I had a smack a few weeks ago where someone hit me from behind on a dual carriageway and lost control of his car and bounced it off the armco. I won't bore you all with the details leading up to it. But naturally he's denying liability.

His n/s front wheel was in full view after and the tyre was down to the wear bars. Now i know the legal limit is 1.6mm but he hit me THEN lost control and i think that had the tyre been in better nick it would have been totally different.

I've been looking up on road safety sites and i've had tyres in the past at 1.6 and lower when replaced and can feel the car moving around more even in the dry and wet weather grip is optimistic to say the least.My understanding is that road tyres arent designed to perform without tread. Racing slicks operate at much higher temps than road tyres can achieve under normal use.

So basically on the brief info above would you say that duff tyres would be a contributing factor? Road was bone dry btw.

apologies for the essay...............

 

pressuming your accident happened in the dry, i dont think the tread thickness would make any diferance, the tread is only there to displace water

 

if his hit you from behind he shouldnt have a leg to stand on, if it was dry, the lower the tread the more grip he would of had,

 

If the tyres are techincally legal, then he has not commited a crime. As such, it becomes irrelevant, I am afraid.

JJ

 

yeah in the eyes of insurance it should be that clear cut. The circumstances leading up to it are complicated. Dont want to put it all down as we all know the filth can scan forums. Basically he cut us up further down the the road and kept brake checking us because i flashed my lights at him then when i had room to move to the left lane away from him he swerved in front to stop us and i had to have half my car on the hard shoulder to avoid him. If i'd braked i'd have hit him or he'd have side swiped us and put us off the road. i've ended up in front and he's hit me then lost control.

Just think theres got to be a reason why he hit me and lost it and didnt just anchor up and pull up at the side.

 

as long as there are no witnesses, you was just driving down the road and he hit you, job done, its your word against theres with the swerving etc

 

3 witnesses 2 mine 1 his 1st of mine saw it all ie him swerving infront of me. 2nd said he just saw him lose control and his behind my 2nd witness says i undertook him. How he saw anything i dont know when he was 3 cars behind. I backed off, indicated and moved over and i only got round him when he forced me onto the hard shoulder. He was driving like a dick from way back down the road before we got near him. He chose to try and put a family of four in danger.

Could have been us in the armco

 

legally you dont have a leg to stand on with the tyres, but certainly in the wet, below 3mm is baaad!

I dont know why manufacturers insist on blocking the drainage channels with crappy wear bars, just makes them even more crap!

 

Wrong post due to the utterly stupid auto scroll