Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are features you can't use and images you can't see. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: Join our community! |
| Geo Metro Front End SMASHED in by speeding driver; CRASH DATA Support Needed SEE PICS | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Sep 20 2010, 11:00 PM (8,467 Views) | |
| Coche Blanco | Sep 24 2010, 11:58 PM Post #91 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
She was in a 99 Jetta. Two wrongs don't make a right. |
![]() |
|
| Dmitri | Sep 24 2010, 11:59 PM Post #92 |
|
New Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Bad Bent. You keep mentioning a 98' Jetta,including recalls which are specific to 98 Jetta. The car in question is from the 99-2005 generation,not 94-98 generation. |
![]() |
|
| Woodie | Sep 25 2010, 06:28 AM Post #93 |
![]()
|
If you have decent tires on a GEN2 Metro, the brakes are not capable of locking them up. Push as hard as you want, break the seat back, doesn't matter. |
![]() |
|
| Woodie | Sep 25 2010, 06:37 AM Post #94 |
![]()
|
This guy got outbluffed. He should have said, "F-you, see you in court, my neck is starting to feel stiff". Would have ended up with $5,000. |
![]() |
|
| Ryan | Sep 25 2010, 07:27 AM Post #95 |
|
Ryan
![]()
|
This is the second member in less than two weeks who has 'dismissed' Coche.
|
![]() |
|
| Bad Bent | Sep 25 2010, 10:21 AM Post #96 |
|
Facetious Educated Donkey
![]()
|
Thank you Dmitri, I was going on information posted earlier in the thread. Apparently the police report is wrong and so even if the 89 was transposed to a 98 it is still wrong. Car models, year to year changes, colors, accessories, yada, yada, yada, are obviously not my forte, eh.
Edited by Bad Bent, Sep 25 2010, 10:24 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Coche Blanco | Sep 25 2010, 10:53 AM Post #97 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
Ryan, I don't argue, unless i'm right. That's something my mom taught me...good advice.
Edited by Coche Blanco, Sep 25 2010, 11:00 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| bansheetaz | Sep 25 2010, 12:53 PM Post #98 |
![]()
|
unless someone has invented a magical "mysteriously appearing" car, all cars come from SOMEWHERE. regardless of what anyone thinks. in court the only thing that matters is what you can prove. the fact is that it will be easier to prove that you had a stop sign then it will be to prove that the other person was speeding. due to your stop sign being there, you had absolutely zero right of way. it doesnt matter at that point how fast anyone on the street is going. it could have been an emergency vehicle. the stop sign means you are only to proceed when it is safe to do so and in this case it was clearly not safe at that time. after studying the drawing and seeing all the cars in the center lane and the limited visibility to the right side oncoming traffic due to those cars... im not sure why you would have been trying to cross that kind of traffic anyway. too much action going on at the time. a safer way would have been to turn right off the stop sign and gone to the next lighted intersection to head the direction you wanted to go. bottom line is if everyone drove like everyone else was going to kill them. (which they are). there would be farther fewer accidents. we should all put down our cell phones, coffee, cigarettes, donuts, makeup, pets, and get back to the full time job at hand which is getting where you want to go without dying. having said that... i hate to see metro get smashed and im glad noone was hurt. good luck in court. |
![]() |
|
| geogonfa | Sep 25 2010, 03:50 PM Post #99 |
![]()
|
First: I'm glad your okay, and that no one was hurt . After reading this post I just have a few personal observations ,I really think the metro can be saved, so if you can keep it, try to do so. Maybe sell it as a parts car. As for the police being the way they are, remember they are just corporate highwaymen, they don't care about your opinion, just whether they can cite someone. they are not experts, but they do not expect you to argue with them, they are always right (in their own minds), never wrong. But, on the other hand , even from what was presented, you still can't prove it was not your fault ( not saying it was mind you ), just can't prove it. As for ABS brakes leaving skid marks, it all depends on a lot of variables, having worked with E.M.S. I've seen a lot of accidents, some with no skid marks unless the vehicle in question skidded sideways or the axle bent on impact, even after witnesses said they heard the squealing before the impact. As for the citation, if the officer wrote miss information on the citation ( 89 VW vs. 98 VW) then it is fightable in their court, which might at least keep it off your driving record. Remember, in the corporate courts you are "guilty" until proven innocent, or by you proving their incompetence. The best thing to do... file a complaint about the intersection in question listing as many accidents and dates as possible in the County Court of records, and send a notarized copy to your congressman, this will make the county/state have to respond to the traffic problems presented. As for myself, I would never have attempted to cross the road in that situation, sorry. "Metros,we are the speed bumps on this great highway called life". |
![]() |
|
| 59RamblerWithFins | Sep 26 2010, 12:30 AM Post #100 |
|
New Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Okay people, I started this thread asking for help in assessing the amount of speed it took to cause the damage that was done to my car. Some of you began posting that it was my fault and to let it rest. I didn't mind however I did try to let everyone know that I didn't think so, that I've found information otherwise, (See post #17, #23) Still, I kept getting comments. The two witnesses will testify how far into the road I was before being hit. This is key information for MY side. The witnesses, like some of you other folks believe that I am in the wrong BECAUSE I entered the lane. I know otherwise. In Pennsylvania I would still be okay if I was in the road LESS than 50%. I believe I was 100% in the road but at the very least 75% into the road and NOT less than that. I DID look to my left to the immediate vicinity and saw no cars. If I had looked a lot further I would have seen the red VW but I would still have pulled out cause she would have been NO WHERE NEAR me IF she were going the speed limit!!! Again, according to Pennsylvania law I did nothihng wrong. I thank you for ALL of your postings...it made me REALLY, REALLY research EVERYTHING and I've found a boat load of information that I can use against the boro and the police station and in my defense. I am not saying this facetiously, I am honestly saying this with gratitude. Let's not fight, or argue, that's not what I'm here for. I truly do appreciate MOST all of your comments with the exception of a couple of flamers. People that have issues and want to speak and behave in a hostile/jerk type manner...well, if they want to pick on me that's fine...at least the dog is getting a "brake" from getting kicked! I also know that MOST all of your comments were coming from what you thought was right or the law...however...different states, different laws. My biggest reason for wanting to prove MOST if not just partial innocence was because the local boro government was not enforcing the law on this stretch of road and I was put in in a precarious situation in which I, and others, have been in car accidents. Why did I turn left in such a hairy situation? I guess cause that's what I thought I was expected to do. I mean, the road has a left turn lane. Seeing alllll those people lined up erroneously gave me the indication that they were in the right ( I mean really, how can over 40 cars be lined up in the center lane and it's not illegal or enforced by the cops?) I also thought, okay, this is what I'm presented with...I will sit here and WAIT till the opportune moment presents itself, it did and WHAM this woman hit me from out of no where. It is her fault if she illegally reduced that safe distance by speeding, which is a violation of the law, and failed to yield to me when I was properly in the intersection. That's the law in the state of Pennsylvania and several other states. It's also the law in British Columbia. I'm sorry for those that thought otherwise...I hold no grudge...as I hope you do not either. I'm not here to argue...I just wanted advice on if the accident looked like it was over 35mph as some of you have probably seen wrecked Geos. I will take my photographs to body shops to get their professional opinions as one member gave me this idea :-) THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION I FOUND CAME OFF OF: Michaels and Smolak's attorneys' link: http://www.michaels-smolak.com/lawyer-attorney-1501449.html Quote: "When should I call a lawyer? If there is an issue of negligent road design or maintenance, you may need to file notice of claim against the government agency responsible for the roadway within 90 days." End Quote INFORMATION BELOW WAS COPIED FROM FREEADVICE.COM: http://accident-law.freeadvice.com/auto/car-accident-claim-fault.htm"Proportional Quote: "The states that have adopted proportional comparative fault bar recovery if you are more than 51% at fault for the accident. In other words, you cannot file a liability claim and lawsuit against the other driver’s negligence if you were more than 51% at fault. For example, Dennis hit Teri’s car while driving in excess of 25 miles per hour over the speed limit while Teri was attempting to cross the road. Even though Teri was partially at fault for not waiting until the road was completely clear before crossing, the insurance company allocated fault to Dennis at 60% due to his excessive speed. Even though Dennis suffered a broken arm from the accident, he is not entitled to recover for his injury due to the fact that he was more than 51% at fault for the accident. States: Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Wisconsin and Wyoming."End Quote http://bc-injury-law.com/blog/liability-stop-signs-speeding-fault Quote: In the latter case, if you stopped and yielded to on-coming traffic, and then proceeded with due care, you are not at fault when another car was being driven too fast for the conditions and failed to yield to your vehicle already in the intersection. Just because you have a stop sign doesn't mean you have to wait for anyone coming from a safe distance. It is their fault if they have illegally reduced that safe distance by speeding, which is a violation of the law for that reason, and failed to yield to you properly in the intersection.End Quote From the law offices of Judy Greenwood P.C. http://www.greenwoodlawoffice.com/article-car-accidents-proving-fault.php Quote: "Left-Turn Accidents A car making a left turn is almost always liable for a collision with a car coming straight in the other direction. Exceptions to this near-automatic rule are rare and difficult to prove, but they can occur if: •The car going straight was going well over the speed limit. •The car going straight went through a red light. •The left-turning car began its turn when it was safe, but something unexpected made it slow down or stop. This is an extremely difficult exception to use because a basic rule of the road says a car making a left turn must wait until it can safely complete the turn before moving in front of oncoming traffic."End Quote The following info was written by Attorney Matt Babcock from The Babcock Law Firm, LLC: http://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=18802 Quote: "If there is damage on the front-end of one car and on the front-right side of the other, a left-turn accident has occurred. Exceptions to the “no fault” provision of a left-turn car accident include when the car traveling straight was traveling way over the speed limit or ran a red light."End Quote Minnesota law: Subdivision 1. Right of Way when Approaching an Intersection (d) The driver of any vehicle traveling at an unlawful speed shall forfeit any right-of-way which the driver might otherwise have hereunder. Subdivision 3. Right of Way at Through Highway and at Stop Sign (b) The driver of a vehicle shall likewise stop in obedience to a stop sign, as required herein, at an intersection where a stop sign is erected at one or more entrances thereto although not a part of a through highway, and shall proceed cautiously, yielding to vehicles not so obliged to stop which are within the intersection or approaching so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard, but may then proceed. http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/blog/car-accident-fault-and-getting-what-youre-owed-03356.html So with all that said...I just found what I'm looking for and I will go through it tomorrow looking for the section that pertains to me ;-) PA CODE & STATUTES @Dmitri who wrote under post #89: "Rambler. As evident from your thinking the car was a 89, and many other things you have said, you simply do not understand the subject of the discussion beyond what you subjectively feel to be correct. Cars,or physics of collision are simply not your strong point. ...I posted a picture of the red VW, Woodie brought to my attention under comment #69 on page #5, that "That's more like a 99 Jetta, 89's were quite square." I then posted on the very same page, under comment #73: "Ah! The police report has it as a 1989 which is what I was going by. Thanks for "explaining" the difference Woodie." This was stated 14 posts before you jumped in. I was going by the police report. "All" cars and "all" collisions are not my strong point, that is correct. As for not understanding the subject of the discussion beyond what I subjectively feel to be correct... you are wrong (as I just proved with the links above) and I think the same of you as evidenced by your jumping in and making statements about my posts without fully reading all the posts in their entirety and are just making assumptions which are incorrect and/or out of line. Expressing your opinion CIVILLY is one thing...expressing your opinion in a derogatory manner AND being WRONG...well @Ryan who wrote: "This is the second member in less than two weeks who has 'dismissed' Coche. " Thank you for pointing that out. I'm trying to hold a friendly unobjective conversation, weighing both pro and con and I'm getting a few posts from people who aren't reading posts and/or don't know how to hold a civil conversation without being condescending. I guess it makes them feel better in some inferior way. These two people in specific are being ignored at this point. @Superduty5.9...Thanks for the compliment on the Rambler. Just ordered a new gas tank. Am putting in a fuel pump myself in a week (have Motors Manuel, so I will do what I can understand...as a gurl). Going to drain and flush all fluids and push some buttons (push button transmission) and tada! Well, I hope tada! lol She's been sitting for a while but she should have no issues. I just don't want any gunk or stuff mucking things up. This is going to be my all time favorite car. Killer stereo system would be nice but I'm going to settle for something decent. Now, if I can only find the damn keys to the car! lol Needed to get into the trunk last week and the keys aren't where they should be! Grrrr. I'll bet they're in one of my coat pockets! lol @Bad Bent...Thank you ever so kindly for all your comments and even more so for taking the time to compose "Part II." under post #90. Wow, you're like a rocket scientist! lol (I'm joking, but wow, that was brilliant)! I will be using that in my presentation in my defense! THANK YOU! @Horn12007 who wrote: "None of us saw the car at all until a slight moment before contact. after we thought about it, itwas getting close to dark and they didn't have the lights on, but honestly it was our fault." ...Depending on WHICH STATE your friend had the accident in...if he had an attorney representing him he might have won his case. Read the following: Quoted from : FreeAdvice.com http://accident-law.freeadvice.com/auto/car-accident-claim-fault.htm Quote: "What is Comparative or Contributory Negligence? For example, say Luther and Martin were involved in an accident. Luther hit Martin’s car while making a left turn onto a 2-lane street at night. Luther didn't’t see Martin’s car because even though it was night time (and a dark one at that), Martin was not driving with his headlights on. Under a pure contributory negligence theory, Martin could not recover damages for his injuries because he was partially at fault for the accident. Sound pretty harsh? Actually, some states still follow this rule (Alabama, District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina and Virginia). "End Quote @Geogonfa...The Geo is on Craigslist...sniffle...as a parts car. You made several good points. Thank you for your comments
Edited by 59RamblerWithFins, Sep 26 2010, 02:45 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Coche Blanco | Sep 26 2010, 12:38 AM Post #101 |
|
Troll Certified
![]()
|
Well this was fun. Unless PA law is just bassackwards, there's no way you stand a chance. At BEST you're looking at both drivers being at fault...I honestly hope they show you at fault and you have to pay to fix the VW...that will make my day. Edited by Coche Blanco, Sep 26 2010, 12:39 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Bad Bent | Sep 26 2010, 03:42 PM Post #102 |
|
Facetious Educated Donkey
![]()
|
Update: according to www.motortrend.com/1999_volkswagen_jetta/specs the stopping distance of a 1999 Jetta is 130 feet. A little more detailed stopping distance calculation is at www.ehow.com/calculate-braking-distance.. 1. Determine the speed the car is traveling; 35mph or faster? 2. Establish the stopping distance; if it takes 4 seconds to cross the intersection we are still looking at 200 feet. 3. Institute a deceleration rate. This is the rate that applying the brakes slows the vehicle. This rate is typically 20 feet per second. 4.Establish the stopping time; When traveling at 35 mph, which equals 51 feet per second if the deceleration rate is 20 fps, the stopping time equals 51/20 = 2.55 seconds. 5. Ascertain the thinking distance, which is reaction time as it relates to distance. Reaction time can take an average of 2 seconds to set in and realize that there is a problem. The Red VW driver is young so we will give her the benefit of the doubt although she is pictured with a cell phone in her hand. 6. Calculate the total braking distance. This formula is 1/2 the initial velocity in feet per second multiplied by the time required to stop, which is 0.5 x 51 x 2.55 = 65.25. The calculated thinking distance is 2 x 51 = 102. Add the two numbers together. 167.25 feet is the total braking distance. From seeing the Geo to stopping So it takes a little over 3 seconds to travel that distance. So if the Geo was hit at 4 seconds, then the Geo had ascertained that it was safe to cross the intersection and had released the clutch for 1 second, at which point the Red VW was at the braking point. Being football season, that is 50 yards. or 8 parked cars away. Why is this important to understand? Any one of us can be in the same position as 59RamblerWithFins. Sure, you should not admit fault or talk to the other driver but proving liability is more than 'you are turning, you are wrong.' That's why they call them mitigating circumstances and it depends on who's better at mitigating. Remember, if the Red VW had been in the center of the lane the Geo would have been t-boned. Why wasn't it? The Red VW had time to swerve to the left and try to avoid the Geo but hit the front end and shove the bumper to the right. So, if the impact was at 30+6 then the Red VW had time to think it could make it in front of the Geo. If Red VW had that much time to react at what point could Red VW have decided not to 'go for it' and thus avoided the collision. By 'go for it' I mean thinking 'OMG, if I hit that car it will hurt' or 'Wow a car is crossing the street I'll be patient and let it cross' and even 'one of these cars in line could cut out and hit me.' Unless she was one of the cars who cut out of line and was getting back in the space ahead of the black SUV.
|
![]() |
|
| Dmitri | Sep 27 2010, 02:50 AM Post #103 |
|
New Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually I "jumped in" after having read the whole post. The fact you saw the car in person and it didn't immediately strike you as wrong that it's written in the report as a 89 is a dead giveaway... Also, you insist on 2 things, "the car came out of nowhere" and "the driver had no control over the car". First: Cars just don't come out of nowhere, laws of physics. Second, if you actually had enough time to observe and accurately judge the fact the driver had no control over the car,you've obviously seen it coming.Therefore,the two statements are self-contradictory in your context,and one or both is false. Also, as you stated in the quote about BC's laws, it clearly sais "proceed with DUE CARE". By the sounds of it, you didn't use due care,thus the quote is moot. You quote people who's job it is to weasel money out of people by giving them hope at winning. At best,you may succeed at using letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law and achieve lawful injustice. Truth be told, in my industry, I see people do what you do nearly every day, and the innocent suffer for it. It toasts my noggin. |
![]() |
|
| superduty5.9 | Sep 27 2010, 10:44 AM Post #104 |
|
Metro Defender
![]()
|
Maybe it's just me but I read her posts and looked at her pics and drawings. IT is pretty clear to me. If I were a judge I would rule in your favor. Cars don't appear out of nowhere. It is an expression. It means when I looked it was not there. When I looked again there it was. Sure the lady in the red VW had the right of way but that doesn't mean she doesn't have to slow down or stop for obstructions in her path. If Eva was walking and not driving across the street do you guys think it would be ok to hit her then cause she shouldn't have been there to begin with? The VW has the right of way but also must use caution and common sense to avoid an accident. I don't know cause I wasn't there but if the drawing is correct then the VW's way out to avoid an accident would have been to go to the right an avoid the accident all together. It really doesn't matter if she was speeding or not and if she had control she f'ed up! Eva also sounds like she cares about others and is trying to get her city to change traffic at that intersection to avoid other accident or deaths. She should be commended on this. Like a rail crossing, if after there is x amount of deaths at a particular rail crossing they will put up gates and lights. These are my own observations and this is the way I see it!! |
![]() |
|
| bogs | Sep 27 2010, 01:27 PM Post #105 |
|
Duct tape heals all wounds
![]()
|
Actually, you would have to know cars in general and VW cars specifically to know that, even the cop didn't know so I highly doubt thats a "dead give-away" to anything. I don't have to know bullet calibers to know someone was shot when I hear a "bang" and see blood forming on their chest. Ditto on the "out of nowhere", its an expression and it is used a lot, she doesn't mean literally that the car appeared magically ala David Copperfield. Aside from all that, she was asking not about the accident, as she points out at least 2 other times in this thread, but for an opinion as to what the damage shows. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Geo Metro Lounge · Next Topic » |


Welcome to the all new Geo Metro Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.





![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)


. After reading this post I just have a few personal observations
,
Remember, if the Red VW had been in the center of the lane the Geo would have been t-boned. Why wasn't it? The Red VW had time to swerve to the left and try to avoid the Geo but hit the front end and shove the bumper to the right. So, if the impact was at 30+6 then the Red VW had time to think it could make it in front of the Geo. If Red VW had that much time to react at what point could Red VW have decided not to 'go for it' and thus avoided the collision. By 'go for it' I mean thinking 'OMG, if I hit that car it will hurt' or 'Wow a car is crossing the street I'll be patient and let it cross' and even 'one of these cars in line could cut out and hit me.'

1:58 PM Jul 11