gjm

I understand that year-on-year, the number of fatalities as a result of road traffic accidents over the seasonal period, during the time in which the lower or zero telerance towards speed limits is applied, has continued it rise. Dramatically, this year.

It's catering for the lowest common denominator, again. Those who simply cannot handle a couple of beers, and those that think they are invincible, and/or "drive better" with a couple of beers inside them. Make drink driving an imprisonable offence, with (say) 2 days for being over the limit, increasing 2 days at a time as the level of alcohol rises. The offending individual will serve this time between Friday evening and Sunday evening, doing something useful while being detained.

They've pinched the engine out of Miss M's car!

Understood. And apologies if my PM may have seemed a little blunt... I was confident you weren't incompetent, but didn't know how far your skills might extend. Great to hear you're sorted.

I've not made any attempt to contact the other party involved, either her directly or her husband who's number was provided to me. This morning, I have received a call from their insurer. I explained the situation, and the representative said "I assume you're not admitting liability?" Lol. He asked if could email me, asking if I would respond with details of what happened. I duly received his email: "Thank you for speaking with me today. As discuss can you please provide a statement and diagram of the vehicle incident? Please draw basic pictures to show where the vehicles were and how they came to hit each other with a brief description," No problem. I'm happy to do that. I replied: "I’ll get some details and a description sorted for you. It may take a day or so. Be assured I most certainly am NOT admitting any liability!" I anticipated that would be it until I had sent through the details, but the insurance rep responded: "Thank you for your reply, no worries if it takes a day or so. And yes, definitely understand you are not liable for the damage." This is verbatim - I've not edited for grammar, punctuation or anything.

These really are quite a pretty rim. Kyu... These would suit your car beautifully.

I'd suggest 12.06 is a bit low - probably should be 13.2V. Not enough to cause the problems you're having, though. Our 320d went to ~200000 miles, likely with no ATF change. We didn't have any real issues with it, but I'd certainly never suggest that's a good idea. Change the ATF every 100000km. Go and see Glenn (assuming he's local).

I see what you're saying, but this wasn't an overtaking move (on my part). I was passing a stationery parked car. Hopefully this shows what happened. I was passing her, she started to pull out, I stopped. Had she of been heading straight down the road we might have been OK, but she turned tighter on something similar to the line I've showed, and contacted my car. She didn't stop at that point, and continued to move forward, dragging her car on the corner of mine. At one point she was virtually at 90 degrees to me, something she would never have been if just pulling out. Then she seemed to realise something was wrong, turned away slightly and pulled into one of the bays shown. (I think it was the 2nd or 3rd bay from the end.) I reversed, then moved forward so I could also park in one of the bays. In basic terms, I was proceeding along the road when she pulled out of a parking space and drove in to me.

Just to clarify - she had been parked, stationery, on the left side of the road. I had positioned myself to pass a stationery, parked vehicle. The driver of the other car pulled out from the kerb in a manoeuvre intended to perform a u-turn. As such, I was expecting to pass a stationery, parked vehicle. Had I been there as little as a second earlier, she may have driven into the side of me when pulling away. As it was, when I saw her start to move I braked hard, coming to a full stop. Then she made contact with my car, as a result of the u-turn being performed. Had she been simply pulling out from the kerb (around another parked car) and driving down the road, there might have been no contact at all; the only consequence would have been me forced to brake hard to avoid a collision. (Which essentially I did anyway.)

I took a bathroom suite home in a Porsche 928...

Nathan - I'll be interested in the wheel & tyre. I'll drop you a line.

I think their case will depend entirely on the 'speed' I came around the corner. I wasn't speeding, but as no-one measured this, and no-one present could have seen the contact between the cars, that's a flimsy start at best.

She was close to the junction, but may not have been that close. Academic really... I couldn't prove now or then where she was parked. Regardless, and as Nathan said, I feel she should have pulled further down the street rather than u-turn that close to a junction. It's just so bizarre. When pulling away from the kerb I think she was looking where she was going, not looking for traffic approaching from behind (although she may well have done that already.) I stopped, saw her look at me, felt contact, and she just. Kept. Going! Thanks for your kind words, Grant.

Yup - pretty much an identical situation. Pic of her car, and a pic of the only mark incurred on the Mercedes attached. If she'd stopped as soon as contact was made, it would have been so much better!

I couldn't have said what they weighed, but they were nice to drive. I had a completely and utterly stock 1986 M635CSi Shadowline in Delphin Metallic (#184).

We were both calm - the colleagues were more aggressive than me or the other driver. From the police website, and from a phone call to them, the police are not in the least bit interested. No criminal damage, no damage to property, no injury, no aggression - no interest.

Thanks.

As a statement, this is entirely true. In isolation, it is not shortsighted or missing any specific points.

Aye. Just a different kinda sh*t for a different day.

Yup. Thanks.

I've been doing some digging to try and find what I need to do. From the Police website: "After a non-injury crash you should swap names and addresses with other motorists involved. If the crash involved another person's property, such as a fence, you should report it to the owner of the property within 48 hours of the crash. If the owner cannot be located report to police within 60 hours of the crash. All crashes resulting in injury (such as broken bones or a night in hospital) should be reported to local police as soon as is practicable and no later than 24 hours from the time of the crash." Based on this I doubt the police will be interested, but I'll contact them anyway, if only to protect myself. Get in first, that sort of thing. The insurance company bit is more tricky. My insurance wouldn't cover me in a loan car, and the garage owner is away so I can't easily find out anything about his insurance!

I had an accident, yesterday, at maybe 30km/h, in broad daylight with good visibility. I turned left into a road, driving briskly but not excessively (imho) fast - no squealing, no smoking tyres, no sliding, no excessive body roll in a softly sprung car. I was indicating my turn. The road had cars parked on the left but is very wide. There was plenty of space to pass, so I was positioned to the left of the centre of the road so I would pass cars with a gap of at 1.5m to spare. I had turned into the road, straightened up, started to accelerate, when a car parked on the left pulled away from the kerb and started to perform a U-turn. Frankly, I don't recall whether it was displaying an indicator, but I don't think so. I braked hard, stopping very close to the turning car - I did not hit it. The car continued to turn. We were so close that I felt the turning car connect with the nearside front corner of the car I was driving. Instead of stopping, the car continued to turn, dragging it's side on the front nearside corner of the car I was driving. The driver, realising her error, straightened slightly and pulled into an angled parking bay on the opposite side of the road to where she had come from. I've attached a very rudimentary diagram showing directions of travel. Net result? A small scuff on the front nearside corner of the car I was in, and signs of a 'drag' along the side of the other car, starting towards the back of the drivers door, continuing along the rear passenger door to the front of the rear wheel arch, and showing signs of having continued on the plastic wheel trim, and possibly on to the rear corner. No-one was hurt. No broken glass, no bits of car left on the road, no skidmarks. The other driver had some work colleagues close by who went to great pains to check the WoF, rego, tyre condition and similar of the car I was driving. (The other car appeared Wof'd and rego'd.) I couldn't say if the other people saw the incident or not but I doubt it as the other car would have blocked their view.We exchanged details and went on our way. Now the interesting bit. I was in a garage loan car, which I returned yesterday evening with details of what had happened. The garage owner is away from very early this morning until Monday. He has received a message from the driver of the other car: "Contact my husband [phone number provided]. I have witnesses saying you came around the corner with speed. My insurance company may be in touch with you for damage to my vehicle." I think it is pretty cut and dried, and have pictures of damage to both cars (very minor) and the road scene after the accident. I'm just astonished that someone who turned across my path, caused the damage to her car, herself, is now suggesting she may try to make a claim. Oh well. It's been a pretty crappy start to 2016. Why should yesterday be any different? Question - should I contact the other driver's husband, leave it for the owner of the loan car I was driving, or just wait for insurance to do their thing?

I suspect 'D' is for 'Driftin'

Yes. I usually drive using the Tiptronic; Mrs M leaves it in 'D.'

But lower speed doesn't equate to less road accidents. The only time the toll has dropped was the very first year the zero-tolerance was introduced. The numbers of injuries and deaths have risen, on a case-by-case basis where tighter speeding tolerances have been applied, ever since. A blinkered view is being used, and the real way to reduce the figures is not being addressed in any way.