都唔係冇得上訴既, 不過會好煩, 因為係事發前你真係做過換線呢個動作, 而好明顯你係你既statement裡面亦都幫對方proof左...
對方有冇把對話錄音, ICBC憑咩話對方講既野係岩? 你係報既時候將對方要求你地離開橋面等等既資料全數講比ICBC知, ICBC都係人, 佢地唔係現場, 只能夠憑手上既資料去判, 你亦某程度須要因為自己報案時候既生疏忽而負責喇....
如果你而家上訴, 因為你已經睇過對方既口供, ICBC會先入為主所以會令到上訴更難...有幾點你可以試下:
1. 由granville入arthur leigh, it will be uphill then downhill, obviously u changed lane on uphill then got hit stopped at downhill? when exactly did u change ur lane and how long after that u realized there is a stopped truck? when u see a stopped trunk, how far u stopped from it and how much room u have left for upcoming traffic? cuz if u stopped right after downhill, u really didn't really room for traffic to stop (if u still have room in front of u), then that will be ur fault as well...
2. 我說是因為前面停了那大貨車。她很不高興說我其實還未太接近大貨車, 無必要那麼早停車。=>> maybe she got her point here, so u should challenge that; but did u really stop too far away from the trunk?
3. she was behind u so she could have noticed everything u have done, that's the con for you; u were in front so u take the pro and think u got rear ended so no big deal and just report it to ICBC...some time it's not necessary, case like this will definitely screw u up...i bet that's not the first case on arthur leigh with similiar situation that's why ICBC says u are at fault!
4. u should challenge, u hold a valid driver lience, driving an insured car, what's the point u have to run? especially when u got rear ended (but she can challenge u have drink! so watch out for unexpected, even with ur daughter on the car doesn't mean anything)...
so good luck there!
LOK: she wasn't trying to hit the median, arthur leigh is very slippery on wet and mrsk was probably quite "centre" waiting to cut back to the right lane, so she was trying to avoid the accident?! |
發表於 2008-3-9 10:34
| 
