Do tire marks on my wheel prove I was going in a straight line ?

[Indy]

Jurisdiction

California

A speeding car passed me at about 70-75 mph and swiped the front left side of the van I was driving before going off the road and flipping a couple of times. The officer who came to inspect the van told me that the almost uniform marks on my front left wheel left by the other vehicle's rear right tire indicated that I had been going in a straight line. However, the officer who wrote the report stated that I had turned to the left to hit the other vehicle and caused it to lose control. I haven't had a chance to talk to anybody who is knowledgeable enough to tell me if these pictures can prove anything so if anybody happens to have any idea please let me know.

 

[army judge]

A speeding car passed me at about 70-75 mph and swiped the front left side of the van I was driving before going off the road and flipping a couple of times. The officer who came to inspect the van told me that the almost uniform marks on my front left wheel left by the other vehicle's rear right tire indicated that I had been going in a straight line. However, the officer who wrote the report stated that I had turned to the left to hit the other vehicle and caused it to lose control. I haven't had a chance to talk to anybody who is knowledgeable enough to tell me if these pictures can prove anything so if anybody happens to have any idea please let me know.

The police officer wasn't present when the collision occurred.

You were present.

The other driver was present.

A passenger or two may have been present.

A witness or two may have seen the collision.

All of those people can provide testimony about the collision.

A police officer who wasn't present offering an opinion of the collision is simply an opinion.

Talk to your insurance company for information on how best to proceed.

No one who responds to your post was present at the collision, including me.

You can hire a lawyer to direct your defense.

Other than hiring a lawyer, talking to your insurance agent, writing down your version of events, finding witnesses, this will be driver A said versus driver B said.

 

[mightymoose]

It would not prove you were going straight.

 

[Indy]

It would not prove you were going straight.

How many degrees at the most would you say that my front left wheel could have been turned to the left and still made it possible for the other vehicle's rear right tire to leave these marks on the wheel ?

 

[Indy]

The police officer wasn't present when the collision occurred.

You were present.

The other driver was present.

A passenger or two may have been present.

A witness or two may have seen the collision.

All of those people can provide testimony about the collision.

A police officer who wasn't present offering an opinion of the collision is simply an opinion.

Talk to your insurance company for information on how best to proceed.

No one who responds to your post was present at the collision, including me.

You can hire a lawyer to direct your defense.

Other than hiring a lawyer, talking to your insurance agent, writing down your version of events, finding witnesses, this will be driver A said versus driver B said.

According to what the other driver said in the police report, she never saw the vehicle I was driving because I had come up to hit her car from behind.

"P2 never saw the car that hit V2 from behind."

I think she said this because she did not want to admit passing me a long way past the merging point and the DO NOT PASS sign.

I know that she wasn't telling the truth because she had come up from behind to pass me on my left side and there were two witnesses on the freeway to the left who saw our vehicles being side by side. The marks on my front left wheel and fender shown in the attached photos also indicated that I had not hit her car from behind.

However, the witnesses were not in a position to see if I had turned to the left or the other driver had turned to the right or if each of us was going in a straight line.

 

[mightymoose]

It doesn't matter.
The marks on the wheel only indicate that at some point the two vehicles were in contact. While the vehicles were in contact the wheel could have and likely did move. At some point the wheel would be turned at some angle, and at some point it could have been straight.
The marks only prove contact was made and don't prove anything regarding the actions of either driver.

 

[zddoodah]

The officer who came to inspect the van told me that the almost uniform marks on my front left wheel left by the other vehicle's rear right tire indicated that I had been going in a straight line.

The officer is entitled to his/her opinion, but I can assure you that, if this matter finds its way into court, those marks will "prove" no such thing.

the officer who wrote the report stated that I had turned to the left to hit the other vehicle and caused it to lose control.

I'm guessing the police report doesn't really say this. Rather, I'm guessing that one of the witnesses who made a statement in the report said that this is what happened. An officer who did not witness the incident has no basis for making a statement of this sort.

If you haven't already done so, you need to report what happened to your auto insurer and will need to file an SR-1 with the DMV. Since there may be a claim against your liability coverage, you may want to ask the adjuster with your insurer whether the insurer wants to hire an attorney to represent you and assist with the writing of the SR-1.

How many degrees at the most would you say that my front left wheel could have been turned to the left and still made it possible for the other vehicle's rear right tire to leave these marks on the wheel ?

This is an irrelevant question. Can you prove (other than by your personal testimony) that those marks did not exist to any extent before the accident? Can you prove that those marks were caused by the other vehicle's right rear tire (or any other part of the other car)? The marks on your wheel don't even prove that the wheel made contact with the other car. All those marks prove is that the wheel made contact with some other surface. I have marks like that on my car's wheels from parking next to curbs.

 

[Indy]

The officer is entitled to his/her opinion, but I can assure you that, if this matter finds its way into court, those marks will "prove" no such thing.

I'm guessing the police report doesn't really say this. Rather, I'm guessing that one of the witnesses who made a statement in the report said that this is what happened. An officer who did not witness the incident has no basis for making a statement of this sort.

If you haven't already done so, you need to report what happened to your auto insurer and will need to file an SR-1 with the DMV. Since there may be a claim against your liability coverage, you may want to ask the adjuster with your insurer whether the insurer wants to hire an attorney to represent you and assist with the writing of the SR-1.

This is an irrelevant question. Can you prove (other than by your personal testimony) that those marks did not exist to any extent before the accident? Can you prove that those marks were caused by the other vehicle's right rear tire (or any other part of the other car)? The marks on your wheel don't even prove that the wheel made contact with the other car. All those marks prove is that the wheel made contact with some other surface. I have marks like that on my car's wheels from parking next to curbs.

It would be nice if I can say this. And since the witnesses couldn't have seen the two vehicles colliding from where they were maybe there wasn't a collision at all and the other driver was just going too fast so she lost control.

 

[army judge]

since the witnesses couldn't have seen the two vehicles colliding from where they were maybe there wasn't a collision at all and the other driver was just going too fast so she lost control.

Conjecture or speculation is useless.

If this is that important to you, investigate hiring an accident reconstruction specialist and an attorney.

There are many such experts in your state.
Talk to three or four, see if one could help you make your case.

I am NOT endorsing these people, just illustrating how easy they are to locate.

Please so your due diligence BEFORE shelling out $1.00.


California Accident Reconstruction Expert Witnesses :: JurisPro :: California Accident Reconstruction & Safety Experts & Consultants

You are being redirected...

Kauderer & Associates | Kauderer & Associates

CARS - California Accident Reconstruction Specialists: Home

 

[zddoodah]

It would be nice if I can say this. And since the witnesses couldn't have seen the two vehicles colliding from where they were maybe there wasn't a collision at all and the other driver was just going too fast so she lost control.

Not really sure what this means but I'll repeat myself because it's important: If you haven't already done so, you need to report what happened to your auto insurer and will need to file an SR-1 with the DMV. Since there may be a claim against your liability coverage, you may want to ask the adjuster with your insurer whether the insurer wants to hire an attorney to represent you and assist with the writing of the SR-1.