posted
After a little event this past Saturday I've updated my opinion on driving with a cell phone.
I was coming out of a shopping plaza, where it had been snowing for the past couple of hours while we saw RENT.
Coming out of the exit from the mall, a truck in front of me fishtailed, and ran his right front tire into the curb. That alerted me to the fact that it was REALLY slippery.
I moved into the left lane, in part because the truck had stopped in the right lane, but also because I had to make a left turn at the bottom of the hill at the exit. I also tried to slow down, because it had suddenly become apparent that even going maybe 10 or 15 miles an hour was way too fast. It took a couple of car lengths to slow down to maybe 2 or 3 mph, because any brake pressure at all activated my ABS.
By the time I had slowed down, my car was starting to slip toward the left, because the road turned left and that was downhill. I turned the car that way, and pointed down the hill, which was where I wanted to go anyway.
At this point there was a car in the right lane, inching down toward the intersection, still about 5 car lengths from the intersection. There were no other cars in front of either of us. She turned on her left directional, looked out of her driver's door window, and began pulling into the lane in front of me. Her face was bathed in the blue glow of her cell phone.
Now, she probably didn't know that I was not rolling, but sliding down the hill. I don't usually like to use the horn, but I had to make her aware that if she continued over, I would run into her. So I layed on the horn. Blew it for a full 3 seconds, as I slid downward. Her response? She stopped. Came to a full stop straddling the two lanes.
The ABS was pumping, the car was doing everything it could to come to a stop. 3 seconds to slide about 1 car length. Then I came to a stop, with my right front bumper resting against her left rear bumper. Impact speed approximately zero miles per hour, you could just hear the bump as I came to a stop.
I rolled down the window and called to her to move her car out of traffic, and added "and get off the phone!" She responded: "I'm calling 911."
My wife opened her window and also told her to move her car, as other traffic was backing up behind us. She moved over, but stayed on the slope. I rolled to the bottom of the hill, and told my wife to tell her that I was going across the road into another parking lot. Her response to everything we told her was "I'm calling the police," or "the police will be here soon."
When we got to the other side of the road, we got out the registration and got out of the car, and waited for her to come across. She did. Still talking on the phone. She didn't roll down her window. My wife and I went to the back of her car and examined the bumper. No damage. Not even a scrape or blemish.
She still didn't get out of her car, but eventually concluded her call and rolled down the window. I tried to exchange registration info, but she cut me off. "The police will be here soon." She started to roll up her window, and my wife told her there was no damage to her car.
"The police will be here soon. We have to have a traffic report."
Now, I was pretty hot to tell her that getting a traffic report probably wasn't a good idea for her, since she had just caused an accident, and had been talking on the cell phone at the time, but she was rolling up her window and all that came out was: "You just caused an accident."
She continued rolling up the window and told my wife: "he hit me for no reason."
We waited around for awhile. Ambulances were going by, presumably to other accidents where they were needed. We went back to her car. She insisted that the police would be their soon. I pointed out that it would probably not be soon, because there were a lot of accidents going on. It was that kind of weather. She rolled up the window.
I got out a notebook, and squatted in front of her car to write down her license plate number. Then I went back to my car to sit inside where snow wasn't falling on the paper, and wrote out my own insurance information. I walked up to her car holding it out. She rolled down the window and said the police were coming. I said that may be true, but we were still required to exchange information. She took the slip of paper. My wife asked her why she didn't get out of the car and see for herself that there was no damage to her car. She cut her off. "The police are coming." and rolled up her window.
I walked away, and a little while later she handed a slip of paper to my wife with her registration info on it. She brought it to me and asked if we needed to stay, now that we had exchanged information. I said maybe not legally, but that I had a bad feeling about what this woman would say to the police. So we stayed.
A police car arrived eventually. He talked to us first. Then he talked to her very separately. We could see her get out the car and they went to the back of her car. Some time later he gave us a copy of the accident report. I saw the words "No damage" and just drove away. A little while later my wife saw that the no damage only applied to our vehicle. He had listed her car as having damage to the rear bumper. Doesn't say what part of the bumper.
This morning I called the insurance agent (they're out today, for new year's), and left a message. A little while later we got a call from the insurance company. She's filing a claim.
Now, the fact is that I don't think that her being on the cell phone really contributed to the accident. I just think she talks on the cell phone when she's driving because she's a moron.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
I once rear-ended a car that pulled right in front of my (full-sized) van, slammed on the brakes and came to a dead stop. On a very rainy night. For no reason. Eyewitnesses attested that this accident was not my fault. The other guy kept telling the police "Hit from behind -- BAM!" They carted him away in an ambulance and towed his car. I felt dreadful about it.
The judge threw the case out when he couldn't sort out the damage and injury from this accident from the many many other "hit from behind" accidents that the guy had accumulated over the year. Seems he was something of an expert in managing to get hit from behind.
I guess everybody has something they are good at.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That sounds incredible frustrating. I do not know how I would have handeled that situation, but I probably would have continued to try convince the woman that she was a moron.
The only two things that I really worry about while I'm driving are bad drivers and slippery conditions. I have at least some bit of control in every other situation, but I can do nothing to stop bad drivers from being bad or stop slipping once it has started.
Good luck with that claim. Let's hope that anyone else involved has common sense enough to see the situation clearly.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I just think she talks on the cell phone when she's driving because she's a moron.
So does that mean that you think everyone who drives while talking on a cell is a moron, or was the thought just confined to this situation?
Posts: 1658 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I just think she talks on the cell phone when she's driving because she's a moron.
So does that mean that you think everyone who drives while talking on a cell is a moron, or was the thought just confined to this situation?
Actually this goes back to the other cell phone thread, in which Dagonee pointed out that just because someone is driving distractedly (is that a word?) while talking on a phone doesn't mean that they wouldn't drive distractedly if they weren't talking on a phone.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that anyone who talks on a phone while driving is a moron, but I do think that a lot of people who are morons talk on cell phones while they are driving.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not an advocate of driving while talking on a cell phone, but in conditions like THAT? Make sure you tell your insurance company that she was talking on her cell phone.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Her version of the story is that she dialed 911 immediately after the accident. I told the insurance company that she must have dialed 911 before the accident occurred, because she was on the phone as she changed lanes.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a stupid college student do almost the exact same thing to me... She changed lanes in attempt to make a turn that she should have given up on and made another pass at. No damage to either vehicle, but she insisted on not moving either car out of the road till the police arrived... The moron was so busy yapping on her phone that she didn't think about the fact that she didn't have car insurance and was driving on an expired license... I have to say, the 45 minutes I lost out of my day was worth watching the officer try not to laugh as he wrote her a couple of tickets and explain to her that she had to have her car towed away even though there was no damage...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think her moronity could be established by her reaction after the accident alone. Using the cell phone while driving in those conditions is just icing on the cake.
This is the number one reason I would get a camera phone - to get a picture of her bumper.
Sorry you had to put up with this, Glenn.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Could the insurance company or anyone get the records of her cell phone calls from that night? Or even that time frame?
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, according to accident report, the time of accident was established by the 911 report. If there is a call just prior to the 911 call, then that should nail it.
I don't know if they'll bother to get the records, but I'm sure they could subpoena them if it was a big enough deal.
The insurance company doesn't have any estimate on the amount of damage yet, but the word "fraud" did come up when I said that there was no damage to her bumper. They said they'd investigate.
At this point I'm kind of hoping that she comes up with a really big estimate, in a schadenfreude kinda way.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wouldn't be a bad idea to put a small disposable camera in your glove compartment for next time. I have a camera phone but it doesn't take the best pictures.
Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not illegal to talk on your cellphone (even without a headset) in my state. Is it illegal in your state, Glenn? (I'd check myself but it's not in your profile.)
Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Make sure you consult a lawyer. I had two men try something similar. There were three cars involved, and they were both businessman-types in their thirties or forties. They were very nice to me until they got ahold of my license and realized I was eighteen at the time. Then they told both of their insurance companies that there were thousands of dollars' worth of damage because they figured that because I was young and driving my father's old van, I couldn't afford a lawyer. They backed down when they realized that I had two.
posted
Yes, it's illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone in NY.
I don't think a lawyer is necessary, since it's really only an issue between her and the insurance company. But I think they take fraud quite seriously. If the estimate is anything more than what it costs to repaint the bumper I think they'll be all over her.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good luck with all that - sounds like you've got everything well in hand.
And yes, they would subpoena the records if this were to go to trial, if their lawyer is at all competent.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know that it's nearly always the person in the back who is at fault in a rear-end collision (or whatever you call that.). But isn't pulling out in front of someone pretty much the only exception? If I'm driving safely and you pull out in front of me and I hit you--it's YOUR fault. There's nothing I could have done to prevent it, since I wasn't following you closely--because you weren't THERE.
Seems to me that she was at fault whether she's on the cell phone or not. She was driving unsafely and pulled out in front of you.
Posts: 2880 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
More like this one I think. It seems to be the follow up to the first article. What a weird story. My cell phone is too big for me to even consider swallowing. Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Valentine014, I keep a disposable camera in the glovebox for just this reason. I've had another driver insist on moving his car, then claim it was in a different place/angle at the time of the accident. Next time I'm taking one quick shot of what I can see from inside my car before I even get out of it.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know that it's nearly always the person in the back who is at fault in a rear-end collision (or whatever you call that.). But isn't pulling out in front of someone pretty much the only exception? If I'm driving safely and you pull out in front of me and I hit you--it's YOUR fault. There's nothing I could have done to prevent it, since I wasn't following you closely--because you weren't THERE.
Seems to me that she was at fault whether she's on the cell phone or not. She was driving unsafely and pulled out in front of you.
Jeff had this happen to him and they put it on his record as his fault. Someone pulled right in front of him and slammed on the brakes, and he hit them, and it was ruled his fault. I still to this day am not sure how that works.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does anyone know how temerature extremes affect film? I'm wondering how often a disposable camera kept in the glove compartment would need to be replaced.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Jeff had this happen to him and they put it on his record as his fault. Someone pulled right in front of him and slammed on the brakes, and he hit them, and it was ruled his fault. I still to this day am not sure how that works.
I can sort of understand that if you hit straight on from the back (a clear rear-end). But if you hit the car at an angle (ie, it was still making it into your lane) I can see no way that could be considered anything but the other car's fault.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
At least in Florida, the officer at the scene has to make a determination about what happened and put it in the report. My B-in-L, Dean, was in an accident where he was coming up on a green light in the through lane. An old van in the left turn lane, which had a red, suddenly decided to pull into the through lane and go through the light. Even though it was clear from the angles what happened, the other driver lied and said Dean hit him sitting at a red light.
Because the officer at the scene didn't write down anything about what he saw (angles, skid marks, etc.), the insurance companies decided Dean was at fault.
Posts: 4625 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw a good one, no accident, but a fun little scene. I'm walking on a not busy but not side-street either, and I see a car stopped at a sign maybe a block ahead. As I reach the car, it still hasn't moved. I take a look, see if there's a problem. The driver (female) is talking on a cellphone. And reading a newspaper. And drinking coffee. With the car running. And not moving. Being slightly confused and a little surprised, I decided to stick around for a bit to see how long this would keep up. Five minutes later, I get bored and move on, but the woman still has not budged. No less than three cars swung around her after tooting their horns.
Posts: 354 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Anecdotally, I kept two disposable cameras in my glove compartment through the last year I lived in Montana and the summer when I moved home. When I finally developed the pictures they came out faded and washed out, but recognizable.
I kinda liked it, because it gave them an old timey feel. But not good for documentation purposes I wouldn't think.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Glenn, What does the police report say? I mean, the responding officer talk to both of you so your version of the event would also be noted down on the report. Isn't there a section there where the officer writes his opinion of who was at fault?
Posts: 176 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
The police report says she said she was in our lane and was hit from behind. It says there is rear bumper damage, but doesn't say where.
It also says we say she was in the right lane, and moved into our lane. It doesn't menion snow, or the fact that I was sliding, or that she was talking on the cell phone, or where we said we made contact with her car, or how fast (slow) we said we were moving when we hit her car.
I called the officer, and asked him where he saw damage on her bumper. He said at both ends there was evidence that the bumper had been distorted. Spiderweb cracks in the paint, apparently. I tried to get him to describe it in more detail, since there were no spiderweb cracks where we looked on her bumper. The rest of the bumper was covered in snow, but you could see where we hit because there was no snow. He wasn't very forthcoming with information, so I don't know for sure, but it sounds like the bumper had buckled underneath sometime earlier when it was hit squarely from behind.
Now I want the insurance company to come look at my front license plate, so that they can see that I couldn't have hit her that way, but I don't know.
quote:Now I want the insurance company to come look at my front license plate, so that they can see that I couldn't have hit her that way, but I don't know.
It's worth doing.
To be fair though, I had a bumper with about $300 in damage caused by a slow rear-end collision which didn't damage the front bumper of the car that hit me. Many bumpers are designed to absorb the shock in a way that results in failure.
Has the company asked you for an affidavit yet?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I meant that the rear bumber may be damaged because it was working as designed while the license plate wasn't damaged. In my case, it was my rear bumper that absorbed the blow by taking the damage.
Also, that type of damage isn't necessarily immediately visible - mine was simply tilted a little, not bent.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if the film product is illegible, I bet the act of my visibly taking the pictures would act as at lest some deterrent to lying to the officer at the scene.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The police report should have a section where it says "road conditions" or weather conditions or something. Even my speeding ticket(s) have had that.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, there's no place on the report specifically set aside for road condiditons. There's a place for driver and auto information, a place to list damage for each car, a place for a description of the accident, and a place for "notes."
The description of the accident has her version and ours. The officer chose not to put anything into the notes section.
Dag,
I know what you mean, but the damage to her bumper would require that I hit her squarely with my front bumper, where my license plate projects downward. If I'd hit her with that part of the bumper the plate would have folded, no matter how much impact her bumper absorbed.
But I didn't hit her with the front of my bumper, I hit her with the right front corner, into her left rear about a foot from the corner of her bumper. I could see that if someone didn't know how the cars had made contact they might believe that I could have caused the compression damage to the left side fo her bumper, but not the damage the officer saw on the right side.
Then again, the front of a Prius is really short and stubby. If I'd caused that much damage with the corner of my bumper, I would've taken out my headlight.
But as I said before, the collision speed was almost zero mph. There was no damage where we hit, either to her car or to ours.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
Someone pulled right in front of him and slammed on the brakes, and he hit them, and it was ruled his fault. I still to this day am not sure how that works.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
