please comment!

[statute]

What is the name of your state? florida

to avoid an accident i changed lanes, by doing so the gentelman in the other lane to which i moved into hit his brakes and spun out of control hitting the guardrail and causing damage to his car.
Now i recieved a violation for improper lane change. first of all can i challenge that bc i had plenty of room to switch lanes , and can he expect my insurance to pay being that i never touched his car?

 

[efflandt]

If you suddenly changed lanes without signaling, causing someone to take evasive action, that sounds to me like a definition of improper lane change.

I can never understand why people spin wildly out of control, but I am an autocrosser, and know my limits of braking and steering at the same time (even without anti-lock brakes).

 

[DaveInPhx]

If you suddenly changed lanes without signaling, causing someone to take evasive action, that sounds to me like a definition of improper lane change.

I can never understand why people spin wildly out of control, but I am an autocrosser, and know my limits of braking and steering at the same time (even without anti-lock brakes).

OP said nothing about "suddenly" and "without signaling". It would be the other drivers word against his/hers and, unless the OP admitted he/she was too close or otherwise specifically acknowledged he "caused" the other driver to spin out of control, there's no evidence to this fact. With the info provided, it's just as likely the other driver wasn't paying attention and looked up just in time to see he was about to hit the OP so he braked and swerved.

Another thing....it's also possible the other driver's vehicle had some mechanical defect that caused the car to spin out of control, especially if it was a newer vehicle with modern safety features such as anti-lock brakes and steering assist.

I would absolutely go to court to fight the citation, but unfortunately, insurance companies are not bound by court rulings. They will negotiate between the two of them and come up with a percentage to determine each party's level of fault.

On a side note, I hate to say it but it seems that because you hung around after the accident to be a good citizen, you created the opportunity to get cited and for the other drivers insurance company to pin the responsibility on you. Not saying you didn't do the right thing - just that this is one of those cases where doing the right thing doesn't have the desired outcome.

 

[Zigner]

Of course, Dave is wrong.

You caused the accident. The only thing that you ARE lucky for is that you didn't actually strike the other vehicle. At least YOU have a drivable car now

 

[VeronicaLodge]

What is the name of your state? florida

to avoid an accident i changed lanes, by doing so the gentelman in the other lane to which i moved into hit his brakes and spun out of control hitting the guardrail and causing damage to his car.
Now i recieved a violation for improper lane change. first of all can i challenge that bc i had plenty of room to switch lanes , and can he expect my insurance to pay being that i never touched his car?

are you serious? yes you should have received a violation and yes you or your insurance should repair his car.

 

[VeronicaLodge]

OP said nothing about "suddenly" and "without signaling". It would be the other drivers word against his/hers and, unless the OP admitted he/she was too close or otherwise specifically acknowledged he "caused" the other driver to spin out of control, there's no evidence to this fact. With the info provided, it's just as likely the other driver wasn't paying attention and looked up just in time to see he was about to hit the OP so he braked and swerved.

Another thing....it's also possible the other driver's vehicle had some mechanical defect that caused the car to spin out of control, especially if it was a newer vehicle with modern safety features such as anti-lock brakes and steering assist.

I would absolutely go to court to fight the citation, but unfortunately, insurance companies are not bound by court rulings. They will negotiate between the two of them and come up with a percentage to determine each party's level of fault.

On a side note, I hate to say it but it seems that because you hung around after the accident to be a good citizen, you created the opportunity to get cited and for the other drivers insurance company to pin the responsibility on you. Not saying you didn't do the right thing - just that this is one of those cases where doing the right thing doesn't have the desired outcome.

this is the most ridiculous thing I have read on here.

 

[DaveInPhx]

Of course, Dave is wrong.

You caused the accident. The only thing that you ARE lucky for is that you didn't actually strike the other vehicle. At least YOU have a drivable car now

Sorry, but on what do you base your claim that I'm wrong?

Are you claiming it's not possible that the other driver wasn't paying attention? Are you claiming it's not possible the other driver's vehicle was defective?

These are questions that should be asked in front of a judge. The cop wasn't a witness to the accident so his testimony will be based on statements made by the drivers. As you said, there was no contact between the two vehicles so unless the other driver can prove he was paying attention or that his car recently passed a safety inspection, chances are pretty good OP can argue that he wasn't at fault.

 

[racer72]

Sorry, but on what do you base your claim that I'm wrong?

Are you claiming it's not possible that the other driver wasn't paying attention? Are you claiming it's not possible the other driver's vehicle was defective?

These are questions that should be asked in front of a judge. The cop wasn't a witness to the accident so his testimony will be based on statements made by the drivers. As you said, there was no contact between the two vehicles so unless the other driver can prove he was paying attention or that his car recently passed a safety inspection, chances are pretty good OP can argue that he wasn't at fault.

Your post is based on pure speculation, not factual law. This site is Free Legal Advice, not Free Speculative Advice. As Joe Friday use to say, "Just the facts". Base your answers on facts like the other, not on assumptions. Remember, to assume makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me".

 

[DaveInPhx]

Your post is based on pure speculation, not factual law. This site is Free Legal Advice, not Free Speculative Advice. As Joe Friday use to say, "Just the facts". Base your answers on facts like the other, not on assumptions. Remember, to assume makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me".

I assumed nor speculated anything but the POSSIBILITY that there may be another explanation. Are you saying the info in the original post allows one to conclude only that the OP is responsible for the accident? IMO, *that's* pure speculation.