Contesting finding of fault in a collision report

[y_p_w]

Anyone do this?

My wife was in a collision. She was going straight down a T-intersection. Another driver came from a stop sign and was turning left. So with this image, she's on the left moving right (straight without a stop sign) and the driver on the bottom is turning left (from a stop sign).

She told me that the impact was at the left fender of the driver side door of the turning car. I was pretty sure that this was going to be an easy failure to yield right of way determination.

It was taking forever for the report to be filed and she just got it today with a finding that she was at fault. I haven't read it yet, but apparently the reasoning was that the turning driver was already in the intersection and had no way to stop. My guess is that he didn't look left before turning; I've seen a lot of drivers who look in the other direction before turning.

I know collision report findings aren't specifically allowed in court, but are pretty strong arguments when insurance companies settle amongst themselves. My wife is cheap and refused to get collision on her own car, so basically insurance was only going to cover it if the fault was of the other driver. She was also feeling kind of abused by the cop who took the report, as if he was immediately taking the side of the other driver. The driver was a Spanish speaker, along with the (Hispanic) cop so my wife couldn't tell what they were saying. About all I found out was that the other driver claims my wife was going too fast and he didn't see her coming.

Certainly the damages aren't enough that we could justify hiring an attorney and expert to dispute the findings. Nobody was physically injured and in court I'm thinking an attorney could tear that finding apart. My wife also has no pictures of her own because she has a habit of using up the batteries on her phone and not charging it; we're looking to get copies of the photos the cop took. I have the feeling that questioning the report findings isn't going to be effective in this police department. I'm wondering if it might be subject to review from another agency. At the very least, anyone have an idea of how to get our insurance company to fight on her behalf in a settlement? I doubt that they want to pay if they feel the other driver failed to yield when he had a stop sign.

 

[old1]

IMHO, If the other driver had a stop sign, it is a clear cut case of failure to yield, even if he says he didn't see her. If those are the facts, then any other finding other than the other driver at fault is pure bogus.

 

[AlaskaMike]

Crystal clear failure to yield. In the picture above, (at least in Alaska) vehicle B must yield to vehicle A.

Definitely talk to your insurance company. My agent has been great for things like this, but the claims dept. would be another good one to approach if your agent doesn't do anything for you.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: old1
IMHO, If the other driver had a stop sign, it is a clear cut case of failure to yield, even if he says he didn't see her. If those are the facts, then any other finding other than the other driver at fault is pure bogus.

+1 Completely bogus. Driver at the stop sign failed to yield the right way and the fact that it was clipped in the front fender indicates that he didn't allow enough time and space to clear. If the cop saw it any other way, and the facts are as related, then he's crooked.

If not enough to hire a lawyer, take them to small claims court yourself.

 

[4wheeldog]

A great case for Judge Judy.

I guess you could ask to speak to the writing officer's Sargent. Start by getting an explanation of how the officer derived the conclusions he did. But unless your wife was going double the speed limit, I don't see how she is at fault.

 

[y_p_w]

The other thing I didn't mention was that this was a commercial vehicle and the left turn driver was driving for work. I suspect that he was telling the cop that he could lose his job if he was found at fault.

 

[dishdude]

This is an interesting one, if you had collision, you could file a claim and let the insurance company decide if they want to subrogate. However without collision, I think you are stuck taking the driver (and their insurance company) to small claims court.

 

[HerrStig]

The DUTY of the driver entering the highway is not to LOOK, but to SEE. "I didn't see the other car" is NO excuse. Skid mark length will be evidence of the speeds involved. Your company will probably choose to defend this case when they find out that 5 people claim to be riding in the other car. BTW, my FIRST thought was "the cop has some connection with the other driver". Happens ALL the time.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: old1
IMHO, If the other driver had a stop sign, it is a clear cut case of failure to yield, even if he says he didn't see her. If those are the facts, then any other finding other than the other driver at fault is pure bogus.

+1 Completely bogus. Driver at the stop sign failed to yield the right way and the fact that she was clipped in the front fender indicates that she didn't allow enough time and space to clear. If the cop saw it any other way, then he's crooked.

If not enough to hire a lawyer, take them to small claims court yourself.

She T-boned the fender of the other vehicle. However, he was still coming off a stop sign.

I really wish we had photos.

 

[Sayjac]

Yeah I understood that, used she rather than he. If he was hit in front fender, obviously he never saw or looked for your wife when he pulled out. That was his responsibility and thus failure to yield.

 

[Roob]

Hire a lawyer or paralegal who specializes in traffic infractions. Ex cops are usually the best lawyers to get for these issues and can be significantly cheaper than a regular attorney.
We have companies here like X copper and so on that have X OPP and city police who specialized in traffic for years. They are the experts you want.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: old1
IMHO, If the other driver had a stop sign, it is a clear cut case of failure to yield, even if he says he didn't see her. If those are the facts, then any other finding other than the other driver at fault is pure bogus.

+1 Completely bogus. Driver at the stop sign failed to yield the right way and the fact that it was clipped in the front fender indicates that he didn't allow enough time and space to clear. If the cop saw it any other way, and the facts are as related, then he's crooked.

If not enough to hire a lawyer, take them to small claims court yourself.

Not sure if winning in small claims court does anything if my wife gets a point against her. And California has a pretty standard failure to yield law for drivers at a stop sign where the other directions have no sign.

Quote:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/vctop/vc/d11/c4/21802

Stop Signs: Intersections

21802. (a) The driver of any vehicle approaching a stop sign at the entrance to, or within, an intersection shall stop as required by Section 22450. The driver shall then yield the right-of-way to any vehicles which have approached from another highway, or which are approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to those vehicles until he or she can proceed with reasonable safety.

(b) A driver having yielded as prescribed in subdivision (a) may proceed to enter the intersection, and the drivers of all other approaching vehicles shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle entering or crossing the intersection.

(c) This section does not apply where stop signs are erected upon all approaches to an intersection.


This also took well over a month. I've had to deal with getting these reports, and in my experience it's typically less than two weeks. And CHP is really fast if it's fender bender without physical injury.

 

[Skid]

This is why I have a dash cam.

 

[Nick1994]

She is not at fault.

Go buy a disposable camera and keep in both of your cars. They're like $3.

 

[dernp]

As a LEO with 30 yrs experience, I find this unbelievable. You cannot prove speed unless there is radar or forensics. The other driver must yield to your wife regardless. That is the law, plain and simple.
Unless there is some other bit of evidence that you haven't told us, this case is a shoe in.
Are there any independent witnesses?

 

[racer12306]

Originally Posted By: Skid
This is why I have a dash cam.


The more I drive and the more bull mess I continue to see in regards to traffic incidents, the more I want to get a dash cam.

I drive too much for work to risk some bozo trying to pull something like this on me.



Best of luck, it appears to be clear cut, but then there is what actually results.

 

[brandini]

Also any diagrams you make need to have road signs present, so as above, the bottom car should have a stop sign nearby with no other signs at the intersection.

If it's as described, she couldn't possibly be at fault.

I had the SAME thing happen to me here in VA- not at fault.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Go there and take a picture of the intersection from both sides. Or, give us the address and we can see it on google.

 

[y_p_w]

Originally Posted By: friendly_jacek
Go there and take a picture of the intersection from both sides. Or, give us the address and we can see it on google.

I know this intersection well. I'm not too keen on putting it out here, but I'll send you a PM.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: y_p_w
.....Not sure if winning in small claims court does anything if my wife gets a point against her.

Ahh, that a different subject. If your wife is going to get points on her license or insurance and you don't want that, then depending one on how badly you want to contest it, you may have to hire a lawyer or see what options your insurance may have to help. I doubt the latter will be of much help though unless they would end up having to pay for damages.

I do wish you good luck though because as the facts are related, the conclusion is bogus.