» Site Navigation | | » Recent Threads | | | | | | | | | 09-19-2007, 09:00 PM | #16 | Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Marion, IA Posts: 388 | I would consider challenging that ruling in court, maybe get the advice of a lawyer at least. Most states you legally have a right to clear the intersection, but maybe Utah doesn't allow you to enter the intersection if you don't have a clear path to go? Since she admitted to running the light red, I would definitely challenge it. Maybe your insurance will consider her admission as her claiming fault for the accident (making it her insurances responsibility to pay). You don't want this to be your fault because it will raise your insurance significantly. As personal advice though, I always make sure the oncoming traffic stops before I clear an intersection because I have seen too many people running the light. I really hope they gave her a ticket for running the red light, and not just let her off the hook? | | | 09-19-2007, 09:12 PM | #17 | Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Marion, IA Posts: 388 | Actually, it does look like you forfeit your right of way while turning left. http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE41/htm/41_04107.htm This basically says that if you turn in front of a vehicle, and it hits you, you yield your right of way to them. The light state doesn't matter for this violation (it might be important for insurance). The flaw in this logic is if you have a green turn arrow, and someone runs the light and hits you, it is your fault. That makes no sense, but it is how the law is written. And I see in the Green Arrow section (see section 305 in link further down) says that you must "cautiously" enter the intersection, even with the arrow. I also notice in section 305.4, that a vehicle running the red light forfeits right of way, but only to another vehicle legally obeying a traffic signal, or to a pedestrian in a crosswalk legally. Since you also had a red light, that might not fly. I think the logic is, you forfeit right of way by turning left, but she does not yield right of way to you because you were also illegally in the intersection (that might be disputable). She should have also been cited for running the red light. Then the insurance companies get to duke it out. Make sure you tell your insurance on your claim that she admitted running the red light. That is important. I would also go to the DMV and pick up a driving handbook, and see if it says anything about clearing intersections. Here is a link to Utah traffic code: http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE41/41_04.htm I am not a lawyer, and my statements are just my opinion. You should consult with someone familiar with the law in Utah. | | | 09-19-2007, 09:58 PM | #18 | Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Marion, IA Posts: 388 | One final link: http://www.sgcity.org/police/showArticle.php?id=17 but this is not official law. This states that you specifically had the right of way, because you entered the intersection legally and she did not. As long as you can prove you entered yellow and she entered red. She already admitted to entering on a red so that might give you an edge. | | | 09-19-2007, 11:35 PM | #19 | Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Utah Posts: 27 | She did admit to running the light. "I just saw the yellow light and gassed it and i ran it" but she never specifically said it was red so I can't prove it My insurance said I am at the liability of the accident that means I have to pay.... I will have to consult a lawyer. Quote: Originally Posted by tastade One final link: http://www.sgcity.org/police/showArticle.php?id=17 but this is not official law. This states that you specifically had the right of way, because you entered the intersection legally and she did not. As long as you can prove you entered yellow and she entered red. She already admitted to entering on a red so that might give you an edge. | | | | 09-20-2007, 12:48 AM | #20 | Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Portland Oregon Posts: 1,363 | I was just reading Utah's 41-6a-305. Traffic-control signal -- At intersections code online, it says nothing about being in the intersection when the light turns red, just says..." (1) (a) Green, red, and yellow are the only colors that may be used in a traffic-control signal, except for a: (i) pedestrian traffic-control signal that may use white and orange; and (ii) rail vehicle that may use white. (b) Traffic-control signals apply to the operator of a vehicle and to a pedestrian as provided in this section. (2) (a) (i) Except as provided in Subsection (2)(a)(ii), the operator of a vehicle facing a circular green signal may: (A) proceed straight through the intersection; (B) turn right; or (C) turn left. (ii) The operator of a vehicle facing a circular green signal, including an operator turning right or left: (A) shall yield the right-of-way to other vehicles and to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk at the time the signal is exhibited; and (B) may not turn right or left if a sign at the intersection prohibits the turn. (b) The operator of a vehicle facing a green arrow signal shown alone or in combination with another indication: (i) may cautiously enter the intersection only to make the movement indicated by the arrow or other indication shown at the same time; and (ii) shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk and to other traffic lawfully using the intersection. (c) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian traffic-control signal under Section 41-6a-306, a pedestrian facing any green signal other than a green turn arrow may proceed across the roadway within any marked or unmarked crosswalk. (3) (a) The operator of a vehicle facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal is warned that the allowable movement related to a green signal is being terminated. (b) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian traffic-control signal under Section 41-6a-306, a pedestrian facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal is advised that there is insufficient time to cross the roadway before a red indication is shown, and a pedestrian may not start to cross the roadway. (4) (a) Except as provided in Subsection (4)(c), the operator of a vehicle facing a steady circular red or red arrow signal: (i) may not enter the intersection unless entering the intersection to make a movement is permitted by another indication; and (ii) shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the marked or unmarked crosswalk on the near side of the intersection and shall remain stopped until an indication to proceed is shown. (b) Unless otherwise directed by a pedestrian traffic-control signal under Section 41-6a-306, a pedestrian facing a steady red signal alone may not enter the roadway. (c) (i) Except when facing a red arrow signal or when a sign is in place prohibiting a turn, the operator of a vehicle facing any steady circular red signal may cautiously enter the intersection to turn right, or may turn left from a one-way street into a one-way street, after stopping as required by Subsection (4)(a). (ii) The operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to: (A) another vehicle moving through the intersection in accordance with an official traffic-control signal; and (B) a pedestrian lawfully within an adjacent crosswalk. (5) (a) This section applies to a highway or rail line where a traffic-control signal is erected and maintained. (b) Any stop required shall be made at a sign or marking on the highway pavement indicating where the stop shall be made, but, in the absence of any sign or marking, the stop shall be made at the signal. (6) The operator of a vehicle approaching an intersection that has an inoperative traffic-control signal shall: (a) stop before entering the intersection; and (b) yield the right-of-way to any vehicle as required under Section 41-6a-901. | | | 09-20-2007, 01:37 AM | #21 | Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 2,525 | Yeah. I don't think the first couple of links to their laws apply. It is the section quoted above- http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE41/htm/41_04025.htm Mainly the point about you only needing to yield to traffic that has lawfully entered the intersection. She did not lawfully enter the intersection as she ran a red light. You, however, look like you did something that is legal. If you don't think you can figure out how to do this properly yourself, definitely get a lawyer. I'd call the police to get a report and make sure that the report says you entered the intersection under green, and she ran a red light. If it doesn't, find out how to contact the officer that wrote the report and ask him why it was not included in the report. Also, call the clerk of court or whomever handles tickets in your area and figure out how to protest the ticket. I'd probably not say anything more to your insurance company or her company than she ran the red, and you were legally making a turn. Maybe tell them that you are fighting the ticket. If you end up with a lawyer, let them do the talking to the insurance companies. | | | 09-20-2007, 02:17 AM | #22 | Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Minnesoat Posts: 13 | I was in an accident in 1989 in the same situation in WVC in Utah but I was the one who ran the red. I got a ticket. Perhaps the laws have changed. I was driving a '78 Ford LTD wagon. Cars like that are hard to damage. Sorry to hear about your TI. We were in Utah Labor Day weekend in my TI. People in SLC are truly the worst drivers. | | | 09-20-2007, 04:10 AM | #23 | That's not Millpoint Blue Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: BNA Posts: 3,161 | One other bit of advice: Don't rely on her admission that she ran the red light. Odds are that she'll retract that statement, and probably deny ever making it, once lawyers and insurance companies get involved. __________________ Real men know how to SEARCH! THIS IS A MILLPOINT BLUE INTERIOR Mods 'n' stuff: Star Spoke 43 wheels - X-Brace - Mason Engineering front strut brace - CF gauge overlay - ZHP shifter knob - Racing Dynamics cat-back - Doubled brake lights - M-tech rear spoiler From Page 68 of the 1997 Owners Manual: "Vehicles equipped with ASC+T remain subject to the laws of physics." | | | 09-20-2007, 07:06 AM | #24 | Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Portland Or Posts: 2,666 | Its illegal in most states to enter the intersection to turn until its clear. So the trick everybody pulls of crawling forward then going under the yellow/red is JUST as illegal as the running of the red light. Sucks but thats the way it is.... Dave __________________ Dave - PDX 1995 318ti - Active Black and Tan. 2005 330xi - Mtech 1 - 6spd - Orient Blue/Black | | | 09-20-2007, 01:59 PM | #25 | Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 2,525 | I thought the same thing PDX. But in looking around I found a number of states where it is apparently legal, like Florida, Utah, and New York. The weird thing is I know people who have gotten a ticket for being in the intersection after the light turns red... Probably a hard thing to fight in court. | | | 09-20-2007, 08:52 PM | #26 | Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Arlington Texas Posts: 48 | Any insurance adjuster will try to low-ball you on the worth of your vehicle. I was in a wreck in mine 2 years ago and they initially wanted to total it and pay me less than I thought the car was worth. But, I challenged them to find a replacement with the same package, options, etc for the low amount they were offering and they could not. In fact, at that time they could only find a handful of 98's for sale at all and none of them were the sport package like mine. Eventually, they decided the car was worth more than the original estimate and it was a better deal for them to repair it rather than total it. I was very happy to be able to keep my ti... Good luck and sorry about your loss. I know how crappy I felt when I thought mine was a goner. -Clutch | | | 09-21-2007, 05:27 AM | #27 | Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Utah Posts: 27 | Hey everyone they are saying it may be totaled and they will call tomorrow. I took a look at http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=&ni...view&ad=305599 that and it seems in great condition i've been checking it out all day it is amazing. SOOOO fast. If my car is totaled I will try for this one but I dont want to loose my baby | | | 09-21-2007, 11:27 PM | #28 | Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: California Posts: 32 | Just got $9k for my '97 sport with 54k miles today without having to fight with the insurance much (I got rear ended). Hows that for some hope | | | 09-23-2007, 03:17 AM | #29 | Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Utah Posts: 27 | GOOD NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I called insurance yesterday and they said the car is valued WELL over the damage estimate. They are going to send an agent to double check monday, and if they agree its good, they are going to start repairs immediately. $6300 USD worth of damages.... HOLY HELL!!!!!!!!! I'm soooo happy though. I don't care if it is a salvage title or not I wasn't planning on selling anyway. I'm just so happy its gonna most likely be fixed!!!!! I love my TI and I was sad I might lose it! The radiator, front spoiler, hood, roundels and possibly the frame were damaged. I hope the frame wasn't damaged because that will speed up repairs. I don't think the engine was injured though. I need to talk to my insurance agent about a rental car though because mine is out of commission but since I"m under 21 I can't personally drive a rental car so I will borrow my grandma's and she will get the rental. | | | | | Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | Posting Rules | You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |