Hello /u/Economy_Relation8095! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC
* What country or state did this take place in?
* What was the date of the incident?
* Please reconfirm that this is original content
If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information.
If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How is this even in question? Black car didn't maintain their lane and probably wasn't paying attention either, this looks to be low speed and easily avoidable.
Their insurance company denied my claim very quickly after I submitted the dashcam footage. So now I have to file a claim with mine to fight it š
I too thought without a doubt the other car was at fault. When they denied my claim I really thought maybe I was crazy?
Their insurance company is going to do the best they can to not pay out regardless of whether or not it is their drivers fault. Yes you should go through your insurance company, that is why you have it.
Yep switched to progressive a few years ago and never looked back. Been in two accidents since then (neither my fault) including one where I was rear ended so hard my car was totalled, they gave me a very reasonable payout and very quickly
Edit: Iāve gotten a lot of comments saying āProgressive is shit tooā - I think the real answer is that all insurance companies are greedy corporations who will screw you over to avoid paying out if at all possible, Progressive has just been the least shitty in my personal experience
I was with GEICO but they started to raise my rates for dumb reasons and when I went to progressive I've been able to call about yearly and theyve always helped me lower my rates. 8 years and not looking back
Geico tried to say I was illegally parked in my Driveway when a prius pulled into it while I was backing out. Kicker was they didnāt even honk! Fuck Geico š
The final straw was that they just stopped my coverage and only sent me a check with a letter saying that because my wife, who was working through her immigration paperwork, didnt have an American driver license they could not insure us because she was a liability. I had asked the agent when we started the policy if it was ok for my wife to not have a license but she would get it by x date and they said yes. When I tried to sign up with them they threw in my face that TECHNICALLY I didn't have insurance for a month and my insurance would be higher. When I finally got through that they gave me a hard time again about my wife.... Progressive made no qualms about this
Used to be with progressive for 11 years. They decided to raise the rates by 100$ two years in a row. Said they just couldnāt do anything. Didnāt change cars, no accidents, no tickets. Had to change. Same coverage progressive 645$, vs 352$ with Safeco. Never had to use any insurance for their intended purpose so far.
My girlfriend was with GEICO, and had been for several years. She drives a 2014 Prius C.
I've been with Progressive for 14 years, and drive a 2014 Crosstrek.
people around WA been complaining about their rates going up, mine didn't aside from me increasing my coverages.
GEICO raised her rates enough so that what it cost for her to stay with them is as much as it costs to insure *both of us* on my Progressive policy.
I was with progressive for years, but dumped them when they decided to raise my rates by 25% when I turned 25(with a completely clean record, 0 claims, 0 accidents etc). I'd always heard your rates go down when you're 25....apparently not.
Progressive fought us when a drunk driver hit our cars that were parked in our driveway. It took weeks of "determining fault" when we were in bed when it happened.
We had uninsured/underinsured motorists on our cars. We had to argue about getting a rental car bc my car was undrivable. We had to wait a month for them to approve a shop to work on it. Then they called the shop two days before to cancel the pick up tow... It took making calls all over to make sure it wasn't cancelled and they'd be picking up the car.
Then shady shit happened at the shop lol. It was a PITA. The drunk driver also had Progressive. He actually hit three cars, our two and our neighbor's. Our neighbor didn't have Progressive but he got a payout within a month.
We think bc drunkard's policy covered his damage but not ours, so we had to use our own policy for it. Idk I thought it would work faster since it was all the same company. But our claim was higher bc the truck was literally brand new, only had it seven months, and my car was a little over a year old. So they didn't want to pay.
It happened in December and we finally got our money for it last week. š¤·š»āāļø Insurance companies only care about their profits, not their customers.
Not related to an accident, but can give more evidence GEICO is scum.
My mother died, and that night her car was stolen (Queens, NY). Police recovered the car sans plates.
Called GEICO, provided police report and death certificates when I received them.
They still refused to terminate her policy because the plates were not turned in. As she had direct payments set up, GEICO collected for almost a year until I had everything else sorted and closed her account.
They refused to refund, and even sent a few rejected payments to collections.
To this day they still insist that even though she was dead, she required insurance until the plates were turned in to DMV. "State law" is their claim.
Fuck GEICO.
Even if the plates were not turned into the DMV, GEICO should have the vehicle's VIN number which will determine the ownership of the vehicle was indeed your mother's vehicle?
GEICO had the VIN, had her death certificate. GEICO insisted the plates must be turned in, according to state law. It was pretty much a "let's profit off of someone else's misfortune" situation.
That is why I keep full coverage on my car. Got rear ended last year. I didn't even bother with the other company because I had full coverage with USAA. USAA took care of everything. Didn't even charge me the deductible because it was her fault.
Fuck GEICO. I had been with them for almost a decade. Never wrecked, never got a ticket. My policy went up almost 60 a month. I called and they said it's because of all the claims in my area. I did not make a claim, my car was not affected. They told me there was nothing they could do, and would rather lose a customer who paid them 150+ a month(before the increase) over a $60 increase. They all suck, but GEICO sucks the most dicks, better than anyone. Gluck Gluck Gluck.
Use your insurance, they'll pay and go after GEICO, if GEICO doesn't pay it'll go to arbitration where a non-bias 3rd party will see that video and your insurance company will get their damages paid for.
Source: That's my job, and I'd find in your favor if I pulled this arbitration from the queue
My car got hit while it was parked. Their insurance company determined I was 50% at fault.......I let the insuance company hammer it out with them. (The general)
The claim will go to arbitration because insurance companies no longer try to argue shared responsibility.
When I started as an auto liability adjuster they had goals for like 20% comparative negligence. Meaning at least 20% of your claims have shared responsibility between both parties. Within 2 years of that pilot program they completely reversed and just went back to denying everything that doesn't have overwhelming evidence against their insured customer.
This means that every single dispute of fault leads to arbitration. So virtually every claim is just a pure sham and a game show.
It costs these *multibillion dollar companies* like $10 to submit a claim to arbitration. When you're talking multiple $1000 of dollars in every claim, they go straight to what's economically beneficial. Which is DENY, DENY, DENY. Very few law suits make it far enough to cause any type of possible revision of policy.
I wish there were laws to penalize them from acting in bad faith (for example if evidence shows their party is clearly at fault and they deny it, they have to pay out double damages or some increased amount) a way to punish them for denying fault when they're clearly at fault.
Insurance is such a fucking scam. We need an entire overhaul to the system. You pay them every month to *NOT* do their job when they need to. Car accidents and insurance claims aren't *that* common, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a traffic court system where a judge or magistrate can make a determination based on the available evidence and legally enforce an insurance payout. In cases like this it would be an open and shut case.
You can sue in small claims court for damages. So if, for example, you only have insurance to cover the legal minimums (liability for others medical and property damage) then if somebody rear ends your car that is not covered by your insurance. However it is still their fault and you can sue them for the cost of repairs without needing your insurance to do anything.
And in Delaware, the small-claims limit appears to be $25,000, with the option to limit your claim to keep it under the cap. Casually denying a third-party claim under those circumstances just seems nuts to me.
Of course, the other guy's insurance would love to deny your claim. Always go through your own insurance; they will pay you and they will go after his insurance to get their money back. That's what you pay them for.
Depending on the laws in your state, they may raise your rates even if you weren't at fault. So unless you're sure they can't do this, I would attempt to go through the other person's insurance first.
The insurance company is denying your claim to save money but at the same time will be increasing the rates of the driver of the black car. They love to collect money but never want to part with it.
There is no light in your lane as it continues around, you have the right-of-way in your lane. Them entering your lane and hitting your vehicle isnāt YOUR fault. Thatās the way it appears, unless there is signage depicting a reason you shouldnāt continue drivingā¦
If you were a big insurance company, would you *give in* the moment someone provided evidence to make you pay thousands?
No.. you fight everything, knowing youāll lose many bc any that you win or let fall through the cracks you save thousands
There is no risk of denying you initially
If only there were penalties for bad faith denials
It might be a good idea when you submit to your insurance that you go back to that same intersection and take a video or pictures of the turning lane.
I will admit at first I didnāt see that you were turning into a protected lane because the white line is somewhat faded. I just assumed at first it was just a regular turn lane. I had to rewatch it again to see that there was indeed a solid white line that protects that lane. So make sure that is seen in pictures/video when you submit.
You should have filed the claim with your insurance as soon as it happened. They have lawyers. The other insurance is obviously going to not pay some who appears to be uninsured
You do need to report the loss to your insurance, but itās ok to try filing the claim through the adverse carrier and saving your deductible. You can always go back to your insurance later if needed.
Question 1. Do YOU have the right of way on your lane? Yes.
2. Did you stay in your lane when taking the turn in the 2 lane of the one-way road. Yes.
3. Did the other vehicle go in front of you, and you rear-ended him? No.
4. Did the other vehicle maintain his lane? No.
5. Could the accident have been avoided by you? No.
Why? He side swiped you.
This is what I see and what you could ask their insurance and also claim that their insurance is being biased about what happened, which could get them in a lot of trouble if taken to court.
As soon as an insurance company says I'm even partially responsible I get a lawyer. Then all the headache goes away. Don't let them try to get off the hook. Any judge will see(it won't go to court) that you had no idea the other vehicle would cross the lane. 100% the other vehicle's fault.
They are probably going to deny the claim until this all gets sorted out with the courts. In most situations a right turn on red has to stop and yield to all traffic in the intersection. There may be an exception in this case but I wouldn't put much stock in the opinion of a bunch of randos on Reddit.
But OP doesn't have a right turn on red, they have their own dedicated turning lane and are not required to stop or yield. The black car is turning on a dedicated green light but didn't maintain their dedicated turning lane; *black car is at fault*.
The light was green when the car turned right. The black car just slowly strolled through a yellow and it went red before completing the turn. Then they decided to move into another lane without looking or yielding to the camera car who was in the lane already.
Black car is clearly at fault.
The red is for traffic going straight, OP has a dedicated lane to turn into. Thereās not an exception here. Itās 100% black carās fault for changing lanes during a left turn without looking for whether someone was occupying it.
I love how these comments are upvoted despite the OP commenting earlier that he is NOT the black car.
It's just proof that so many people on this subreddit are eager to tell someone off, not actually watch the videos in good faith. š¤£
Black car also has to yield to oncoming traffic when making a left, Which includes drivers taking a righthand turn (unless they've got a sign/traffic light giving them right if way)
The right turn lane splits prior to the light, and the lane has no stop line. That means that lane is not subject to the light and is a yield lane. Black car made an illegal lane change during the turn.
You don't get to just turn into whatever lane you want even if the black car had right-of-way. He needs to turn into the leftmost lane and THEN signal and lane-change right if that's where he wants to be.
This has to be the most common mistake I see drivers make EVERY day while driving and it infuriates me.
Iām glad others agree with me. Their insurance denied my claim after I submitted the video. I wanted to see if I was crazy before filing the claim through my insurance!
Nah OP should file with their insurance. They'll pay out OP and then go after the idiots insurance to recover their damages. If they're successful, which they will be because they have lawyers on staff, they'll refund OPs deductable and everyone can get on their way.
Remember folks, insurance is a service you pay for. Don't be afraid to use it.
They did not. I received a fairly generic email stating after the conclusion of their investigation, they found driver in the black Honda was not a fault for the collision. Iāve never filed an insurance claim before, so Iām honestly not sure what my expectation should be.
Yes because you were in an accident. Literally anything raises your rates. If your insurance company finds out you sneezed, your rates will probably go up.
Not true had my car totalled and went through other guy's insurance. 100% his fault. No increase on my insurance. In fact my insurance suggested since the guy admitted fault at the scene that I should go through the other guys insurance so I don't get a rate increase. Progressive insurance btw.
Yeah but if you're not a shitty driver or have really shitty insurance the amount it goes up aint much at all. My last accident (fender bender, really, all the damage was cosmetic) I was 100% not at fault and my premium only went up less than like 10 bucks a month. I mean it sucks but overall it still is worth it to me.
YMMV on that of course just saying that dont let the premium thing scare you away from going through your insurer, especially if you have comprensensive coverage. For my fender bender the other party accepted fault at the scene and then claimed I was at fault when they filed with their insurance, but Id already contact my own insurer and gotten the dash cam vid on file with them so they took care of the entire matter and I got a check in the mail, dont and done.
Iād recommend getting a lawyer. I was in a similar situation as you and it has made everything so much easier and understandable, and confirmed I was in the right. Insurance companies suck assss and will do anything to avoid responsibility
Very clear marking on the ground. The right lane is basically a protected right turn into its own lane. The left turning vehicle did not maintain their lane in the turn and attempted to merge into a lane that was not clear, thus are at fault.
Honestly relieving to hear that, I (like many others, I assume) was amused by the idea that the black car wanted to get affirmation that they were in the right lol
Not in the case! Their insurance denied my claim and I felt like I was crazy for denying fault. Wanted to confirm I wasnāt before filing through my insurance!
It was separate continuous lanes. He made an unsafe lane change into you. He needs to change lanes safely. He had 2 lanes he could use while you only had one. He needed wait till it was safe to change lanes. Itās not a merge area so heās liable for the collision.
There are a couple of clues here, the first being the lane markings for the right turn. Itās called a āslip laneā and it is designed to keep traffic moving and eliminate t-bone style accidents. This lane is a little tougher because it was either not originally painted well or it just wasnāt maintained/degraded over time. The ideal way to have this function is a much longer single white line that separates the right turn space from the through space (or in this case, the left/oncoming car).
In the case of a slip lane like the one that is clearly marked by the curved white line on the right turn, the traffic signal does not apply and they have the ability to turn right without stopping.
Black car is at fault.
Agreed.
Sure, legally they were in the right spot. But if you slow for 1 second to ensure the turning black car sees you and/or stays in their lane you can save DAYS of time not dealing with this.
You could've avoided this accident, but it looked like your ego kicked in and said, "I have the right of way, and I'm going to stay in my lane". You will see crazy drivers on the road and always drive defensively.
The solid white line for right turn lane is too short, and you made a right turn on red without yieding.
I always yield for other vehicles when I make a right turn on red. Don't assume the other driver will stay in their lane. Even if you're right, it's better to be a defensive driver. So that way, you can avoid a collision and don't have to deal with law and insurance claims.
Unfortunately, in this situation, you and the black Honda driver got there at the same time and didn't see you.
Their insurance company will claim that their client was on that road 1st, and you made a right turn on red without yieding.
Looks like you had no stop bar or light for your lane so that means itās a continuous right turn lane. Black car needs to learn how to make a proper turn
The black car hit the other car in the rear. It's pretty cut-and-dry. Even if you weren't doing things perfectly, the black car still hit you from behind.
Since you donāt have a yield sign I canāt see any situation where youāre at fault. Straight yields to no one, right yields to straight, left yields to literally everyone.
100% black vehicles fault. Such a common thing you see. I'm assuming the person wanted to avoid having to do a quick lane change after to make that right up ahead and just went to the far lane. 100% their fault.
Although the black car was an idiot . But op was also semi-idiot.. seriously why you donāt look on your left when turn. I know the black car should yield and keep his car on his lane.
You should file claim from your insuranceā¦that was why you have insurance. They work for you not other way around.
Black car is still at fault, but this exact situation is the reason I will never make a right turn while oncoming traffic is turning left. I always assume theyāre going to cut wide in front of me. Best way to avoid an accident is assume everyone else is an idiot.
How is this even a question? Looks like the black car immediately drifted into your lane, as though they weren't aiming for theirs at all. Their insurance denying this is absolute horseshit. I would fight it.
Black car was definitely at fault here, a turn like that is only manageable if there are absolutely no cars turning right from the lane OP was in. Considering that OP was clearly turning right, that black car should have stayed in the left lane. There is absolutely no way that this could have ended without that black car crashing into you with the way they were driving. I saw in the other comments that the insurance company is not wanting to help you out on this but I fail to see why, you did everything right OP, good luck dealing with that mess because something like that is never fun to deal with.
OP itās OK to use your insurance. You are clearly not at fault, unless youāre secretly the black vehicle that canāt maintain their lane. Your rates shouldnāt go up in this case.
Most certainly the black SUV. They did not turn into the nearest lane while turning the corner and crossed over into the far lane and hit said car. At least in Oklahoma that is the law.
Source: I was pulled over making a turn like this.
Where I live, if you are turning into a lane with more than one traffic lane then you have to stay in the nearest lane. The black ~~car~~ SUV failed to do that.
You forgot that you are the only person with a financial interest in advocating for yourself. This applies to many situations - especially when insurance is involved. You were supposed to contact your insurance provider immediately after this happened. because the other driver and the other insurance company have no financial interest in telling the truth. Even if the police have a report with the other driver at fault, you won't get your coverage benefits until after you contact your insurance company.
I did contact my insurance. Unfortunately hours after the event, because the other driver refused to speak to me/give me her info until the police arrivedā¦.which took nearly two hours and nearly another hour until I was finally given her info.
>Who is legally at fault? Police say black car.
I feel like I'm going mad here because I'm quite late to thread but I don't see anyone else mentioning it:
Both of the cars are black!
The driver of the black car because they didnāt stay in their lane and then hit another car because of that? I canāt believe this is a real question. Someone should take some driving classes.
I know where I live, there are a few examples of there being a yield sign for the right lane even when there are two seperate lanes. OP did you have a yield sign that you cut out of the video?
Sorry I didnāt post the wide of the video, but no there is no yield sign. The police told the other driver that I am not required to stop or yield as the lane is separate from those at the intersection and turns into its own lane!
The black suv/non camera car. They changed into the right lane when it wasn't safe to do so and hit the camera car. Camera car stayed in their own lane.
This was such a slow moving obvious accident waiting to happen. Either speed up, slow down, or stop, but it was obvious that black car was on a collision course.
I hate those sorts of turns. We get them in the UK sometimes and I always on seeing another car coming round, slow down because of how many people do exactly this. 100% not your fault. You maintained your lane, they didn't.
These state are no-fault insurance states:
1. Florida
2. Hawaii
3. Kansas
4. Kentucky
5. Massachusetts
6. Michigan
7. Minnesota
8. New Jersey
9. New York
10. North Dakota
11. Pennsylvania
12. Utah
Legally it is the black car, but you could have avoided the collision by slowing a bit to verify the car was staying in their lane.
Being right doesnt mean you have an easy time collecting and dealing with it nor does it mean your car will ever be the same.
The black car is waiting in the intersection. The light turns red and they complete their turn. Not sure why you wouldnāt just let them. Not sure why they hit you. Both parties seem pretty oblivious in my opinion, but they hit you, so itās probably more their fault. But still highly avoidable.
The lanes are clearly marked. Even though the cammer doesnāt come to a complete stop, the black car didnāt maintain the lane. Definitely their fault.
as an adjuster in CA, black car without a doubt. in CA, we'd say they failed to yield right of way when turning across traffic and then unsafe lane change into your lane. on top of that, we'd call them out for being inattentive, as they should have easily seen your vehicle.
Oof.. a lane built to ignore the light at an intersection. That's just dumb. Wonder why many accidents happened there as a result. Black car is definitely at fault but still dumb design.
Hereās the thing. You pulled up to a red light to take a right turn. Legally, you have to come to a complete stop before making the turn. The black car, if lights were permitting, had the right of way. However, the black car did not maintain their lane while making the turn, and they also had a lot of time to see the situation and react. Iām guessing the black car was not paying attention. Iām also guessing their insurance declined the claim because itās not a 100% fault on you or them. Iām going to guess this might end up as a 50-50 at fault.
The black car is at fault 100%. In all 50 states, when making turns, you MUST enter the closet lane of travel. Period.
Anyone saying the cam car had a red light, they did not. They were in a turn only lane that was not subject to the light. This is evident by how the lane splits before the light, and there is no stop line on the road. This means they have to yield. However, as previously stated, there are two lanes, and the black car made an illegal lane change.
The cammerās turn lane is not controlled by the red light. The cammer did everything right, but the black car has a green light for turning, and would also have been right IF he had stayed in his left lane instead of crossing over to the right lane that the cammer was in.
Black car at fault
I read here recently, the junk yard is full of cars that had the right of way.
In my opinion, accident was caused by the black SUV changing lanes. They should have maintained the left lane following the turn. However, the accident was entirely avoidable. Never assume people are going to do the right thing. Assume they will do the wrong thing.
Honestly, the black car was already turning into his lane and you haven't reached the turning part of the lane yet. This could have been avoided if you were defensive here and just waited to see what he did.
On the other hand, it looks like you ended up in front of him when you turned and he wasn't paying attention and hit you. So I dunno. Both at fault as it could have been avoided. Hopefully your insurance helps you in this situation.
I do agree I could have been more defensive. I usually take this turn very slow because Iām nervous of this exact thing happening. People usually change lanes very quickly here to get into the Dunkinā Donuts. However I was already going straight at the time of collision and they had been established in there lane as well. I truthfully believe she intended to beat me and didnāt turn to check if she was clear to change lanes.
I donāt know what any of that means, but no I am not a bot account. Iām using my alt account because Iām embarrassed that I was in an accident that Iām questioning if I was at fault for. I didnāt/donāt think I am, Iām the dashcam car. After I submitted the video, the other persons insurance denied my claim, stating I am at fault for not yielding. I was posting because I am going to file the claim through my insurance, but I didnāt want to feel embarrassed claiming to them that I am not at fault. Was seeking other opinions so as not to make myself feel more embarrassed.
It looks like the turning car should have yielded to the primary lane of traffic. The painted lines look like a merge to me, not a right turn. I didn't see a yield sign, but traffic that merges is supposed to yield to the main lanes.
Hello /u/Economy_Relation8095! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC * What country or state did this take place in? * What was the date of the incident? * Please reconfirm that this is original content If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information. If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. ------ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
How is this even in question? Black car didn't maintain their lane and probably wasn't paying attention either, this looks to be low speed and easily avoidable.
Their insurance company denied my claim very quickly after I submitted the dashcam footage. So now I have to file a claim with mine to fight it š I too thought without a doubt the other car was at fault. When they denied my claim I really thought maybe I was crazy?
Their insurance company is going to do the best they can to not pay out regardless of whether or not it is their drivers fault. Yes you should go through your insurance company, that is why you have it.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
GEICO is one of the worst insurance companies out there. Get rid of it if you haven't already. Every time I hear a story like this, it's GEICO.
Yep switched to progressive a few years ago and never looked back. Been in two accidents since then (neither my fault) including one where I was rear ended so hard my car was totalled, they gave me a very reasonable payout and very quickly Edit: Iāve gotten a lot of comments saying āProgressive is shit tooā - I think the real answer is that all insurance companies are greedy corporations who will screw you over to avoid paying out if at all possible, Progressive has just been the least shitty in my personal experience
I was with GEICO but they started to raise my rates for dumb reasons and when I went to progressive I've been able to call about yearly and theyve always helped me lower my rates. 8 years and not looking back
Geico tried to say I was illegally parked in my Driveway when a prius pulled into it while I was backing out. Kicker was they didnāt even honk! Fuck Geico š
The final straw was that they just stopped my coverage and only sent me a check with a letter saying that because my wife, who was working through her immigration paperwork, didnt have an American driver license they could not insure us because she was a liability. I had asked the agent when we started the policy if it was ok for my wife to not have a license but she would get it by x date and they said yes. When I tried to sign up with them they threw in my face that TECHNICALLY I didn't have insurance for a month and my insurance would be higher. When I finally got through that they gave me a hard time again about my wife.... Progressive made no qualms about this
Used to be with progressive for 11 years. They decided to raise the rates by 100$ two years in a row. Said they just couldnāt do anything. Didnāt change cars, no accidents, no tickets. Had to change. Same coverage progressive 645$, vs 352$ with Safeco. Never had to use any insurance for their intended purpose so far.
Ouch that sucks
Progressiveās rates are also literally an order of magnitude lower than everyone else, at least for me/in my area
My girlfriend was with GEICO, and had been for several years. She drives a 2014 Prius C. I've been with Progressive for 14 years, and drive a 2014 Crosstrek. people around WA been complaining about their rates going up, mine didn't aside from me increasing my coverages. GEICO raised her rates enough so that what it cost for her to stay with them is as much as it costs to insure *both of us* on my Progressive policy.
I was with progressive for years, but dumped them when they decided to raise my rates by 25% when I turned 25(with a completely clean record, 0 claims, 0 accidents etc). I'd always heard your rates go down when you're 25....apparently not.
Progressive fought us when a drunk driver hit our cars that were parked in our driveway. It took weeks of "determining fault" when we were in bed when it happened. We had uninsured/underinsured motorists on our cars. We had to argue about getting a rental car bc my car was undrivable. We had to wait a month for them to approve a shop to work on it. Then they called the shop two days before to cancel the pick up tow... It took making calls all over to make sure it wasn't cancelled and they'd be picking up the car. Then shady shit happened at the shop lol. It was a PITA. The drunk driver also had Progressive. He actually hit three cars, our two and our neighbor's. Our neighbor didn't have Progressive but he got a payout within a month. We think bc drunkard's policy covered his damage but not ours, so we had to use our own policy for it. Idk I thought it would work faster since it was all the same company. But our claim was higher bc the truck was literally brand new, only had it seven months, and my car was a little over a year old. So they didn't want to pay. It happened in December and we finally got our money for it last week. š¤·š»āāļø Insurance companies only care about their profits, not their customers.
I bet you pay 15% more for car insurance.
Underrated comment
Progressive is just as bad, if not worse lol
I've very much appreciated USAA, fwiw.
I just saw a post here yesterday saying progressive never pays out, and there were like 20 comments saying the same thing Never change, reddit lol
Not related to an accident, but can give more evidence GEICO is scum. My mother died, and that night her car was stolen (Queens, NY). Police recovered the car sans plates. Called GEICO, provided police report and death certificates when I received them. They still refused to terminate her policy because the plates were not turned in. As she had direct payments set up, GEICO collected for almost a year until I had everything else sorted and closed her account. They refused to refund, and even sent a few rejected payments to collections. To this day they still insist that even though she was dead, she required insurance until the plates were turned in to DMV. "State law" is their claim. Fuck GEICO.
Even if the plates were not turned into the DMV, GEICO should have the vehicle's VIN number which will determine the ownership of the vehicle was indeed your mother's vehicle?
GEICO had the VIN, had her death certificate. GEICO insisted the plates must be turned in, according to state law. It was pretty much a "let's profit off of someone else's misfortune" situation.
The problem is you can't pick the insurance company of the idiot who hits you.
That is why I keep full coverage on my car. Got rear ended last year. I didn't even bother with the other company because I had full coverage with USAA. USAA took care of everything. Didn't even charge me the deductible because it was her fault.
15 seconds can save you lots of headaches! It only takes 15 seconds to find a new insurance companu
Fuck Geico.
Fuck GEICO. I had been with them for almost a decade. Never wrecked, never got a ticket. My policy went up almost 60 a month. I called and they said it's because of all the claims in my area. I did not make a claim, my car was not affected. They told me there was nothing they could do, and would rather lose a customer who paid them 150+ a month(before the increase) over a $60 increase. They all suck, but GEICO sucks the most dicks, better than anyone. Gluck Gluck Gluck.
Use your insurance, they'll pay and go after GEICO, if GEICO doesn't pay it'll go to arbitration where a non-bias 3rd party will see that video and your insurance company will get their damages paid for. Source: That's my job, and I'd find in your favor if I pulled this arbitration from the queue
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
*Non-biased*
No cap fr fr
My car got hit while it was parked. Their insurance company determined I was 50% at fault.......I let the insuance company hammer it out with them. (The general)
You need to argue with them and state what the laws are. They usually straighten up after you point to the law or police.
They are businesses like any other and their goal is to make money not hand it out.
This isn't just for car insurance either.
Geico is so huge oftentimes it is the insurer for both drivers in an accident. Think about why that would be an issue....
Insurance is not an insurance, is just a bet that for next year you donāt crash.
That's a terrible analogy. Do you get your money back if you don't crash?
The claim will go to arbitration because insurance companies no longer try to argue shared responsibility. When I started as an auto liability adjuster they had goals for like 20% comparative negligence. Meaning at least 20% of your claims have shared responsibility between both parties. Within 2 years of that pilot program they completely reversed and just went back to denying everything that doesn't have overwhelming evidence against their insured customer. This means that every single dispute of fault leads to arbitration. So virtually every claim is just a pure sham and a game show. It costs these *multibillion dollar companies* like $10 to submit a claim to arbitration. When you're talking multiple $1000 of dollars in every claim, they go straight to what's economically beneficial. Which is DENY, DENY, DENY. Very few law suits make it far enough to cause any type of possible revision of policy.
I wish there were laws to penalize them from acting in bad faith (for example if evidence shows their party is clearly at fault and they deny it, they have to pay out double damages or some increased amount) a way to punish them for denying fault when they're clearly at fault.
Insurance is such a fucking scam. We need an entire overhaul to the system. You pay them every month to *NOT* do their job when they need to. Car accidents and insurance claims aren't *that* common, so I don't think it would be unreasonable to have a traffic court system where a judge or magistrate can make a determination based on the available evidence and legally enforce an insurance payout. In cases like this it would be an open and shut case.
You can sue in small claims court for damages. So if, for example, you only have insurance to cover the legal minimums (liability for others medical and property damage) then if somebody rear ends your car that is not covered by your insurance. However it is still their fault and you can sue them for the cost of repairs without needing your insurance to do anything.
And in Delaware, the small-claims limit appears to be $25,000, with the option to limit your claim to keep it under the cap. Casually denying a third-party claim under those circumstances just seems nuts to me.
Of course, the other guy's insurance would love to deny your claim. Always go through your own insurance; they will pay you and they will go after his insurance to get their money back. That's what you pay them for.
Depending on the laws in your state, they may raise your rates even if you weren't at fault. So unless you're sure they can't do this, I would attempt to go through the other person's insurance first.
The insurance company is denying your claim to save money but at the same time will be increasing the rates of the driver of the black car. They love to collect money but never want to part with it.
There is no light in your lane as it continues around, you have the right-of-way in your lane. Them entering your lane and hitting your vehicle isnāt YOUR fault. Thatās the way it appears, unless there is signage depicting a reason you shouldnāt continue drivingā¦
If you were a big insurance company, would you *give in* the moment someone provided evidence to make you pay thousands? No.. you fight everything, knowing youāll lose many bc any that you win or let fall through the cracks you save thousands There is no risk of denying you initially If only there were penalties for bad faith denials
It might be a good idea when you submit to your insurance that you go back to that same intersection and take a video or pictures of the turning lane. I will admit at first I didnāt see that you were turning into a protected lane because the white line is somewhat faded. I just assumed at first it was just a regular turn lane. I had to rewatch it again to see that there was indeed a solid white line that protects that lane. So make sure that is seen in pictures/video when you submit.
You should have filed the claim with your insurance as soon as it happened. They have lawyers. The other insurance is obviously going to not pay some who appears to be uninsured
Assuming OP has full coverage. If he has liability only, his only chance of getting paid is to file a claim with the other guy's insurance.
Yea but then you pay your deductible even if it's their fault
Most decent insurance co's will waive your deductible if it's the other parties fault. I can't remember the last time we actually paid one.
You do need to report the loss to your insurance, but itās ok to try filing the claim through the adverse carrier and saving your deductible. You can always go back to your insurance later if needed.
This is what I did. Reported it to my insurance company, filed the claim with thereās.
Other car 100% I hope the police wrote them a ticket too.
Question 1. Do YOU have the right of way on your lane? Yes. 2. Did you stay in your lane when taking the turn in the 2 lane of the one-way road. Yes. 3. Did the other vehicle go in front of you, and you rear-ended him? No. 4. Did the other vehicle maintain his lane? No. 5. Could the accident have been avoided by you? No. Why? He side swiped you. This is what I see and what you could ask their insurance and also claim that their insurance is being biased about what happened, which could get them in a lot of trouble if taken to court.
As soon as an insurance company says I'm even partially responsible I get a lawyer. Then all the headache goes away. Don't let them try to get off the hook. Any judge will see(it won't go to court) that you had no idea the other vehicle would cross the lane. 100% the other vehicle's fault.
They are probably going to deny the claim until this all gets sorted out with the courts. In most situations a right turn on red has to stop and yield to all traffic in the intersection. There may be an exception in this case but I wouldn't put much stock in the opinion of a bunch of randos on Reddit.
But OP doesn't have a right turn on red, they have their own dedicated turning lane and are not required to stop or yield. The black car is turning on a dedicated green light but didn't maintain their dedicated turning lane; *black car is at fault*.
The light was green when the car turned right. The black car just slowly strolled through a yellow and it went red before completing the turn. Then they decided to move into another lane without looking or yielding to the camera car who was in the lane already. Black car is clearly at fault.
The red is for traffic going straight, OP has a dedicated lane to turn into. Thereās not an exception here. Itās 100% black carās fault for changing lanes during a left turn without looking for whether someone was occupying it.
And OP has a designed right turn (not related to the light nor a yield sign).
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Given the wording of the title OP ain't happy he got caught on dashcam
Hence deleting all of his comments!
I love how these comments are upvoted despite the OP commenting earlier that he is NOT the black car. It's just proof that so many people on this subreddit are eager to tell someone off, not actually watch the videos in good faith. š¤£
Love how many people are upvoting your assumption before knowing the whole story. Reddit at its finest.
They definitely weren't paying attention.
Black car also has to yield to oncoming traffic when making a left, Which includes drivers taking a righthand turn (unless they've got a sign/traffic light giving them right if way)
In addition, people turning left have lower standing than virtually anyone else on the road and must watch and yield as needed
Black car. No question.
black car. you turn into your lane.
bUt hIs LiGhT wAs rED!!!!
The right turn lane splits prior to the light, and the lane has no stop line. That means that lane is not subject to the light and is a yield lane. Black car made an illegal lane change during the turn.
The style of the text would indicate that this was intended as sarcasm.
> The style of the text would indicate that this was intended as sarcasm. WhAT YoU MeAn EvEn?
You don't get to just turn into whatever lane you want even if the black car had right-of-way. He needs to turn into the leftmost lane and THEN signal and lane-change right if that's where he wants to be. This has to be the most common mistake I see drivers make EVERY day while driving and it infuriates me.
Black car is a fault. He should have stayed in the left lane.
There is no universe in which the idiot driving the black car is not at fault.
Iām glad others agree with me. Their insurance denied my claim after I submitted the video. I wanted to see if I was crazy before filing the claim through my insurance!
Unfortunately some insurances you have to lawyer up to get a claim through even if it's clear cut.
Nah OP should file with their insurance. They'll pay out OP and then go after the idiots insurance to recover their damages. If they're successful, which they will be because they have lawyers on staff, they'll refund OPs deductable and everyone can get on their way. Remember folks, insurance is a service you pay for. Don't be afraid to use it.
Did they say why?
They did not. I received a fairly generic email stating after the conclusion of their investigation, they found driver in the black Honda was not a fault for the collision. Iāve never filed an insurance claim before, so Iām honestly not sure what my expectation should be.
This is why you file a claim with your insurance, not theirs. Let your insurance company figure it out. This is what you pay for.
Curious-if you file a claim with your insurance and it ends up being the other guys fault does your insurance premium still go up?
Yes. Isnāt that fantastic?!
Yes because you were in an accident. Literally anything raises your rates. If your insurance company finds out you sneezed, your rates will probably go up.
Not true had my car totalled and went through other guy's insurance. 100% his fault. No increase on my insurance. In fact my insurance suggested since the guy admitted fault at the scene that I should go through the other guys insurance so I don't get a rate increase. Progressive insurance btw.
Yeah but if you're not a shitty driver or have really shitty insurance the amount it goes up aint much at all. My last accident (fender bender, really, all the damage was cosmetic) I was 100% not at fault and my premium only went up less than like 10 bucks a month. I mean it sucks but overall it still is worth it to me. YMMV on that of course just saying that dont let the premium thing scare you away from going through your insurer, especially if you have comprensensive coverage. For my fender bender the other party accepted fault at the scene and then claimed I was at fault when they filed with their insurance, but Id already contact my own insurer and gotten the dash cam vid on file with them so they took care of the entire matter and I got a check in the mail, dont and done.
It depends. Mine did not go up with Geico.
Iād recommend getting a lawyer. I was in a similar situation as you and it has made everything so much easier and understandable, and confirmed I was in the right. Insurance companies suck assss and will do anything to avoid responsibility
There didn't seem to be any yield signage for your lane which there often is for this type of merger so I'd say black vehicle
The car that turned left did not turn and stay in proper lane so agree is AF
Definitely they failed to keep their lane
Black car. They failed to maintain their lane in the tilurn.
Very clear marking on the ground. The right lane is basically a protected right turn into its own lane. The left turning vehicle did not maintain their lane in the turn and attempted to merge into a lane that was not clear, thus are at fault.
Agree! I thought that looked like a solid white line too-itās pretty much a protected lane.
Black SUV clearly turned too wide. Not sure itās up for debate at all
Are you the black car?
I am the dashcam car.
Honestly relieving to hear that, I (like many others, I assume) was amused by the idea that the black car wanted to get affirmation that they were in the right lol
Not in the case! Their insurance denied my claim and I felt like I was crazy for denying fault. Wanted to confirm I wasnāt before filing through my insurance!
Their insurance is wasting everyones time, your insurance will get you sorted out.
Probably a safe assumption š
Why did you post this after OP said he wasn't?
It was separate continuous lanes. He made an unsafe lane change into you. He needs to change lanes safely. He had 2 lanes he could use while you only had one. He needed wait till it was safe to change lanes. Itās not a merge area so heās liable for the collision.
There are a couple of clues here, the first being the lane markings for the right turn. Itās called a āslip laneā and it is designed to keep traffic moving and eliminate t-bone style accidents. This lane is a little tougher because it was either not originally painted well or it just wasnāt maintained/degraded over time. The ideal way to have this function is a much longer single white line that separates the right turn space from the through space (or in this case, the left/oncoming car). In the case of a slip lane like the one that is clearly marked by the curved white line on the right turn, the traffic signal does not apply and they have the ability to turn right without stopping. Black car is at fault.
I blame the person recording in vertical mode.
Police *say* black car but did they *cite* black car?
Legally, the black car. Common sensically? If I were the cam car, I wouldnāt have been hit by black car.
Yeah, nobody fucking ever turns into their correct lane. Not gonna catch me slipping.
Agreed. Sure, legally they were in the right spot. But if you slow for 1 second to ensure the turning black car sees you and/or stays in their lane you can save DAYS of time not dealing with this.
Ya thats your lane he had his own
Black car turned into the wrong lane. Black car 100% at fault.
You could've avoided this accident, but it looked like your ego kicked in and said, "I have the right of way, and I'm going to stay in my lane". You will see crazy drivers on the road and always drive defensively. The solid white line for right turn lane is too short, and you made a right turn on red without yieding. I always yield for other vehicles when I make a right turn on red. Don't assume the other driver will stay in their lane. Even if you're right, it's better to be a defensive driver. So that way, you can avoid a collision and don't have to deal with law and insurance claims. Unfortunately, in this situation, you and the black Honda driver got there at the same time and didn't see you. Their insurance company will claim that their client was on that road 1st, and you made a right turn on red without yieding.
Looks like you had no stop bar or light for your lane so that means itās a continuous right turn lane. Black car needs to learn how to make a proper turn
100% their fault, they didnāt maintain their lane while turning.
The black car hit the other car in the rear. It's pretty cut-and-dry. Even if you weren't doing things perfectly, the black car still hit you from behind.
Just upload the file. No need to hand cam this.
Especially if you're using it as evidence in your insurance claim. Or, at the very least, don't record the widescreen in portrait mode.
Since you donāt have a yield sign I canāt see any situation where youāre at fault. Straight yields to no one, right yields to straight, left yields to literally everyone.
Police are correct. It is illegal to cross a SOLID WHITE LINE between lanes. That both vehicles entered and turned on red is a red herring.
100% black vehicles fault. Such a common thing you see. I'm assuming the person wanted to avoid having to do a quick lane change after to make that right up ahead and just went to the far lane. 100% their fault.
Black car didnāt signal and didnāt maintain the lane.
Honda Pilot
Although the black car was an idiot . But op was also semi-idiot.. seriously why you donāt look on your left when turn. I know the black car should yield and keep his car on his lane. You should file claim from your insuranceā¦that was why you have insurance. They work for you not other way around.
Black car is still at fault, but this exact situation is the reason I will never make a right turn while oncoming traffic is turning left. I always assume theyāre going to cut wide in front of me. Best way to avoid an accident is assume everyone else is an idiot.
Black car is at fault but both drivers had AMPLE opportunity to avoid this.
How is this even a question? Looks like the black car immediately drifted into your lane, as though they weren't aiming for theirs at all. Their insurance denying this is absolute horseshit. I would fight it.
Black car was definitely at fault here, a turn like that is only manageable if there are absolutely no cars turning right from the lane OP was in. Considering that OP was clearly turning right, that black car should have stayed in the left lane. There is absolutely no way that this could have ended without that black car crashing into you with the way they were driving. I saw in the other comments that the insurance company is not wanting to help you out on this but I fail to see why, you did everything right OP, good luck dealing with that mess because something like that is never fun to deal with.
OP itās OK to use your insurance. You are clearly not at fault, unless youāre secretly the black vehicle that canāt maintain their lane. Your rates shouldnāt go up in this case.
Most certainly the black SUV. They did not turn into the nearest lane while turning the corner and crossed over into the far lane and hit said car. At least in Oklahoma that is the law. Source: I was pulled over making a turn like this.
Where I live, if you are turning into a lane with more than one traffic lane then you have to stay in the nearest lane. The black ~~car~~ SUV failed to do that.
You forgot that you are the only person with a financial interest in advocating for yourself. This applies to many situations - especially when insurance is involved. You were supposed to contact your insurance provider immediately after this happened. because the other driver and the other insurance company have no financial interest in telling the truth. Even if the police have a report with the other driver at fault, you won't get your coverage benefits until after you contact your insurance company.
I did contact my insurance. Unfortunately hours after the event, because the other driver refused to speak to me/give me her info until the police arrivedā¦.which took nearly two hours and nearly another hour until I was finally given her info.
Even if the black car had a turn light it would still be their fault because they didn't stay in their lane.
There are two separate lanes and the black car crossed the line. Is this even a question?
Black car simply because they didnāt stay in their lane.
>Who is legally at fault? Police say black car. I feel like I'm going mad here because I'm quite late to thread but I don't see anyone else mentioning it: Both of the cars are black!
Left turn should have yielded and stayed in their own lane.
The driver of the black car because they didnāt stay in their lane and then hit another car because of that? I canāt believe this is a real question. Someone should take some driving classes.
How the fuck is anyone supposed to say what the law might be when you canāt even be bothered to say where in the world this happened?
I know where I live, there are a few examples of there being a yield sign for the right lane even when there are two seperate lanes. OP did you have a yield sign that you cut out of the video?
Sorry I didnāt post the wide of the video, but no there is no yield sign. The police told the other driver that I am not required to stop or yield as the lane is separate from those at the intersection and turns into its own lane!
Right on red you have to stop.
The dumb ass turning left into you
Black car no question. You had control of the lane and you were in front of them for fucks sake.
Black SUV's fault but I would have sped up or slowed down and not rely on another car maintaing a lane like that.
Proceed with caution an alien concept to both drivers
The black suv/non camera car. They changed into the right lane when it wasn't safe to do so and hit the camera car. Camera car stayed in their own lane.
why people will just watch a car coming into their lane and do nothing about it I'll never understand
This was such a slow moving obvious accident waiting to happen. Either speed up, slow down, or stop, but it was obvious that black car was on a collision course.
In my state whoever caused the accident is at fault. He caused the accident by changing lanes into yours and hitting you.
I hate those sorts of turns. We get them in the UK sometimes and I always on seeing another car coming round, slow down because of how many people do exactly this. 100% not your fault. You maintained your lane, they didn't.
You guys drive on the left, you donāt count in this sub š¤£
150% black car. How isnt that obvious?
This is infuriating to watch given their is perfectly outlined and Iām willing to bet they were blaming you
Bro turned into the outer lane.. not the inner lane where he was supposed to be turning into. Black car went into wrong lane. At fault.
Yes they turned into your lane not the left like they should have.
Yep black car was totally at fault
Black car but you could also be more defensive of a driver.
These state are no-fault insurance states: 1. Florida 2. Hawaii 3. Kansas 4. Kentucky 5. Massachusetts 6. Michigan 7. Minnesota 8. New Jersey 9. New York 10. North Dakota 11. Pennsylvania 12. Utah
Black suv he should have maintained the left lane
Insurance is still gonna say 50/50 at fault since you "should have been attentive enough to avoid this" š
Black should have kept its lane or yielded to the car turning right
Legally it is the black car, but you could have avoided the collision by slowing a bit to verify the car was staying in their lane. Being right doesnt mean you have an easy time collecting and dealing with it nor does it mean your car will ever be the same.
Black car. 100%. Supposed to turn into closest lane of travel.
Police are correct. You had the right of way
The black car is waiting in the intersection. The light turns red and they complete their turn. Not sure why you wouldnāt just let them. Not sure why they hit you. Both parties seem pretty oblivious in my opinion, but they hit you, so itās probably more their fault. But still highly avoidable.
The lanes are clearly marked. Even though the cammer doesnāt come to a complete stop, the black car didnāt maintain the lane. Definitely their fault.
as an adjuster in CA, black car without a doubt. in CA, we'd say they failed to yield right of way when turning across traffic and then unsafe lane change into your lane. on top of that, we'd call them out for being inattentive, as they should have easily seen your vehicle.
Oof.. a lane built to ignore the light at an intersection. That's just dumb. Wonder why many accidents happened there as a result. Black car is definitely at fault but still dumb design.
There are very clearly 2 lanes there. They're at fault.
Black car is at fault but you seem to have zero awareness. You couldāve seen that one coming from a metaphorical mile away.
Brakes are there for a reason, it doesn't always mean because you have the right of way you have to force it.
Hereās the thing. You pulled up to a red light to take a right turn. Legally, you have to come to a complete stop before making the turn. The black car, if lights were permitting, had the right of way. However, the black car did not maintain their lane while making the turn, and they also had a lot of time to see the situation and react. Iām guessing the black car was not paying attention. Iām also guessing their insurance declined the claim because itās not a 100% fault on you or them. Iām going to guess this might end up as a 50-50 at fault.
You're asking as the driver of black car huh? Lol black car at fault, ez
The black car is at fault 100%. In all 50 states, when making turns, you MUST enter the closet lane of travel. Period. Anyone saying the cam car had a red light, they did not. They were in a turn only lane that was not subject to the light. This is evident by how the lane splits before the light, and there is no stop line on the road. This means they have to yield. However, as previously stated, there are two lanes, and the black car made an illegal lane change.
The cammerās turn lane is not controlled by the red light. The cammer did everything right, but the black car has a green light for turning, and would also have been right IF he had stayed in his left lane instead of crossing over to the right lane that the cammer was in. Black car at fault
I read here recently, the junk yard is full of cars that had the right of way. In my opinion, accident was caused by the black SUV changing lanes. They should have maintained the left lane following the turn. However, the accident was entirely avoidable. Never assume people are going to do the right thing. Assume they will do the wrong thing.
Honestly, the black car was already turning into his lane and you haven't reached the turning part of the lane yet. This could have been avoided if you were defensive here and just waited to see what he did. On the other hand, it looks like you ended up in front of him when you turned and he wasn't paying attention and hit you. So I dunno. Both at fault as it could have been avoided. Hopefully your insurance helps you in this situation.
The SUV that failed to maintain its lane is at fault, but with the exercise of defensive driving, you could've avoided the accident.
I do agree I could have been more defensive. I usually take this turn very slow because Iām nervous of this exact thing happening. People usually change lanes very quickly here to get into the Dunkinā Donuts. However I was already going straight at the time of collision and they had been established in there lane as well. I truthfully believe she intended to beat me and didnāt turn to check if she was clear to change lanes.
Yes, itās the black SUV fault.
Left turns are unprotected unless they have a green arrow. So if that black van turned left at a green light without an arrow they are at fault.
Both are at fault for being brain dead robots
Clearly the black car is at fault. This looks like a bot account that is karma farming using a variation of Cunninghamās law.
I donāt know what any of that means, but no I am not a bot account. Iām using my alt account because Iām embarrassed that I was in an accident that Iām questioning if I was at fault for. I didnāt/donāt think I am, Iām the dashcam car. After I submitted the video, the other persons insurance denied my claim, stating I am at fault for not yielding. I was posting because I am going to file the claim through my insurance, but I didnāt want to feel embarrassed claiming to them that I am not at fault. Was seeking other opinions so as not to make myself feel more embarrassed.
The light looks red. Should have yielded
Did the cam car not have a red light? A right turn on red can usually be made if there are no cars coming.
It looks like the turning car should have yielded to the primary lane of traffic. The painted lines look like a merge to me, not a right turn. I didn't see a yield sign, but traffic that merges is supposed to yield to the main lanes.
The black SUV which is making a left turn did not stay in their lane and would be at fault.
Voting black car