January 6, 20179 yr From the description it sounds like you slowed down then suddenly cut in front of her then stopped which makes you at least partially at fault and up to 100% at fault of the accident (for vehicular repairs) and partially liable for injuries (can't be fully liable because she wasn't wearing a helmet). Yes the onus is on her to prove that's what happened but you admitted it freely here yourself so be a man and take some responsibility. You can do this one of two ways, either tell the truth to police and let them and the insurers decide on liability and your insurance will pay whatever you need to pay. You may be fined as well but fines in Thailand are trivially small. Or make no comment on what happened to police other than the bike hit you in the rear while you were stopped but contribute a reasonable amount of money to the victim's hospital bills and repair his bike.
January 6, 20179 yr Driving behind another vehicle you should be at a distance and at a speed thar will allow you to stop safely in the event that the vehicle makes a sudden stop or change in direction. eg a dog ran in front of the vehicle.
January 6, 20179 yr 1 hour ago, overherebc said: Driving behind another vehicle you should be at a distance and at a speed thar will allow you to stop safely in the event that the vehicle makes a sudden stop or change in direction. eg a dog ran in front of the vehicle. That only applies if you're in the same lane or lanes are unmarked. If you're in a different lane, when you make a lane change you must yield to whatever vehicle is already in that lane. The behind vehicle is only required to slow once the front vehicle has physically entered the lane (hence why these cases often have split liability in Thailand). I've been involved in such a collision in Thailand (vehicle came onto the motorway at about 30-40km/h and immediately pulled across 3 lanes to the right for no apparent reason), even though I rear-ended them they were found to be 100% liable.
January 6, 20179 yr 3 hours ago, wprime said: That only applies if you're in the same lane or lanes are unmarked. If you're in a different lane, when you make a lane change you must yield to whatever vehicle is already in that lane. The behind vehicle is only required to slow once the front vehicle has physically entered the lane (hence why these cases often have split liability in Thailand). I've been involved in such a collision in Thailand (vehicle came onto the motorway at about 30-40km/h and immediately pulled across 3 lanes to the right for no apparent reason), even though I rear-ended them they were found to be 100% liable. On a normal road ie one lane for each direction you should not be so close that you can't stop in time. That seems to be the case with the OP. The same as the guy on the 332 only 30 minutes ago who was so close to me I couldn't see the hood/bonnet in my mirror. Was an expat in a white Ford Wild-Track. Can't argue against your case as you are correct and probably would be in most countries, you can guess the ones where you would be wrong.
January 6, 20179 yr 2 hours ago, overherebc said: On a normal road ie one lane for each direction you should not be so close that you can't stop in time. That seems to be the case with the OP. The same as the guy on the 332 only 30 minutes ago who was so close to me I couldn't see the hood/bonnet in my mirror. Was an expat in a white Ford Wild-Track. Can't argue against your case as you are correct and probably would be in most countries, you can guess the ones where you would be wrong. I don't see that he clarified the number of lanes only that he pulled left (which seemed to imply an additional lane or hard shoulder to his left). In any case, it would simply come down to whether he crossed a line before the accident or not. If he didn't cross any lines then the motorbike is 100% at fault.
January 6, 20179 yr 6 minutes ago, wprime said: I don't see that he clarified the number of lanes only that he pulled left (which seemed to imply an additional lane or hard shoulder to his left). In any case, it would simply come down to whether he crossed a line before the accident or not. If he didn't cross any lines then the motorbike is 100% at fault. A few months ago I was indicating well in advance of turning left at the next junction. Last check in my left hand mirror before starting to turm was clear. As I turned the idiot on his bike who at the last minute decided to pass on the inside had to go into the end of the ditch, which was full of water. I stopped and watched him stand up and try to get his semi-submerged bike out of the water and then I drove off. Never heard anymore about it. There was no contact between the bike and my pick up so as far as I was concerned he had simply driven into the ditch.
January 7, 20179 yr 51 minutes ago, canthai55 said: Nice of you to help him. He made a mistake. See post #8 If I got out to help I would have been putting myself in a position that would quite possibily indicate that I was responsible. He was only wet and unhurt. No-one else was there at the time but TIT and the next small bike that turned up would have been a witness to the whole thing.
January 7, 20179 yr Eh, wake up. Thailand is not a banana republic except in the mind of surprisingly many ignorant ThaiVisa members The police of course supported the OP and confirmed that it was her fault Yes it is.
January 7, 20179 yr On 05/01/2017 at 10:47 AM, asianscouser said: I take it you've never been to Liverpool ? Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Or Birkenhead, Rivers Road estate. ?????????
January 7, 20179 yr On 1/5/2017 at 10:43 AM, MikeyIdea said: I am not American, it's just that the UK has no area that comes even near Chonburi when it comes to criminality but the US has plenty The Chonburi / Pattaya area is statistically the most criminal area of Thailand If you say so but I reckon the islands down south take the biscuit.
Create an account or sign in to comment