997_rich

The M driver may not be aware: there is a difference at the ring if there is a Touristenfahrten day the ring essentially operates as a public road and passing and liability road rules do apply though it's a long and arduous process to determine fault etc. This is a very unusual quirk about the ring that I've never seen anywhere else. This is also why you might see a campervan, motorcycles etc. on these days. However, it sounds like you were at a private track day where the typical track day rules apply: you're responsible for your own car no matter what happens. Maybe the M driver is confused about what type of day it was or maybe he is expecting you to "do the right thing" in his mind. Sometimes even at private track days the world over, the "at fault" car is paying for damage just because they feel responsible (even though they are not legally responsible).

There's a bit about it here if you read the "third parties" section. https://rsrnurburg.com/track-insuran...ents/#accident

Steve113

Sonorous-- Nice info

raspritz

Whoa! I'm wheel-to-wheel racing at the 'Ring next month, and I had thought about renting a car for my wife to drive on a special Nordschliefe track day attached to the race (she is a licensed race-driver). But looking at those driver-liability caps, no freakin' way!

Zhao

I'm in agreement passing car is responsible for a safe pass, that dive bomb pass gave you no hope, no signal = wtf is he passing for?, send him your bill, etc.

But for being a better driver my opinion is every incident has fault to both parties because one party could have almost always done something better that would have prevented the incident.

Situational awareness would have helped, but it also seems like you really slowed down in that section. I don't know how hard you were pushing before but if you were going near the edge and then all of a sudden slow to a crawl, I can see how another driver may think you were letting him by without a signal. If you were holding him up for a large section I could see how he could get frustrated and decided to pull off a risky pass.

Also, if someone catches you in a DE, it's often best to let them by asap (not sure why DE's have moved more and more towards passing in corners is cool, i preferred old rules of straights only myself). You could argue it's not a timed event and their lap time doesn't matter, but I'd argue it's not a timed event and your lap time doesn't matter.

If I was you I'd be evaluating those things and wondering what I did that made that guy think he could pass me there. It's possible he's just an A-hole, but there probably is something you did that escalated the risk.

facelvega

Thanks, again, everyone for your input. The end of the story (in case anyone cares):

We have all seen the d-bags that blame other drivers, the car, the tires, the weather, the track, anyone or anything but themselves when things go wrong. I did NOT want to be that guy.

My interest is in becoming a better, SAFER driver. @JDISTEFA , really liked the Randy Pobst article "Vortex of Danger". Seems obvious in hindsight, but the triangle from turn in to apex, and the triangle from apex to track out are where you are moving across the whole track, and where you are at the absolute limit of tire adhesion (turning, braking and accelerating) is where bad things are most likely to happen. This really brings some focus - not just "do better everywhere, all the time".

While I think that the other driver was primarily at fault for lighting the fuse, I also absolutely know that I could have avoided the accident if I had been more situationally aware. My decision was to add up the total cost of repair for both cars, and offer to split it 50/50. He accepted, and we are done.

I agree with @JSCOTT82 , that each participant should plan to bear full cost for their own car. In this case, I made the split cost offer for two reasons: I DO feel I have partial responsibility, and I learn the most from painful lessons. I am way more likely to remember to watch the Vortex of Danger if I paid a painful penalty for previous failure.

YMMV. I am not proposing that this was the best solution, but it worked for me. Thanks for your input, everyone!

Mike Murphy

I think that’s a fine decision and outcome. You know what works best for you, and at the end of the day, you came to a solution, a resolution, and a benefit of having to learn from the experience, and the other party has also accepted the solution. I’d say this is an ideal outcome and win-win across the board. Perfect may not ever exist, but life is messy and perfection is overrated.

ParadiseGT3

Sometimes there's a gap between what the circumstances dictate you should do, or what is legally required, and what feels right in your gut. Nothing wrong with acting on the latter and moving forward with a clear conscience, that's admirable.

Hope the BMW driver is appreciative, he wasn't due this outcome. Lucked out by causing a collision with a decent guy.

quickboxster

A very recent real world example for the U.S.

Not the same as the OP situation but a useful datapoint as to a court's viewpoint for those of us here in the States.

https://www.roadracingworld.com/news...h-laguna-seca/

stownsen914

Very important differences between that case and the situation being described in this thread - track / event organizer liability for injury, vs. a participant gripe over car damage.

Kein_Ersatz

PCA coverage for Liability is stated as $10M per event, per PCA RPM section 6.