snow; etc. This is easily refuted; probably not even admissible in the first place. I'm thinking he's going to have to show that you struck him rear of his cg, and that was enough to get his vehicle rotating cw, at which point his tires (which were able to completely break traction earlier) now suddenly gain enough traction to redirect all that energy into the right shoulder. It's an easier argument to make if you cut your wheels back to the right as a reflex to striking him - but argument is that you didn't strike him in the first place, so there goes that. The more plausible scenario is that he lost control of his vehicle first and momentum did the rest. Fortunately, the burden is on him to show the implausible. I'm just thinking out loud, so don't hang your hat on anything above. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 7:40:57 PM EDT
[#45]
Reconstructionists can do crush and deformation impact analysis.
They can also potentially download data from each of the vehicle's crash data recorders. A not to scale accident report, at least in Tennessee, can be admitted into a criminal court case. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2015 9:13:32 PM EDT
[#46]
I think I really do need to consult with a lawyer. Damn it.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
