Legal assistance after a traffic accident | Get free advice

Questioner

Good day, My parents had an accident. They were driving on a 60 km road and went onto a traffic plateau with an equal crossing to turn left there. This traffic plateau was announced 100 meters in advance with a sign, was provided with zigzag markings, the road to the left was very confusing due to vegetation. Also, after the threshold for straight-through traffic there is a bend to the right with vegetation, so also poor visibility. Now a car was already driving behind my parents for a few kilometers and never gave the impression of overtaking. Kept sufficient distance and stayed neatly on its own half. Well before the threshold my mother turned on the indicator, looked and saw the car behind still keeping sufficient distance, braked and went to the left on the threshold. At that moment the car behind slammed into the side of my parents. In our opinion this lady was daydreaming and swerved at the last moment to avoid a head-on collision. After some discussion with the lady she said she had not done it on purpose and my mother put the key in the ignition and pointed out to the lady that the indicator had immediately gone on. At this moment the other party is twisting that story and denying that my parents had the indicator on. She also does not indicate that it was not on but says that she did not see it. The insurance company initially wanted to place the full blame on my parents and is now pushing for sharing the blame. Both parties are insured with the same party, the other party fully comprehensive and my parents third party. We now have a very strong feeling that the company defended the most advantageous choice for them and we do not think sharing the blame is fair because it concerns swerving and not overtaking. We had to prove that the indicator was on and initially they indicated that my father was not allowed to testify (he was a passenger), later I heard that this was the case. But she continues to insist on sharing the blame and does not want to ask the other party any more questions. For us it is clear, if you drive behind someone the whole way and do not give the impression of overtaking in clear places, then it is very illogical to overtake at this spot. The lady also did not have her indicator on when she 'overtook', it was simply swerving. With a witness statement from my father, the description of the situation on the spot and the vague statements from the other party... can the insurance company do nothing more for us than propose to share the blame? Can they not question the other party further? Incidentally, the lady in question also tells me that she did not tell the insurance company that my parents' indicator was not on, but that she did not see it. That is also how she put it on the form 'I did not see that the indicator was on'

Lawyer

Good afternoon, I read your story. I hope your parents are doing well. No accident is the same. The situation you describe is complex and it is therefore difficult for me to give a conclusive answer in a few sentences. I would therefore like to get in touch with you personally to discuss the situation thoroughly. As an advocate for victims of accidents, I can, as a lawyer, provide your parents with guaranteed free legal assistance and help them recover the damages suffered by your parents. Attention, understanding and communication are always my starting point. If you need this, please contact me. I will be happy to assist you.

Lawyer

If I summarize your story correctly, your parents were driving a car and were planning to turn at an equal intersection. At the moment they turned, they were overtaken by another car. This car was already several kilometers behind your parents' car. Your mother states that she signaled with the turn signal. Article 18 paragraph 1 RVV states that the driver of a car turning off must give way to traffic on the same road next to them or to the left or right close behind them. Regardless of whether your mother indicated to turn left, she should have made sure that there was a car behind her that wanted to pass her. This means that your mother is in principle liable for the collision. Article 54 RVV (special manoeuvre) does not imply that drivers of a car overtaking another stationary car must give priority to this car. Overtaking is not unlawful in itself. In general, if a car intends to turn, other road users may be expected to be extra attentive. It therefore depends on the circumstances and the traffic situation whether overtaking can be regarded as unlawful in this case and to what extent the parties can be blamed. If you can share photos of the traffic situation and the statements of the parties and witnesses, it is possible to make it more concrete who is liable to what extent for the occurrence of the accident.