adamc260

Registered Member
  • Content Count

    199
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

adamc260 last won the day on March 1 2011

adamc260 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About adamc260

  • Rank
    Advanced Club Member

Profile Information

  • Gender*
    Male
  • Toyota Model
    Auris 1.33 TR (2009)
  1. adamc260

    New Yaris?

    I had a monte carlo 1.2 tsi fabia.. After 6 months of hell, solicitors, fos and threats of legal action they finally gave in and took the shambolic car back. VW quality isn't what you think mate, wait until the problems start, there's loads of recorded issues on fabia's =/
  2. Year - Amount 2012 - 1900 2011 - 1900 2010 - 1900 2009 - 1900 2008 - 2000 2007 - 1900 2006 - 1900 2005 - 1900 2004 - 1200 2003 - 383 According to howmanyleft.co.uk
  3. Some insurers won't charge extra for winter tyres (due to the added safety... however it may give some drivers the impression they can take more risks than those without) but some do unfortunately!
  4. Toyota could revive the Celica name and make a cracking car.. they have the tecnology/know how. But in all honesty.. the GT86 is just so shockingly similar to the car Subaru released.. I get they worked together but there's 2 almost identical vehicles out here now.
  5. CVT doesn't sound that great if you have to put your foot down though =/ spose you can't have everything though eh! Less than 1500 rpm at 70? Surprised the car doesn't struggle.
  6. The terminology used in the legal description is not "established on the roundabout" but to traffic "circulating on the roundabout", so if the OP had collided with a vehicle entering the roundabout from 12 o'clock say I would agree with you, but in this case the van driver entered the roundabout while a vehicle was approaching from the right, his only defence would be if the OP was approaching the mini roundabout at excessive speed. The only independent witness to the incident supports the OP's version of events, the lack of damage to the van indicates a low speed impact. I would in the circumstances be in no way certain of what the insurance companies decision would be. I very much agree with what Richard Overfield has said. Given that I was an arb and pre lit handler for 3 years between insurers/solicitors and worked in insurance fraud for a year and a half... i've come across a fair few roundabout claims. 'Excessive' speed cannot be even considered without proof which far exceeds a witness stating 'they were going fast' as everyone has a different interpritation of what is considered 'fast'. I've never heard anyone describe it as 'circulating on the roundabout' but each to their own. Whilst the TP may of pulled out, the fact that the damage is so far at the rear of the vehicle it is reasonable to consider that they were not merely 'just out of the exit'. You usually have about a car length before you reach the roundabout and it would be approx another car length when the impact occured. I sympathise with the OP ofc I do and whilst this is unfortunate for liability it will not be 100% non fault (unless the TP makes an admission of course). It's probably a hangover from my being a highway design engineer for 31 years (including being a Road Safety Auditor). Each to their own but the purpose of it being noted as 'established' is because that helps to ... funnily enough help 'establish' liability. Anyway, thread hijack over. Let us know how you get on OP.
  7. The terminology used in the legal description is not "established on the roundabout" but to traffic "circulating on the roundabout", so if the OP had collided with a vehicle entering the roundabout from 12 o'clock say I would agree with you, but in this case the van driver entered the roundabout while a vehicle was approaching from the right, his only defence would be if the OP was approaching the mini roundabout at excessive speed. The only independent witness to the incident supports the OP's version of events, the lack of damage to the van indicates a low speed impact. I would in the circumstances be in no way certain of what the insurance companies decision would be. I very much agree with what Richard Overfield has said. Given that I was an arb and pre lit handler for 3 years between insurers/solicitors and worked in insurance fraud for a year and a half... i've come across a fair few roundabout claims. 'Excessive' speed cannot be even considered without proof which far exceeds a witness stating 'they were going fast' as everyone has a different interpritation of what is considered 'fast'. I've never heard anyone describe it as 'circulating on the roundabout' but each to their own. Whilst the TP may of pulled out, the fact that the damage is so far at the rear of the vehicle it is reasonable to consider that they were not merely 'just out of the exit'. You usually have about a car length before you reach the roundabout and it would be approx another car length when the impact occured. I sympathise with the OP ofc I do and whilst this is unfortunate for liability it will not be 100% non fault (unless the TP makes an admission of course).
  8. At mini roundabouts the rule is that the marking across each entry requires that you give way to the right, in law the OP doesn't have to give way except to vehicles from the right. In the circumstances described it was the van that failed to give way. The OP needs to give way to vehicles on the right and vehicles already established on the roundabout. The OP collided with the rear corner of the TP vehicle, had it been the front there would be a better arguement that they had JUST pulled out and failed to give way. As said, 50/50 is going to be your best bet.
  9. Was it bad at 60? I can't imagine it being much different at 70.. at least it hasn't been in any other car i've been in. I think the only thing that seems to be a downside on SR, T sport etc models is the high gearing and the fact the revs are 'screaming' as people say. My old fabia 1.2 TSI for example ticked over at 2500 rpm at 70, my 1.4 fiesta does about 2950rpm at 70.
  10. Mini roundabouts are a pain, whilst drivers need to give way to the right it's often a 'split second' decision due to the size of them. Speed counts for nothing in claims without proof (which neither part have). Your best bet would be hoping the other person who saw it acts as a witness in your favour that he just pulled out but because you hit him on the rear wheel arch it suggests he was already established on the roundabout so i'd assume best terms are 50/50.
  11. Mini roundabouts are a pain, whilst drivers need to give way to the right it's often a 'split second' decision due to the size of them. Speed counts for nothing in claims without proof (which neither part have). Your best bet would be hoping the other person who saw it acts as a witness in your favour that he just pulled out but because you hit him on the rear wheel arch it suggests he was already established on the roundabout so i'd assume best terms are 50/50.
  12. Is the MPG much worse on the T sport compared to the 140?
  13. Had it happen to my car, in 7 months its been reversed into, someone flung open their door and smashed into mine and my mirror knocked off (Auto folding and heated... expensive!) and my car is only 1 year old (Fiesta Titanium). All 3 times people drove off.
  14. VAG group are more interested in sales figures and becoming the 'biggest car company'.. they no longer watch the crap they churn off their production lines! I miss my little toyota, I'll be coming back soon with a 1.8 SR Yaris hopefully! Looked at the t sport corolla but don't really need that much 'power'... tax was a bit mental and MPG is even worse! I love the beefy look of the 1.8 SR over the 1.3 SR.
  15. I had a brand new fabia monte carlo... 6 months of pure hell, solicitors involved, fos and FINALLY skoda accepted it back! Seems to be a common theme eh