UKC

Three weeks ago, in Mallorca, we were in a car addident which I believe was 100% the other drivers fault.

We were on a single carriageway road (driving on the right, obviously) and were indicating left to turn into our villa. This meant crossing the other side of the road and into a drive way. There was no oncoming traffic at all.

We slowed over an appropriate distance whilst indicating left. There was a car behind us but all was well. We started to turn left and the other car pulled onto the wrong side of the road and hit the left side of our car.

For whatever reason, perhaps he was going too fast/not paying attention and didn't notice us slowing down/indicating, his decision to overtake despite our signals led to the accident.

We drew what happened (as seemed standard with hire cars) and the other driver signed to say this was correct. We made sure it showed us indicating etc.

No one was hurt, we got a new car and all was well.

Three weeks on, I today received an email from the hire car company saying that their insurance company has decided that I was at fault and when questioned they said:

"However, when I sended all documentation to our insurance they told me that legally its guilty who turns and hit with someone who was ahead. Believe me that I was as surprised as you."

I don't really understand what this means and I have asked for clarification whilst explaining the situation again.

I've had £870 taken from my credit card so I'm keen to get to the bottom of this ASAP.

I do have excess insurance but don't believe have I should have to pay. We have pictures of the scene showing his skid marks on the wrong side of the road, where we were turning and were we ended up etc.

Any advice would be appreciated as I was a little shocked to hear they are placing the guilt on me. With them being a foreign company (Click and Rent) I'm not sure what standard procedures etc are.

In reply to James Malloch:

I wonder if they have misunderstood the report.
He who turns hits someone ahead.
Sounds to me like they think you turned in to the path of an oncoming car.

In reply to Dax H:



That was my thought - I've made it clear that the other car was behind me, travelling in the same direction, and was never in front of us.

I shall see how they come back.

I thought about just letting the excess company deal with it but I'm unsure how it will affect my insurance. I'm assuming if it's deemed as my fault I'll be worse off than visa verse?

In reply to James Malloch:


Is this the problem?

In reply to Kipper:

A typo on my part. I'm on a long train journey, tired, and thinking about some route beta for Malham this weekend.

Good spot! I've edited the post, thanks.

In reply to James Malloch:

Right or wronmg I'd just let the excess insurance company deal with it....

You will get to explain to them, in English etc... they can then take the pain of arguing with companies in another country.

I've had one use of such insurance (admittedly just getting money back from a dodgy firm that should never have debited me in the first place) and it was utterly no questions asked, they just got on with it... repaid me and what they did after that was none of my concern - indeed, I never heard back whether they managed to claim back/have the charge cancelled or whatever.

In your case I guess if you are being squeaky clean, until such time as you are exonerated, technically you have an accident you 'should' disclose but outside of that it has no impact on your insurance/NCB etc.

I'd simply reclaim my cash, leave it to the excess firm to fight your corner or not as they wish, and for any on-going insurance etc just forget the incident... if ever challenged (and how would you ever be) simply state that the incident was not your fault and the reasons why and state that it was handed over to insurers and you have no idea what the outcome was. When buying excess insurance again, they never ask anything about your driving history in any case.

In reply to James Malloch:

For what its worth, the convention all over South America when you want to indicate to let someone know that they should overtake you is to use your left indicator.... i.e. the indicator towards the middle of the road. This is the opposite to the convention in the UK where you would indicate on the kerbside (still left indicator though!).

I don't know if this is the same convention in Spain, or maybe the other driver was a Latin American? In any case it is possible that the other driver thought you were giving them an all "clear to overtake" signal. Might be useful information, maybe not.

In reply to James Malloch:

Completely depends on the timing. If you had already started to turn left before he started to overtake - his fault. If he had started to overtake before you started to turn - you are partly to blame.

In reply to James Malloch:
In Mexico, (and they may take this from Spanish laws?) it is the obligation of the driver turning left to pull over to the right side of the road, and allow cars behind to pass, before turning left accross the road.

If the law is the same in Mallorca, then, as backwards as it is, it is technically you who is at fault.

In reply to Creedence:



Pretty sure this is how it worked in Menorca last time I visited - admittedly a fair few years ago.

In reply to Andes:

This sounds bonkers, but makes a little more sense after Creedence's explanation.

In reply to Creedence:


That's not the case on Spanish roads. It's like every else in Europe.

In reply to Creedence:

Yes, I wondered if this was relevant. A number of busy left turns have you pulling right and then crossing the whole carriageway when it's clear. Perhaps a Spanish lawyer is required?

In reply to James Malloch:
It's not worth the hassle of contesting it, just let the excess insurance company deal with it. Presumably the police are not involved and there is question of any prosecution against you? My ex was involved in a crash in Spain - her fault, she admitted it. Her insurers dealt with it without any problem, but the other party informed the police and she got a 250 euro fine which the excess company wouldn't cover!!

I wouldn't worry about it affecting your excess insurance. Prior to the above crash I had made a previous claim on my excess insurers when we were blamed for damage to a hire car which we hadn't caused (stupidly we hadn't noticed it when we picked the car up at the airport and when we discovered it the next day the hire company denied that it was already damaged). Our excess insurance company paid up without a fuss on both occasions and our premium was not affected on renewal.

We were insured with Insurance4carhire.

In reply to James Malloch:

Take it up with the credit card provider and if you get nowhere with that then hand it over to the back-up insurance.

In reply to Creedence:



Yep - this is exactly what I first thought. Many times, traffic turning left off a main road in Spain is directed to a sort of turning half-circle on the right to leave you at 90 degrees to the main road. You then cross both lanes (when clear, obviously) straight on. I've been beeped at before by traffic coming up behind when stopped waiting to turn left.

Not sure what the deal is when there isn't a turning circle (which there wouldn't be for an individual property) but that might be where the problem lies.

This is what you have excess insurance for...

In reply to James Malloch:

I'm definitely no expert but I've driven fairly extensively in Spain and I don't think the South American convention on indicating left in order to be overtaken applies. However, as already said, on main carriageways in the most of Spain in the absence of a roundabout you can't turn left without using a right turning known as a ‘Cambio de Sentido’. This leads you round through 90 degrees so that you end up perpendicular to the main carriageway, where you wait to cross in safety.

On normal single lane roads, you aren't allowed to turn left if there is a continuous white line in the middle of the road.

On normal single lane roads with a dotted white line in the middle, when turning left, I *think* it's Spanish law that you must wait until everything behind you has gone past and that it's then clear to turn. This means that if the oncoming lane is clear of traffic, the cars behind you will all overtake you as soon as you slow down and indicate your intention to make a left turn.

As I said, I'm no expert, so best check if I'm right. If I am, it would explain the response you've had from Spain.

HTH

Dave

In reply to James Malloch:
Thanks for the replies again - lots of food for thought. I think I'll let the excess company deal with it having just received this from the hire car company:

QUOTE OPEN

>In my opinion, and in answer to the question posed by the client, I must inform you / you to:

>The warning notice by optical signals of a maneuver that involves (ra) one (better known as "turn signal to turn left") lateral displacement, it is an obligation of the driver; and not a right of preference.
(S / Art£ 109 of Royal Decree 1428/2003, of 21 November, approving the General Traffic Regulations for the implementation and development of the articulated text of the Law on Traffic, Motor Vehicle Traffic and Road Safety approved, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 339/1990 of 2 March 1990)

>The driver of the vehicle that will be in advance, has "banned" perform maneuvers that prevent or hinder overtaking.
(S / Apdo.2 - Art£36 - Legislative Royal Decree 6/2015 of 30 October, approving the revised text of the Traffic Act, Motor Vehicle Traffic and Road Safety approved.)

QUOTE CLOSE

Any idea what it actually means?

In reply to James Malloch:

I was wondering if this means:

The driver of the vehicle that will be in advance (IE - The car that tried to overtake me),

has "banned" perform maneuvers (TRANSLATION ISSUE? - should this be "has performed a banned maneuver")

that prevent or hinder overtaking. (That they shouldn't have done?)

In reply to James Malloch:

They just sent the Spanish. They just used google translate which probably means the above wasn't fully accurate in terms of the law...

La advertencia mediante señales ópticas de preaviso de una maniobra que implica(rá) un desplazamiento lateral (más conocido como "poner el intermitente para girar a la izquierda"), es una obligación del conductor; y NO un derecho de preferencia.

El conductor del vehículo que va a sera adelantado, tiene "prohibido" efectuar maniobras que impidan o dificulten el adelantamiento.