M I in the wrong?
-
Was on my way to pick up something from my friend this morning,suddenly,a cat dashed across my path so i jammed the brakes immediately,unfortunately,this had not prevented me from running over the cat. What it did caused however is a collusion from a Super4 behind.I got down the car to check on the rider. Luckily the rider was not seriously hurt,only some scratches on his forearm. But the cat is dead. What a gruesome death!
The Super4 rider insisted tt it was my fault n demanded compensation from me($500)for repairs on his bike n medical bills but i refused saying tt i had no choice as a cat had came into my path. Further more, he was not folllowing a safety distance.Seeing no further conclusion from this argument, we exchanged personal particulars/licence plates n left.B4 he left,He said tt he's going to sue my pants off for this but i had not heard from him till now.
What should i do? Should i make a police report or just report to my insurance coy? Asked a few friends n they said its his fault as he had not followed the safety distance rule,n i could claim the damages on my car from him. Need views from u guys. Thanx!
P.S izzit against the law to run over a cat n leaving the scene wifout reporting? -
u shld just run over the cat... really... unless behind u got no other vehicles...
if u go msia see alot of dead cats,dogs,birds, and etc all kena run over by cars...
------------------
Don't Flame Me. -
Wat I heard is that when you that your car practical, the instructor should have told you that if you can avoid the cat without causing any accident you may do so if not then you will be the one at fault. They will rather have you killing the cat rather then causing any accident. That's what I heard when I'm taking my car practical.
-
As i said, the cat dashed out suddenly, i had little reaction time n the natural instinct is to brake.
-
Maybe some of us do have tt kind of killer instinct him/her???
-
actually, i think you are at fault.
it's not about safe following distance, but braking power.
4 brakes vs 2.
if you are on your bike, following a car at let's say.... 2 car lengths, suddenly he jams his brake, i believe you too will end up crashing into him.
so yes, you are wrong. the thing about the cat popping out is just suei.
------------------
Target -> Jha Over Rev Carbon Pipes -> 100000 Yen -> $1400 -
ist of all u dun hv to exchang particulars at all. the only infor you need is the plate numbers.
and indeed there is no need for u to pay him. ZERO. in fact, even if there is nothing infront of your and you jam brake which caused him bang onto you. its still his fault as like wat u said, he did not keep a safety distance.
the party in fault is always the one who hit the front's butt. unless the front vehicle cause the whole accident while changing lane.
but being a rider oso, hope u still abt claiming from him your damages of your car, of course it depends on his attitute oso.
if the damage of your car is very minimum and he is not very XL. then give him a chance lor.
but the amount is big and he really KNS then claim till his pants drop lah.
but the bottom line is its not ur fault and u need to report this to your insurance coy. but wheather to claim against him its up to you.
------------------
----------
Cheeers!
DogGoesPunk
~~~The fewer our wants the more we resemble the Gods~~~
Socrates -
he is wrong precisely because he jammed his brakes. it is not his fault, because he wanted to avoid killing the cat, however to the S4, he is 100% wrong because no warning was given.Originally posted by dgp:and indeed there is no need for u to pay him. ZERO. in fact, even if there is nothing infront of your and you jam brake which caused him bang onto you. its still his fault as like wat u said, he did not keep a safety distance.
the party in fault is always the one who hit the front's butt. unless the front vehicle cause the whole accident while changing lane.
something very important was not stated. what speed were you 2 going at?
on paper, a safety distance is 2 cars length, it works on paper, not in real life. in real life, people do not stick to 50kmh or less. -
poor little cat.... rest in peace
sorry ah.. i m a cat lover
------------------
WARNING: "Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance thereon. Communication of any information in this message to any unauthorized person is an offence under the Official Secrets Act (Cap 213). Please notify the sender immediately if you receive this in error." -
try telling that to the TP.Originally posted by nismoS132:actually, i think you are at fault.
it's not about safe following distance, but braking power.
4 brakes vs 2.
if you are on your bike, following a car at let's say.... 2 car lengths, suddenly he jams his brake, i believe you too will end up crashing into him.
so yes, you are wrong. the thing about the cat popping out is just suei.
isnt it obvious its finding reasons to justify the mistakes?
------------------
----------
Cheeers!
DogGoesPunk
~~~The fewer our wants the more we resemble the Gods~~~
Socrates -
jus like i said, even if he purposely jam brake and the S4 bang into him. under the eyes of the law S4 still in thbe wrongOriginally posted by nismoS132:he is wrong precisely because he jammed his brakes. it is not his fault, because he wanted to avoid killing the cat, however to the S4, he is 100% wrong because no warning was given.
something very important was not stated. what speed were you 2 going at?
on paper, a safety distance is 2 cars length, it works on paper, not in real life. in real life, people do not stick to 50kmh or less.
------------------
----------
Cheeers!
DogGoesPunk
~~~The fewer our wants the more we resemble the Gods~~~
Socrates -
the law is blind.Originally posted by dgp:jus like i said, even if he purposely jam brake and the S4 bang into him. under the eyes of the law S4 still in thbe wrong
it is created to try to keep order in certain situations, but it does not apply to all.
in cases like this, rather than go to the law, you should judge by your own principles and morals.
think about the accident, think about what caused the accident. you should remember that the s4 was not tailgating you, he was just riding as per normal, safe distance or not. if you want to blame others for not keeping a safe distance, 1st think whether you keep a safe distance when you ride/drive. -
Originally posted by nismoS132:
jus like wat u said earlier on. the book says a thing and rider do otherwise. thats y i suggested to look at the rider's attitute. you might think that ur travelling at the safest speed and tailgating never exist in your dictionary but still its your own thoughts. and what we have here is reality. the truth is if the driver wants to claim against the river, he can.
the law is blind.
it is created to try to keep order in certain situations, but it does not apply to all.
in cases like this, rather than go to the law, you should judge by your own principles and morals.
think about the accident, think about [b]what caused the accident. you should remember that the s4 was not tailgating you, he was just riding as per normal, safe distance or not. if you want to blame others for not keeping a safe distance, 1st think whether you keep a safe distance when you ride/drive.[/B]
the rider hav to claim from his own insurance.
whose fault is it we hv no postion to judge, no one is to be omnipotent asin playing god to pass the sentence and of cos the individual wld hav on things said on their own favour.
wat i provide is reality straight actual senario from my book.
Raider, its all up to you, but if he insist of u paying and call u up again for compensation, ask him to claim against his own insurance and then u shld noe its time you claim from his as well.
------------------
----------
Cheeers!
DogGoesPunk
~~~The fewer our wants the more we resemble the Gods~~~
Socrates -
ermm i dun think u are in the wrong even thou u jammed brakes. cause i once bang into a car due to the drivers misjudgement ( the driver tot tat his car wont be able to squeeze thru the road with a bus stopping at the side, in fact, actually theres more den enuff space.) i was stated wrong but anyway i juz rode off. blame myself for not keeping a safe distance. After asking my friends, i den realise tat in an accident, if u happen to bang ppl from the rear, u are at fault. stupid right... no choice.. i think the S4 behind u should not follow so close. if he is keeping a distance, he might not be able to stop but maybe can avoid banging into u ....
juz my opinion. -
the S4 is trying to escape responsibility. i disagree with Henry, RAIDER u are in no wrong.
if i were u, i would have jammed brake too bcos i look forward more than i look in the mirror.
whether it is a cat or not isn the point. if a piano was to drop from the sky suddenly and land in front of ur car, naturally u would jam brake right? if during that split second while u are braking u look in the mirror and see de S4, would u let go your brake and crash into the piano? allowing him to avoid an accident while urself bear the costs for something u could have avoided if u braked. de S4 was following too close. no doubt abt that.
The exact same thing happened to me last nite at Changi V, when i was turning into ChangiV from loyang avenue by filtering left, i checked for traffic and when i turned bac the car in front brake from 40km/h to 0km/h just in time to avoid hitting a cat. thankfully i did manage to stop in time bcos i wasn going too fast and i wasn tailgating...
but i had quite a feel of my pillion when i e-braked... but thats out of point... kekeke -
Rest In Peace Kitty....poor cat...
-
Thanx for ur comments everybody, i've just called up my insurance coy but nobody picked up the phone(Oh ya! i forgot today vesek day!) Went to make a police report from advice from a friend(just in case the S4 tua me n reported the case claiming tt i ran away after the accident). Btw i was travelling at abt 60km/h on n so i think the 4 brakes vs 2 brakes would not b an issue here. My bumper had a crack about 8cm long so i think the bike was was going above 60km/h too. Anyway the rider called up, still demanding for the 500bucks for his injuries n damages. He even threatened to sue me for that but i had asked him to go ahead as had received an assurance from my friend's dad who is working in the tp investigation department that wif the nature of accident, i would have a more favourable ground.
-
don't worry too much,cos 100% the person who kiss ur butt of ur vehicle is at fault!!he's suppose to keep safe following distance so that he can react in cases like this,isn't it that we were tot this in riding sch??he must had forget i think & can i claim insurance for e kitty??hahaha
-
On paper its 1 car length for every 10km/h so if we r both travelling at 60km/h he should b 6 car length from me. I think its more than enugh distance for a S4 to brake from 60 to 0 in 6 carlength(abt 15m??? Unless he is going well above that...Originally posted by nismoS132:he is wrong precisely because he jammed his brakes. it is not his fault, because he wanted to avoid killing the cat, however to the S4, he is 100% wrong because no warning was given.
something very important was not stated. what speed were you 2 going at?
on paper, a safety distance is 2 cars length, it works on paper, not in real life. in real life, people do not stick to 50kmh or less. -
I dunno about this, but I kept thinking about this statement .... Cars 4 brakes, higher braking power, bikes 2 brakes, smaller power ....
I think think think ... car has 4 brakes, true, but they also have higher inertia due to their larger mass. Bikes have only 2 brakes, but in comparison, bikes have lower inertia. So the statement that a car can stop in a shorter distance than a bike can doesn't seem to make sense to me. It seems to me that both vehicles would roughly have more or less the same stopping distance, if not, the bike should be able to stop faster.
I think the problem with motorist on our Singapore road is that we follow too close behind. Every so often, on the expressway, on the right most lane,I can on several occasions, see a car coming behind another car, so close. What's that suppose to mean ? "Hey, I am faster, you better give way, and to show that, I'm coming right up behind you" That's very bad.
No, I dun think you are in the wrong. Super 4 was too close perhaps. -
sori 2 hear tis... in my own opinion, u r not in the wrong. the following distance is too close oreadi. the one who hit the rear of another is always in the wrong in the eyes of the law. if u go to tp on tis, worse case end up both party deduct 6 points for reckless drivin... the one who hit the rear is always in the wrong because he is supposed to follow a safety distance. even anythin, if he had followed tis safety distance, he will hav time 2 react.... juz my opinion coz i been in accident b4 when drivin 2...
-
eh i think raider is in de wrong , cos last time i when for car theory lesson , one person go ask , SIR IF Say one cat jump infront of ur car how?
Instruter reply : IF cat too near , YOu got to go over de cat , cos if u do a sudden braking , a vehical behind u dont have enuff reaction time , n will hit you , in dat case you are in wrong
But if de cat is far distance away u can slowly slow down to let cat pass ,
i think raider you in wrong ,
YOu ride bike rite ?
you must noe how good is a car n bike braking performance -
the main point here to note is sudden braking. no warning was given at all the the s4.
that is where raider is "wrong". -
Dear raider,
forget bout the safety dist, rd cond , the dead cat and how many brake calipers.....haha
In the eyes of the law, the bike is at fault no matter how far the safety dist and speed he was goin!
If he calls u again, ask him to contact and make claim against your ins...which is a joke and waste of time. But make sure u report the incident accordingly to your ins company.
If u want to u can claim against the bike for the damaged to your bumper...but if u pity him thn forget it cos he will suffer a greater loss on his repair of his bike thn your small scratch on your bumper......
Ride safe..... -
from behind is always wrong. so dun worry raider.