尋找撞車目擊證人

mrsk

本人於2008年2月4日(星期一)農曆年廿八晚上約8時半於Arthur Laing 橋南行(向列治文方向)左線被另一車從後撞我的車.

如閣下於當時經過該處而目擊一藍色車(sedan)撞車一黑色車(SUV)的情況,懇請与本人聯絡 [email protected]

因為不可能在Arthur Laing 橋上放告示牌, 所以希望能在internet上找到證人。

謝謝!

siumaibb

don't worry, if you got hit from behind and you got all the info of the other driver, 99% that you'll win

mrsk

以下是事故細節,希望能找到有心人作證之餘,亦讓各人參考。

日期: (星期一) 二00八年二月四日 約晚上八時半 (農曆年廿八晚上)

我當晚從Granville 街進入 Arthur Laing 橋。到了橋梁的平直部份(我在右邊車道), 在
我前面有一列汽車。左車道看來相當空,於是我開我的左轉顯示, 並在鏡子檢查和Shoulder- check,以確實在左車道上前後面都沒有車。(我的確小心看了,因為我有四歲女兒在車上,亦非趕時間) 。確實後, 我便換道到左線。

當我已完全地在左車道上, 我注意到前面有一大貨車停了並閃著光燈。在我和貨車之間也有另一汽車正在切回右邊車道。我因此決定不再前進,而等機會返回右邊車道。我停下來等候, 等了兩三秒就被人從後而撞。

當我下車, 我的汽車完全地在左車道上直向前面, 距離在我右邊的中心點線約1.5英尺。撞我的那車前頭向左斜躺 (她車的前右擊撞了我車的左後方) 。那司機是一年輕洋女, 大聲嚷著我們要馬上離開(下橋)。起初我猶豫了,因為我們完全地是在左車道上,並不阻右車道交通。且有大貨車停在前面,其它車也不能前行。但她再叫了和準備回去開她的車。

我怕她不顧而逃, 於是記住了她的車牌號碼,便回到我的位子開車駕駛。當時下著毛毛雨,我的女兒被縛了安全帶在carseat上。我沒有機會拍照片或找其他司機作證人(況且當時橋上只剩得右邊車道行車, 若我上前攔住便會阻礙交通。) 我並認為既然我的車正停著而她從後撞我,無論如何也是她應負責。

我們到達了列治文一個油站,下汽車和交換了資料。她問我兩次-為什麼我在橋梁中間停車,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。

我當晚打電話給ICBC報案, 並遵守他們的指示,於次日帶我的車到維修車店檢查和拍照。10天以後,我再打電話給ICBC查看情況,他們說仍然在調查, 但不會提供我任何詳細資料 (我不明白為何要那麼久)。

幾乎四個星期, 在我的汽車被修理了之後, ICBC 給我打電話並且說他們有評斷和投了我100%

應負責任。原來撞我車的司機等了兩天才遞交她準備的聲明, 誣告我換道到左線時擠在她的車前面,
以至她在我停車時並沒有足夠空間來停她的車。這是ICBC 稱"不安全的換車道"(Unsafe Lane

Change), 因此我要受罰。 其實我清楚記得, 在我換道時,左車道在我後並沒有車。 她根本不在那裡。 她是在來我已停了車,在等待過程中才撞在我後面的。 在加油站交談, 她亦從沒提及我有移到她前面擠著她, 只是惱我在橋中間停車。

大家都以為: 如果您撞了一輛停在您前面的車, 您(後邊的司機)一定地是100% 應負責任。我在知道了他們的評斷後才曉得, ICBC唯一的例外是如果您聲稱那車在您前面做了"不安全的換車道"。

撞了我車的司機在那48個小時期間一定做了她的研究或見律師, 以將這個"不安全的換車道"投擲在她的聲明內。

我告訴ICBC, 我當時是"安全的換車道" 我停下來等候, 過了一會她才從後而撞我。他們說我不能證明在我換車道時她不在我後面, 說我亦不能證明她撞我是因為她不集中精神或車速太快。 堅持說是我引起這次意外。可是,他們卻不需要那洋女司機證明她所說的一切。

我發覺得ICBC的評斷極不公平,跟他們談話亦令人沮喪。

LOK

You are NOT the only one who hate ICBC.

But I don't understand, you were on the left lane already, and her car was 向左斜躺, and her car's right front corner hit your cars left rear corner?  Were she trying to hit the median?

mrsk

was wet she lost control. That's what ICBC told me.

BiscottiGelato

What's up with ICBC lately with all these ridculous settlements? The system is a complete failure. First of all the most ridculous part is ICBC will be inclined to settle 50/50, this is a simple case where there is purely a conflict of interest, only the dumbest person will create such a system. Second part is ICBC does not seem to do anything more than listen to both sides and reach a judgement depending on their mood of the day. Settlement process is not open and decision is probably made by a single person or a single body of people with similar backgrounds.

No wonder ICBC is always profitable. Just always settle 50/50. To reduce cost, just hire any average joe and have that guy decide on the settlement outcome. Of course collecting evidence is such a high cost exercise that should be avoided.....

What a joke.

mrsk

數天前我要求ICBC給我雙方司機的聲明及兩架車的照片副本. 今日收到, 一看之下, 快要出煙.

原來在她的聲明內,她除了誣告我換道時cut正她前面外,還謊話連編, 說我在撞車後開車逃, 她要不斷響按我才停車, 還說我下車後不停向她道歉說全是我的錯, 及她沒有機會拍照片因為我先走了!!!!

簡直無臉無恥!! 實在很怒很怒!!

真希望能找到證人爭回一點公義!

字典仔

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?!

mrsk

我們當時在橋梁的平直部份, 大約1/4, 仍有點兒上坡, 大貨車在橋梁的中間部分. 撞了我車的司機在她的聲明內說貨車在四五百米前, (我打golf的, 對距離有點判斷力, 知道不可能). 今日查證, 橋的主幹只有二百七十米.

Yes, 我會繼續盡力爭回公道, 謝謝您的鼓勵!

chobit

Hi mrsk,

I am sorry to hear about your situation.  Yet, I am glad that you are not giving up.  Sometime, we should fight back not just for money, but for justic, and to teach those lier a lesson.

The big truck that was stopped there, I wonder if there is anyone there at the time.  Also, since you write everything in chinese, I just wonder how your english is?  If you are ok, but not great, I still think it's a good idea to find someone who can really speak..!

What about gather as much facts and info. as possible, then find a lawyer?

Good luck!