COLLISION CASE.

Putaruru Press, Volume VI, Issue 231, 5 April 1928, Page 5

COLLISION CASE.

JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF. Before Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M., on Friday, E. F. Ironmonger sued G. L. Martin for damage done to a car as the result of a collision in Princes street, Putaruru, the amount claimed being £24 10s. Defendant counterclaimed for the sum of £ls 9s 6d. Lindsay David Ironmonger stated that he was in the car on the morning in question. The car changed to low gear near the town hall about 100 yards from the corner of Princes street and Arapuni road, where the accident occurred. The car was proceeding in second gear about eight to ten miles an hour when the collision occurred. The brakes were applied as soon as the lorry was seen. The car was on its right side and hit the back of the lorry, which had no cab, and the driver df which was wearing smoked glasses. The morning was very foggy and the defendant was inclined to go on when he saw no one was hurt, stating he was in a hurry and had to go to Arapuni. The car was a 5-seater and the lorry was a big heavy one. Cross-examined, witness stated he had been on this road frequently. On the morning in question the fog was thick from the hall to the railway station. The car had two-wheeled brakes. The corner was an easy one if a driver kept to his right side of the road. C. R. Neilson stated he was the driver of the car, and had eight years’ experience. He admitted being fined for not having renewed his driver’s license. Particulars given by the previous witness in regard to the nature of the morning and distances and speeds were corroborated. When he first saw the lorry it was close in to the shops. The camber at this point induced lorries to cut the corner. He considered he did everything possible to avoid the accident and would have hit the post on the corner had he pulled closer to the left. The fog was frosting on the wind-screen, but he was watching out of the side. In his opinion defendant was doing ten to 15 miles per hour.

Reginald A. Phillips, farmer, stated that defendant was on his incorrect side. The car he was in mounted the footpath in the driver’s endeavour to escape a collision. The car hit the lorry about midway so far as he could judge. Constable Murphy stated he saw the marks made by the cars and the lerry. The latter was on its wrong side at the corner. The car was on its correct side, and practically as far over as it could get. For defendant, Mr. Reid stated that broadly speaking defendant’s case was that plaintiff had the last chance of avoiding the accident. The Magistrate pointed out that it had to be proved plaintiff was negligent to so base the defence. G. L. stated he changed gear by Smith’s shop; he then followed the usual practice of taking the corner by following the camber. His lorry was governed, and a lorry would not pick up quickly after changing gear. His speed was about eight miles per hour. The cross-members of the lorry were broken by the car. His lorry was only quarter-lock. After the accident he tested the brakes on the car, and only one was working. He couldn’t find any horn. Cross-examined, defendant stated he used dimmed glasses at night. He saw no risk in doing so. He admitted he was on the wrong side of the road. He thought the car was about 60 yards away when he first saw it. In testing the brakes he jacked the car up. Ironmongers were not present when the test was made. J. Mitchell Spear, motor engineer, stated he took measurements with Constable Murphy after the accident. The plan produced was his. If the car had aimed at pulling up and not going round the corner it could have gone another foot into the kerb. The decking of the lorry, was broken by the impact. G. G. Ringer stated in his opinion that owing to the camber of the road it was almost impossible for a heavily loaded vehicle to get round on its proper side. The Magistrate: This man was well on his wrong side. The Bench held there was no doubt about the case at all, plaintiff being awarded the amount claimed plus £7 7s costs and £2 2s on the counterclaim, which failed. The Magistrate added that defendant was lucky not to be charged with negligent driving.