Our first traffic accident, just what is the law?

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, GinBoy2 said:

It's a bit of impossible question. There is no law!

 

Outside of Bangkok, which is crazy enough in itself, we all know Thai's drive on the left, except if driving on the right gets you somewhere quicker.

Stick on the hazard flashers, and you are good to go!

Every morning on my way to the gym driving by a few factories, the motorbikes, rather than go to the next U turn, went across the divider, and drove on the right(wrong) side of the road to get to work.

So you also have the hazard when you are on the left, having swarms of motorbikes, crossing over the lanes in front of you to get to the right hand lanes.

It's all lunacy

 And I'm guessing the cops have seen this activity (drive across the divider etc.) a million times and never taken any action? 

 

[GinBoy2]

1 minute ago, scorecard said:

 And I'm guessing the cops have seen this activity (drive across the divider etc.) a million times and never taken any action? 

 

Of course not

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, moe666 said:

Well it doesn't always go aganist the farang I know two farangs who have killed Thais in accident and both were found not at fault. And this was not in Bangkok, they both had car cams.

Highlights the necessity to have a Dash-Cam (fwd & Rear facing) in Thailand....

 

 

In this case the Motorcycle was in the wrong because he was riding down the wrong side of the road in the wrong direction (over taking or otherwise). 

 

Brit man said the Op was at fault as he was turning. I disagree. 

Having been in the same situation the Police also disagreed with this point but only to some extent and made the decision to spilt the blame 50/50 because I was turning, but the other vehicle should not have been on the wrong side of the road (over taking) unless it was clear to do so. 

 

The only debatable part on this point is if the Op was indicating or not which could place the Op's wife at fault if she didn't indicate - but thats word vs word and unprovable - thus Ops wife not at fault. 

 

[donim]

Next time, as farang.. you did not drive then you hide. Walk like a egypt, nothing to see walk away. But surely make sure you wife understand your action next time.

[richard_smith237]

9 minutes ago, Traubert said:

All well and good but who are you going to show the footage to?

 

The Police of course....  and kept as evidence in the event of escalation. 

 

I witnessed a hit'n'run motorcycle accident - The motorcycle in front of me pulled out of a side son straight into the second lane (of a 3 lane road - Rama IV) and straight into another motorcycle, both came off. The party at fault got back on his bike and and sped off. 

 

I stopped and helped the downed motorcyclist. Told him I had Dash-Cam footage. The Police arrived and I sent them and the Motorcyclist the footage via the Line App.

Both were very polite and thankful. 

 

The only thing which does give me pause for thought is if I am on my Motorcycle or Car and get totaled... Would anyone think to collect the footage from the Dash-cams (which I have on both Motorcycle and Car). 

 

[richard_smith237]

7 minutes ago, donim said:

Next time, as farang.. you did not drive then you hide. Walk like a egypt, nothing to see walk away. But surely make sure you wife understand your action next time.

 

I think in some cases it may give more credibility to have a Westerner present - depending on the Westerners behavior etc...  Sometimes a stubborn, but firm and Polite Westerner can swing things their way when the BiB become exasperated after failing with their BS, giving up and realizing that instead of following the easier path of least resistance they have to play it by the book and apply / follow the law.... 

[donim]

2 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

We had to fork out for a 'mechanic' to turn up and access damage to car and bike, insurance man was not enough. That was 3k and took 10 minutes

' We ' ? You and your wife or your party and the MC party?

If later on the decission is put on 50/50 and you did pay the 3K, then the MC should cough up 1.5K ?

Anyway, I don't know why the mechanician should come and look, the only way I can think of is that when the insurrance want more information about the damage, then the insurrance should pay the mec and not any of the two party on scene.  Just after the decission the bills are put on the table.

 

But TiT

 

Rgds,

[donim]

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I think in some cases it may give more credibility to have a Westerner present - depending on the Westerners behavior etc...  Sometimes a stubborn, but firm and Polite Westerner can swing things their way when the BiB become exasperated after failing with their BS, giving up and realizing that instead of following the easier path of least resistance they have to play it by the book and apply / follow the law.... 

I can find good statement in this, but also it is hard to tell when which action is the best.
You already said "I think in some cases", how we decide.  But right, stubborn farangs and also drunk or big mouthed ones, should just be quiet and "hide" act as just a bloke from next door carpooling with the lady.

But if farang knows words and can stand his ground and surely knows he is in the right, ok interact and do it politely and the outcome will be good for the unguilty or even for both party.

[evadgib]

35 minutes ago, Traubert said:

All well and good but who are you going to show the footage to?

Upload to cloud & await the orderly queue.

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, donim said:

20 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I think in some cases it may give more credibility to have a Westerner present - depending on the Westerners behavior etc...  Sometimes a stubborn, but firm and Polite Westerner can swing things their way when the BiB become exasperated after failing with their BS, giving up and realizing that instead of following the easier path of least resistance they have to play it by the book and apply / follow the law.... 

I can find good statement in this, but also it is hard to tell when which action is the best.
You already said "I think in some cases", how we decide.  But right, stubborn farangs and also drunk or big mouthed ones, should just be quiet and "hide" act as just a bloke from next door carpooling with the lady.

But if farang knows words and can stand his ground and surely knows he is in the right, ok interact and do it politely and the outcome will be good for the unguilty or even for both party.

 

I've found this to be the case in a couple of accidents...

One where the BiB initially deemed the accident my fault (they thought that was the easiest solution)... At the end of the process they asked if I worked for the Embassy !!! - It think a firm confidence placed them on the back foot.

 

A second incident when the other party wanted to blame me with 100% of the fault (a car park bump which I considered 50/50, I was moving slowly and driving hesitantly looking for a space, she over took me in the car park and we collided). The other party was rude, aggressive, threatening me with Police action. I laughed her off. Again, firm confidence ensured I was treated with a level of respect when the Policeman asked me "who's fault do I want it to be?" (I kid you not!)...  I said 50/50 is ok with me, but the girl rejected that, insisting we all go to the Police station. The BiB told me not to worry about it, no need for me to go to the Police station and waste my time he's already decided 50/50 is ok with him and that was the last I heard of it. 

 

I've found that firm and polite confidence works extremely well over here in such situations - I imagine it works well anywhere. 

 

 

 

[Orton Rd]

29 minutes ago, donim said:

' We ' ? You and your wife or your party and the MC party?

If later on the decission is put on 50/50 and you did pay the 3K, then the MC should cough up 1.5K ?

Anyway, I don't know why the mechanician should come and look, the only way I can think of is that when the insurrance want more information about the damage, then the insurrance should pay the mec and not any of the two party on scene.  Just after the decission the bills are put on the table.

 

But TiT

 

Rgds,

As we admitted guilt we had to pay the full 3k, was not very impressed with the insurance man, seemed just to go along with anything the cops and the boss of the bike man said. Come to think of it same happened to sister in law who is a headmistress locally. She took it to court and actually lost, bit of a gamble as so unpredicable.

Mrs just gone to see the bugger on the bike in Hospital 'have to' apparently, not me. He'll probably be expecting wais and fruit!

[thequietman]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

Left hand side is considered a bicycle/motorcycle lane, cars shouldn't be driving there.

So if a m/c pulls out into it and you are driving your car in it, again you are in the wrong.

and if a motorcycle is also travelling forward in that 'motorbike lane' (that is a hard shoulder!) does that bike have the going straight right of way and if a collision occurred, he would be in the right, correct?    or did you just make up your own rule? ????

[Orton Rd]

42 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Highlights the necessity to have a Dash-Cam (fwd & Rear facing) in Thailand....

 

 

In this case the Motorcycle was in the wrong because he was riding down the wrong side of the road in the wrong direction (over taking or otherwise). 

 

Brit man said the Op was at fault as he was turning. I disagree. 

Having been in the same situation the Police also disagreed with this point but only to some extent and made the decision to spilt the blame 50/50 because I was turning, but the other vehicle should not have been on the wrong side of the road (over taking) unless it was clear to do so. 

 

The only debatable part on this point is if the Op was indicating or not which could place the Op's wife at fault if she didn't indicate - but thats word vs word and unprovable - thus Ops wife not at fault. 

 

Anit that the truth Mrs claimed we have one for the discount, I wanted to get one she said no way. She agrees now we should get one, rather late. One reason why I did not want to take it any further, the insurance man might have started asking for the footage, surprised he has not.

[Orton Rd]

45 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The only debatable part on this point is if the Op was indicating or not which could place the Op's wife at fault if she didn't indicate - but thats word vs word and unprovable - thus Ops wife not at fault. 

 

Indicator was still winking when the cop turned up, made no difference to his on the spot verdict.

[thequietman]

42 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

from the Dash-cams (which I have on both Motorcycle and Car). 

n I ask please about the camera for the bike. Have been looking for one but none of them are waterproof!

[Orton Rd]

1 hour ago, BritManToo said:

Straight ahead has right of way in Thailand, if turning you have to give way to everyone on either side of you.

Policeman was right, you were at fault as you were turning.

straight ahead travelling the wrong way has right of way legally?, no wonder the killing rate is so high

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

I thought he was in the wrong, no according to the cop who turned up and later at the station a bike has the right to travel on the wrong side of the road! and speeding it looked like.

I don't understand why so many people here won't stand up to this kind of incident.

If it was me then court & judge it is, along with Insurance company rep if there is one.

My wife wouldn't of never given in to plonker policeman who probably knew the motorbiker rider family or was family.

[brokenbone]

it may be that she was too late to flip on the signal,

or didnt signal at all, that was the cause of two of my three accidents here.

another possibility is that the biker assumed she had just left

the signal on and forgot about it, as is common here in thailand.

theres really no telling how long that signal was on, and therefore no telling whos at fault

[MeePeeMai]

8 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

As we admitted guilt

 

Rule # 1 (came directly from my car insurance agent and spelled out on the instruction sheet I was given if involved in an accident). 

 

NEVER ADMIT GUILT AFTER ANY ACCIDENT.  They can deny coverage if you admit guilt so just don't do it.  Just say you don't know who's fault it was and your insurance company will just have to figure it out.

 

Rule # 2 - Notify your insurance company immediately at the scene.

 

Rule # 3 - SEE RULE # 1

[Orton Rd]

Insurance agreed to pay for damage to car and bike and the hospital bills

[MeePeeMai]

Just now, Orton Rd said:

Insurance agreed to pay for damage to car and bike and the hospital bills

Good, they should.  

 

How about the fine for careless driving?  Was that mentioned?

[Kinnock]

I think the wording in the original post title demonstrates the way we foreigners think, but the law is not the key issue here.

 

The Police don't know the law, most Thai drivers and riders don't care about the law.

 

The Police see their role as a sort of Traffic Solomon, they consider the relative wealth of the parties, who has any insurance, who has the most injuries, who's the least drunk, who seems to have most influence, then makes a decision by weighing up all the factors.

 

He who can pay shall pay .... look after the little man, unless the big man has a luxury imported car, or cut the baby in half.

 

Law and rules of the road are irrelevant, foreign concepts.

[faraday]

Are there any written laws that we can refer to- like the Highway Code in the UK?

[utalkin2me]

The key is not to drive. But if you choose to drive this stuff is going to happen. 

 

To each their own, I absolutely love it.

 

Get in a collision once every five or ten years, cop comes and gives you a ticket for 500 baht. No extra insurance fees, no court battle, no nothing. It is done and gone right then and there as far as the govt is concerned. Accidents in Thailand beat accident beaurocracy in my home country ten times over: everyone wants a piece there when there is an accident... insurance, govt everyone. 

[Orton Rd]

14 minutes ago, faraday said:

Are there any written laws that we can refer to- like the Highway Code in the UK?

The Thai highway code is based on the UK one I believe. Last time I went to the licence place the applicants were in a room looking at a film on it, one was looking, the rest playing on the phones, one was asleep

[Dumbastheycome]

2 hours ago, thequietman said:

OK, then explain please why vehicles coming out of side streets have right of way?

 

Surely, if straight ahead has the right of way, then the former rule is mute! .... or did you just make your rule up? ????

My rule  is: Give way to anything in sight  and then allow  another 20 seconds  for   the  approaching  dogs, chickens and  maybe  even a  bloody tokay!

urvived  so  far . lol

[Orton Rd]

6 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

The key is not to drive. But if you choose to drive this stuff is going to happen. 

 

No way I will ever drive here, it's like a jet crashing every week of the year killing all on board, and they really think the Thai ways are the best.

 

[donim]

54 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

As we admitted guilt

End of story.

 

NEVER admit guilt, is one of the most important rule from the insurrance.  If you are in the wrong, let them admit but never you do.

 

Everything you said can be used against you.

[donim]

43 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

Insurance agreed to pay for damage to car and bike and the hospital bills

And the bil for the mec? DO you know for what reason? Maybe you do have an update on that.

[faraday]

41 minutes ago, Orton Rd said:

The Thai highway code is based on the UK one I believe. Last time I went to the licence place the applicants were in a room looking at a film on it, one was looking, the rest playing on the phones, one was asleep

Never saw it when I went for my test here. The film was desperately boring.

 

If the Thai one is based on the Highway Code, then I really must get a English version. Which, I doubt there is.