Broke My Windscreen Avoiding a Car Merging into Me

Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 14:02
Last edited 02/05/2024 - 14:21 by 1 other user

I was bringing some timber home from Bunnings, I had it in the inside of my station wagon laying over the passenger seat through to the boot.

On the way home a car merged into my lane with no notice and I had to slam on the brakes to avoid them. The timber went flying forward and cracked my windscreen.

If I hadn't slammed the brakes they would have been liable for repairs to my car. Given that I did slam my brakes, I've copped a broken windscreen.

Like in another post, I considered following the car and confronting them, but as I'm not a nutjob I settled for beeping them for a good while.

What's everyone's take in the legal, moral and ethical approaches here? Should I have done anything differently? If I had my time again I'd let them hit my car and they'd obviously be liable.

Automotive

Comments

  • Hybroid on 02/05/2024 - 14:06
    +318

    You did not appropriately secure the load in your vehicle. Simple as that.

    • iNeed2Pee on 02/05/2024 - 14:09
      +17

      My loads are always secure….

      • Jimothy Wongingtons on 02/05/2024 - 15:12
        +2

        iykyk

      • kaleidoscope on 02/05/2024 - 21:56
        +12

        username doesn’t checkout

      • SolitaryMan on 03/05/2024 - 22:45
        -1

        This man makes use of ozbargain’s condom deals.

        • ireadtermsofuse on 04/05/2024 - 08:54
          -2

          Poppa condoms
          Proper condoms

          Pop a proper condom on

    • Subere on 02/05/2024 - 14:10
      +15

      Yep. Should have secured it and perhaps covered the ends with a towel or something so it doesn't scratch your car interior.
      Seems the timber had way too much movement available to it.

      • JMosk on 02/05/2024 - 14:16
        +50

        You may feel unfairly done by because their poor driving caused damage to the interior of your vehicle but unfortunately IMHO you're up shit creek without a paddle because you didn't safely secure your load

        • Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 14:17
          +5

          Yeah I agree with this assessment!

        • HeWhoKnows on 03/05/2024 - 12:53

          Wasnt driving safely either (ie SPEEDING) …

          "I had to slam on the brakes to avoid them"

          And engaged in ROAD RAGE as well

          "I considered following the car and confronting them…… I settled for beeping them for a good while."

          • newbo on 04/05/2024 - 23:03
            +2

            @HeWhoKnows: I don't think having to slam on your brakes due to someone merging without proper indication is speeding.

            • Bren20 on 05/05/2024 - 08:14
              +1

              @newbo: I was going about 20km/h, wild speeds!

            • HeWhoKnows on 05/05/2024 - 12:30

              @newbo: Considering this happened whilst the other driver was "changing lanes"….

              "Slamming on your brakes" indicates OP is going significantly faster than the other traffic around them.

              So either the other driver was underspeed or OP was overspeed.

              I think the latter is more probable given the "aggressive attitude"

      • bargaino on 02/05/2024 - 14:22
        +7

        See "Contributory negligence"

        In future, the simple way to do this is to fold/move the passenger seat , so the front end of the timber can go into the footwell.

        • Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 14:45
          -1

          Good tip on using the footwell!

          Totally agree I was "contributory", but the other car was too and got away with it!

          • SlickMick on 03/05/2024 - 08:29
            +1

            @Bren20: But just to be clear, your contribution to the repair cost of both vehicles, if you had rammed them, would have been more than replacing your windscreen.
            Plus you'd probably be going to criminal court if you took an action like that. You actually have an obligation to use your brakes when necessary.

        • bazingaa on 03/05/2024 - 11:27

          no in all cars, in mine it does not fully fold to either back or front. Soci move it as forward as possible and fold to front as possible :/

      • MrPants on 02/05/2024 - 18:38
        +10

        Definitely report them to the police.

        I'm looking forward to the next post

        Help! I self reported myself carrying an unsecure load and got a fine, how can I make the driver in front of me pay the fine, along with the damages I caused to my car?

      • MrPants on 02/05/2024 - 18:44
        +3

        But it isn't as "simple as that". If I had of done nothing to avoid the crash I wouldn't be out of pocket, but the overall damage and financial culpability would be far greater. Hence the ethical side to the question

        You misspelt stupid.

        Remember what everyone got taught in high school.

        Unless you are ready for the consequences, always secure your load.

      • Assburg on 02/05/2024 - 20:41

        You're exactly right… if you'd hit them there's a possibility they'd be liable for everything but as it stands… the risk you accepted by not securing the load, and having to conduct a defensive manoeuvre of sorts.. is a very foreseeable risk and one you're wholly liable for.

        • entropysbane on 04/05/2024 - 10:10

          The car behind would be the liable party in an accident
          ?

          • Assburg on 05/05/2024 - 11:21

            @entropysbane: Generally yes.

            Even if they've done something illegal by pulling out in front of you in your lane…liability is apportioned on on the basis that each road user owes a duty of care to each other road user.

            If someone pulls out in front of you illegally or not.. You still need to do what you reasonably can to avoid the accident.

      • lew380 on 03/05/2024 - 14:10
        +1

        You are lucky the timber didnt go through the window and actually cause harm to other road users. In all honesty, you messed up and payed the price. We've all done dumb stuff with loads, similar to yours, I can't condemn you, but take responsibly for your actions.

      • bigbadboogieman on 04/05/2024 - 10:23

        You're not considering opportunity costs of not having your vehicle due to repairs and the hassle of dealing with repairers and insurance claim if you had not hit the brake. You're also not considering the fact that a collision could've resulted in yourself or other driver or passengers getting hurt.

        Shit happens - university of life teaches lessons which aren't always free - If you have windshield cover in your roadside or comprehensive, just claim on that and be happy as it could have been much worse.

    • Drakesy on 02/05/2024 - 15:40
      +2

      Yep, this.

      OP was lucky the timber didn't go into the car in front (i've seen this happen on the freeway with pipes) speared through the passenger headrest of the car in front. If there was a person sitting there they'd be in a bad way/dead,

      • Muzeeb on 02/05/2024 - 15:50
        +5

        I'm getting legal weapon 2 surfboard vibes here

    • HeWhoKnows on 03/05/2024 - 12:40
      -2

      Alternatively OP did not load the timber safely / correctly….

      The end of the timber could have been placed down in the foot area of the front passenger seat, or OP could have padded the end of the timber and rested it against the windscreen, which would have avoided the windscreen damage.

      So its obvious OP is trying to blame someone else for thier own error.

      And making erroneous claims such as….

      "On the way home a car merged into my lane with no notice"

      Obviously Op wasnt paying atttention to the cars around them.

      and furthermore SPEEDIING!…

      " I had to slam on the brakes to avoid them"

      Then we have OP's admission of ROAD RAGE as well…

      " I considered following the car and confronting them, but as I'm not a nutjob I settled for beeping them for a good while"

      And OP says they are NOT A NUTJOB????

      I suggest that OP pull down this very embarrassing post for themselves before everyone on OB puts OP in thier rightful place place

      • Bren20 on 03/05/2024 - 15:40

        lol road rage

    • newbo on 04/05/2024 - 23:06

      What about if he had some laundry detergent in a bag he just bought from a shop?

  • Godric on 02/05/2024 - 14:09
    +13

    Everyone's looking for an easy handout

      • El cheepo on 02/05/2024 - 15:18
        +4

        Nah, you saved yourself a lot of hassle and learned a valuable lesson.

        It isn’t a kindness to drive defensively, it’s self preservation.
        Unfortunately your self preservation doesn’t include avoiding replicating a miniature version of some final destination stuff 😂

  • mrkorrupt on 02/05/2024 - 14:13
    +24

    I fixed it for the OP

    I was bringing some timber home from Bunnings, I had it in the inside of my station wagon laying over the passenger seat through to the boot.

    On the way home a kid ran into my lane with no notice and I had to slam on the brakes to avoid them. The timber went flying forward and cracked my windscreen.

    Should have ran over the kid

      • hmac on 02/05/2024 - 14:23
        +33

        same concept applies though. If that had happened, you would've broken your windscreen.

        You need to secure your load

    • newbo on 04/05/2024 - 23:05

      What is interesting is if you have the choice between hitting a child and hitting a Tesla, it is actually a sound financial decision to hit the child if you only have the insurance that comes with rego.

  • mskeggs on 02/05/2024 - 14:16
    +18

    If you had not braked, the unsecured timber would have broken your windscreen too.

      • WoodYouLikeSomeCash on 02/05/2024 - 14:26
        +18

        The damage from hitting the car in front may have only damaged your bonnet and not the windshield, however the force could’ve led to the timber coming loose and smashing your windshield. Therefore in that scenario you’d still be liable for the windshield.

      • stumo on 02/05/2024 - 19:51
        +16

        Explain the logic?

        Not logic, Physics.

      • Miss B on 03/05/2024 - 06:31
        +5

        Car stops, anything unsecured keeps going.

        • lunchbox99 on 03/05/2024 - 11:54
          +1

          who are you who is so wise in the ways of science?

        • banana365 on 03/05/2024 - 17:47

          Does this include loans? If so, I think I've got a new way for people to evade debts. Just make sure you've got good brakes and wave goodbye to what you owe!

      • 2esc on 03/05/2024 - 08:40

        Seriously?

  • Stewardo on 02/05/2024 - 14:17
    +18

    You could have been fined for not securing your timber correctly.

      • Dollar General on 02/05/2024 - 14:28
        +28

        What if you hit the car & the timber went flying through your windscreen and into another car and injured or killed someone? what’s your excuse gonna be?

        • Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 15:17

          No excuse, I would be liable.

          • geekcohen on 02/05/2024 - 15:26
            +11

            @Bren20: Exactly, so you are therefor liable for the damaged windscreen in this case.

      • geekcohen on 02/05/2024 - 15:16
        +2

        Cops could've just pulled you over anyway. Cannot find a YouTube clip, but there was an elderly lady on Highway Patrol moving house and got fined for an insecure load inside her car.

      • Stewardo on 02/05/2024 - 15:54
        +3

        Random breath test, hey, why have you got unsecured lengths of timber wedged in your car?

      • SlickMick on 03/05/2024 - 08:35
        +1

        Because if you ram me because I cut you off, I'll be calling the police and have no doubt you'll be done for multiple offences.

        hypothetically - I was not the other driver

  • Sye on 02/05/2024 - 14:24
    +1

    Need MS Paint diagram.

  • Dollar General on 02/05/2024 - 14:26
    -4

    Could of, should of, would of, but didn’t

    • DashCam AKA Rolts on 02/05/2024 - 17:13
      +6

      Could of have, should of have, would of have, but didn’t

      • mapax on 02/05/2024 - 17:21
        +3

        Could’ve, should’ve, would’ve, but didn’t

        • Miss B on 03/05/2024 - 06:45
          +2

          Coulda, shoulda, woulda, but didn't.

  • King Tightarse on 02/05/2024 - 14:29
    +5

    Sometimes you just have to cop it sweet.
    Everyone drives like over-caffeinated bastards these days, following too close is standard, merging quickly without indicating in common.
    This is not fair but it 'just one of those things'.
    There nothing you can do, just fix the windscreen and move on

  • ForkSnorter on 02/05/2024 - 14:39
    +5

    I was bringing some timber home from Bunnings, I had it in the inside of my station wagon laying over the passenger seat through to the boot.
    On the way home a car merged into my lane with no notice and I had to slam on the brakes to avoid them. The timber went flying forward and cracked my windscreen.

    If the timber went flying forward and cracked your windscreen, it was unsecured, illegal, and potentially dangerous. Depending on the height and angle, it could have cracked your skull, or the skull of the front seat passenger, or, at high speed, it could even have gone through the windscreen and hit somebody outside your car.

    If I hadn't slammed the brakes they would have been liable for repairs to my car. Given that I did slam my brakes, I've copped a broken windscreen.

    If you had hit them and the collision stopped your vehicle, the timber would likely have hit your windscreen even harder. If your car had been sideswiped by the merging car, it might have pushed you into another lane, causing a collision with another car.

    What's everyone's take in the legal, moral and ethical approaches here? Should I have done anything differently? If I had my time again I'd let them hit my car and they'd obviously be liable.

    Are you saying you would have deliberately allowed a car accident involving your car to happen on the off-chance that it would save you some money?

  • brendanm on 02/05/2024 - 14:48
    +8

    A) secure your load
    B) claim a windscreen under insurance if you have free windscreen replacement
    C) if you don't have insurance and thought that letting them hit you would be a better outcome, it wouldn't

    • Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 16:55
      -3

      I've got third party, they were driving a BMW so I'd assume they'd have insurance.

      • brendanm on 02/05/2024 - 17:11
        +6

        Silly assumption. You are also assuming that their insurance would side with you with bot much evidence. The entire issue goes away of you had your load secured though. Imagine copping that in the head in an accident.

        • bkt on 04/05/2024 - 13:43

          Wouldn't put a dent in OP's thick skull haha

      • MrPants on 02/05/2024 - 18:27
        +13

        I've got third party, they were driving a BMW so I'd assume they'd have insurance.

        Then you should have assumed that being a BMW, they wouldn't have used their indicators and kept your distance.

  • Euphemistic on 02/05/2024 - 14:51
    +1

    Unsecured load. Its on you.

    As for 'if I'd hit them I would have been covered by insurance' well, no. Becasue you wouldn't have driven into someone because you thought the wood was going to hit the windscreen - becasue you were not expecting it to happen.

  • Bignudge on 02/05/2024 - 14:51

    This is why I enjoy driving a car that has already got some light scratches and bumps all around it. If anyone wants to change lanes into me… go ahead. Dash cam all ready to go back and front.

    I will beep and brake where it's safe to do so. But I won't dodge them by running the curb and mess up my tire, rims, suspension, and allignment…. and have the other driver driver just speed off leaving me in a mess.

    Also go with Shannons insurance, 1 free windshield repair per renewal I'm pretty sure.

    • Sal in SA on 02/05/2024 - 15:19

      Most offer free windscreen per renewal.

      • Bignudge on 02/05/2024 - 17:51

        Never knew that. I was with NRMA for a long time and never heard anything like that

        • Muzeeb on 02/05/2024 - 17:56
          +2

          It's an option with nrma

        • hasher22 on 02/05/2024 - 20:35

          I have it with NRMA for years, it's there. Log in online and you can add it

  • onetwothreefour on 02/05/2024 - 14:55
    +15

    but as I'm not a nutjob I settled for beeping them for a good while.

    that still makes you a nutjob

    • Bren20 on 02/05/2024 - 15:54

      Maybe we can agree that this is on the lower scale compared to the other post…

  • cashless on 02/05/2024 - 15:10
    +5

    Why are you looking to blame someone else when you were travelling with an unsecured load?
    Lucky you didn’t get busted for failure to secure your load.
    Another entitled OzBargain troll post

  • Fredfloresjr on 02/05/2024 - 15:29

    hahaha

  • bobbified on 02/05/2024 - 15:34
    +1

    I had a similar thing happen to me before, except it was a table that moved forward when I braked hard and it destroyed my fold-out screen on my stereo. It was a $3,000 media unit with a fold out monitor.

    There was nothing I could do because there was no actual collision, so I had to fork out from my own pocket to replace the unit.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join