What Have You Done To Your 2nd Gen Tacoma Today?

You may not want to show that video to the insurance company. You changed lanes over a solid line - meaning you were in the turn lane too early. The neon changed lanes at the appropriate time, possibly assuming you were going to stop and turn before the intersection. The good news is they didn't signal, so you didn't have a proper warning. In this case most insurance companies would split the blame and both of you would get charged with the accident. So if the other driver doesn't argue the incident, I would hide that video. As in not show it on the internet. Just my 2 cents.

 

Very nice detail on that escapement graphic, especially the balance wheel. It really fits the truck. Definitely want to see the final product.

 

On a separate note but still on topic, what kind of dash cam do you have? Looking into getting one and I like the mph feature.

 

That's debatable.

 

That whole section of road is like that...I could have been turning into any business on that stretch and would have had to cross that line.

 

How so? How would I turn into that gas station or any of those businesses on my left without crossing that yellow line? It's a turning lane for a reason.

 

You the man! Thanks for the guidance

It's ok I'm bad at math an spelling

 

Its a Falcon Zero 170. Link below.

FalconZero F170HD+ DashCam 1080P 170° Viewing Angle microSD Card Included FULL HD

http://www.amazon.com/FalconZero-F1...1452261906&sr=8-1&keywords=falcon+zero+f170hd

 

Sweet, thanks

 

Sure, it's a turning lane for the gas station, but not the stoplight. I think they would argue you were in the lane too early. The turn lane itself is clearly marked. Granted, Neon was lost and confused and not watching where they were going. Was she at least hot?

 

I agree you could have turned into anywhere but I wonder since your speed is on the camera could they make a case against you.

 

Never volunteer information in a legal case unless no other alternative. Regardless if decided by a judge, or if it ends up in front of a jury, all any good attorney needs to do is create doubt of guilt or innocence. And a good attorney will make that solid line a major point of contention. It would be very easy to create the impression that BOTH drivers shared fault. I'd play dumb and see if the other driver admits liability before showing video.

 

Yes, the video shows that the road markings are not very definitive. But, there is a break in the solid line where the turn area starts, and that is where the neon started their turn. Your entry into that lane was not illegal, but you should have slowed down because you had just entered a turn lane. The video shows your speed was constant, meaning you entered the lane in order to turn at the light. In this case, you were in the lane too early, since technically the "turn at the light" lane began where the solid line was broken. The lane you were in is technically a "turning immediately" lane because of the solid/dotted line with solid on your side. Confusing, you bet. This confusion gives the insurance company the leeway to spread the blame around and tag you with an accident. Meaning they get to charge everyone more money. I'm not judging anything you did, just making observations from the video.

 

I'm sure everything will work out but I really hate when there is a shadow of a doubt. I am an honest person and would not want something like this to happen to anyone. I could only hope that most people are good-hearted as well. I can see how this may be incriminating and knowing insurance companies...well, we all know how they operate.

 

If it was me, I would take it down until a decision is made.

 

So what you're saying is that this most likely would not help my case? What if the driver does not admit fault (which she did on scene, but she could tell her insurance anything).

 

Well I do appreciate it. I think I will take your advice at this point.

 

My wife worked for an insurance company for many years, and I'm very familiar with the games they play. It's all about subrogation, or the way money is pulled/passed from company to company. They really don't care about you, just how much money they can pull from your insurance company. The easiest way is to put some of the blame on you, then they don't have to pay 100% of the accident. The video is great, but like you said it creates doubt.

 

Unless the video was direct and conclusive evidence that contradicts the statements of the other party, it's just as apt to be a liability to YOUR case as it would be an asset. Remember, you're dealing with insurance companies and potentially attorney's. They won't be on your side. They won't look at that video with the same preconceived thoughts as you. They'll be trying to use your "evidence" against you. "Playing dumb" is more effective in most cases.

 

Less is more in this case. She says she's at fault there's no need to muddy the water. Any other witnesses?