If both drivers were insured by the same company (which is not unusual) this could also put a different spin on things. Each policy would respond on the basis of the mix of factors involved.

Who caused the accident?

Many collisions are caused during the act of turning. Police figures for 2001 show that "turning without due care" caused five out of every 100 road accidents. When the numbers for "misjudging clearance/distance" and "apparent errors of judgement" are added (in my view these two groups include the first) these accidents account for more than one-third of all motor accidents in Jamaica.

My 1980 edition of the Jamaican Learner Driver's Guide says this about making a right hand turn (at a junction controlled by traffic lights): "...you must never cut across the stream of traffic approaching from the opposite direction ­ the oncoming traffic has the right of way. The correct procedure is to wait until there is adequate space to pass safely across ..." (page 17). It further states (in a case where there are no traffic lights on a 'broad city road'): "...it may be necessary to cross in two moves. The first is to the centre of the road and stopping, and completing the crossing in the second move, each move being dictated by the permission of the main road stream of traffic." The 2000 edition of the Jamaican Road User's Guide also supports these points.

These principles do not mean that Mr. H was solely to blame. The road conditions and the speed of the other vehicle could some of the factors that influence the fault of Mr. W. Presumably, the police investigated the mishap and filed a report. Get a copy of it. Statements from passengers or persons who saw what took place will be very important in allotting fault. Who caused the accident or what was the fault of each driver is best answered in the context of the rules about turning and finding out what actually took place.

Is there protection under the two policies?

The fact there has been an accident and that someone died does not mean that insurers will pay a cent. Claimants or their legal agents have to do certain things before this happens. They have to report the accident to insurers. They have to pay the premiums if this was not done already. They have to show that each driver had a suitable driver's licence. Also, that each driver was operating his vehicle in the manner his policy assumed. These musts are stated in the contracts but few people either read or understand them. It is only after the conditions have been met that the policy protection will be triggered.

The response of the policies

Mr. W's insurers would respond in one of several ways, if Mr. H's family made a claim against them. They could argue that the accident was caused by Mr. H. Flowing from this they would refuse to pay anything. They would pay lawyers to defend Mr. W if the matter went to court. A second option would be to say that Mr. W was not fully to blame. Therefore, they should only pay a part of the claim from Mr. H's family. The third option would be for them to accept that their client was the cause of the accident and to agree to settle the claim from Mr. H in full. Of course if Mr. W was uninsured or, if he was in breach of his policy, there would be nothing to collect.

The response of Mr. H's insurers would mirror those of Mr. W's in relation to any claim made by the latter against the former. The family of Mr. H would not have a claim for his death against his own insurers. Motor policies generally do not generally provide any coverage for the loss of life of drivers.

Finally, I would strongly recommend that you get the advice of a lawyer if you are a relative of Mr. H.