Why Traffic Police's investigation gather no conclusion?

LTA had confirmed that Roundabout Rules Diag 3.18 for turning  is applicable to Pandan Circle and refereed me to seek enforcement action from Traffic Police.

Yet TP took 2 months to investigate and replied their investigation gathered no conclusion.

After many emails appealing TP to investigate , TP replied that they need me to produce new evidence such as  "INDEPENDENT EYE WITNESS" in order to continue investigation.

My video already shown his car in the wrong lane, the argument with NTUC Income is whether his car should be on the inner or outer lane when he intend to turn-right at the roundabout. NTUC and FIDREC insisted outer lane is ok, I insisted it must be inner lane as according to the rule in the diagram. I just need TP to confirm and take action.

Where to find this independent eye witness? What is the purpose of having this eye witness in this dispute?
On the other hand, can motorists caught speeding by speed-camera insisted TP to produce independent eye witness first or else they not going to pay the fine?

Therefore is it going to FIDREC  a trap?

It appear to be a harmless & economical route to seek FIDREC help as consumer can just reject their decision if unsatisfied. However consumers are unaware that most government agencies will just accept FIDREC adjudicator's decision regardless if it is right or wrong, they seem to gang up!

Is NTUC Income/ FIDREC method of investigating traffic accident correct?
They use their opinion rather than rules to determine the case.
I produced video evidence and highway code rules to support my case while they just produced "their opinion".
Thankfully LTA had enhanced Pandan Circle lane's marking according to roundabout rules which proved "their opinion" was wrong!

General Insurance Association of Singapore created this Barometer Of Liability Agreement which NTUC Income used it on me.

I told GIA this 13b is in contradiction with the Highway Code Roundabout rules.
They replied that this agreement is only use among insurance companies and policy holder are not bound by it and any dispute can go to FIDREC.

Is our  motor insurance industry controlled by "gangster"?
What can you do when you are being bullied by insurance company/ FIDREC?

NTUC Income pushed responsibility to Fidrec's decision

We wrote to their new CEO, Mr Ken Ng.

Letter was intercepted by "customer engagement"  and  Fidrec's decision was again used as reason to close the case.

Why Fidrec and NTUC Income chose not to observe the Roundabout rules of the Highway code?

Highway code is part of Road Traffic Act !

SCENARIO WHERE NTUC INCOME CAN BE RIGHT

NTUC Income only have this reason to support their case:-
 “Vehicles exiting a roundabout should keep to the left-lane; failure to watch out vehicle on the left"
 This is applicable  only to certain situation but not to mine.

Let’s look at a scenario where NTUC Income can apply it.

See diagram 3.18 with 4 exit A,B,C,D and assume this is a NON-traffic light control roundabout.      

At location-C, if the Purple car (on the left-lane) entered the roundabout and wanted to go straight to exit-A but collided with Red car which is exiting to exit-D.
Both cars followed the roundabout diag 3.18 turning rule. Then who is at fault?
NTUC Income "Red car should keep left when exiting the roundabout" is applicable here because Blue car MUST exit at C, therefore there won’t be any car on the left-lane (between exit-C and exit-D). Therefore Purple car is free to enter the roundabout and proceed to exit-A. Red car should have noticed Purple car entering the roundabout on his left and watch out for it when exiting to D.

Therefore Red car should have filtered to the left-lane after location C (as Blue car MUST exit at C) to "block" Purple car from entering the roundabout and can exit safely into D via the left-lane.
However if Red car want to exit at A instead, Purple car MUST exit at A too (since it was on the left lane coming out from C), then Red car can exit-A together (side-by-side) with Purple car. Same time Yellow car cannot enter the roundabout because he must  give way to Purple car.

Therefore in a non-traffic light control roundabout, if the left-lane is clear,vehicles on the right-lane going to exit on next exit should filter-left to exit  as any vehicles entering the roundabout need to give way to your vehicles already on the left-lane in the roundabout. All drivers should signal their intention.
If the left lane is NOT clear, the right lane vehicle can exit from the right lane as the vehicle on his left MUST  exit too. 
The rule clearly stated vehicles MUST "decide" before entering roundabout where to exit and follow the 3.18 traffic flow diagram.

Pandan Circle is a clear-cut case. It is a traffic light control roundabout.
Blue car if entered the roundabout at A, via the left-lane, MUST exit at B or C. If not he should have entered via the right-lane. THIS IS THE MAIN CAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT!

Traffic light regulate the flow of traffic within the roundabout and therefore such accident should not happen unless vehicles did not follow the rules by continue driving in the left-lane within the roundabout without exiting.
This seem rather technical but I hope everyone can understand these rules and its purpose.

Look at the roundabout rules again, there are the few “MUST” which motorists must follow!

Investigators assigned to this case must know all these rules and  principles and cannot blindly say “keep left to exit a roundabout”! 

Our situation are different, we enter the roundabout  from the same entrance A and collided at C. The sketch the other driver produced in his accident report is misleading because it did not indicate where he came from.

This 100% fault on us is really unfair.

NTUC Income having new CEO

This is NTUC Income's promise found in their website http://www.income.com.sg/servicequality/index.asp

The NTUC Income board of directors has appointed Ken Ng as chief executive of NTUC Income, effective 1 October 2013.  Ken Ng will take over from Tan Suee Chieh.

I hope Ken Ng will work toward fulfilling NTUC Income's promise to customers.

I just need NTUC Income to produce legal proof to their statements made regarding  roundabout rules:-
1. We feel that you should have filtered to the left lane before making the exit into Jurong Town Hall
2. She should thus keep to the left and not right of the roundabout.

So far nobody able to show me the proof. They are telling me general rules for normal road.
But roundabout have their own general rules.

However Fidrec did tell me their proof as follow:-
Vehicle on the left-lane of the 2-lane roundabout can exit on the 2nd exit legally, then vehicle from this 2nd exit can proceed to the 3rd exit on the left-lane legally, then vehicle from the 3rd exit can proceed to the 4th exit on the left-lane legally. When combined all of them together, therefore vehicle can proceed all the way in a roundabout on the left-lane!

This is the first time I heard rules can be combined to form new rule.

LTA did not want to be involved in this matter and refer me to TP.

TP did not want to commit and say "Our investigation has not produced any substantive result.  However, this does not preclude further prosecution should new evidence emerge later"

But TP did gave me this diagram:-

I can understand NTUC is a very large organisation here in Singapore and
Singapore is a democratic society .

I hope Singaporean can still remember what we pledge.

Lane enchantment: Before & After Videos

Videos showing the general traffic condition at accident site.
The combined videos is also available at:-
 http://youtu.be/jUeTMkZgT5k

(Traffics are exiting roundabout into Jurong Town Hall Road.)

Before lane/arrow enchantment.

After lane/arrow enchantment



.












http://youtu.be/bBxrC02TKs4

Indeed, roundabout rules apply in Pandan Circle !

I want to thank TR Emeritus and The Real Singapore for publishing my story.
http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/08/12/ntuc-income-doesnt-understand-highway-code/
http://therealsingapore.com/content/ntuc-income-doesnt-know-basic-road-rules

Thank you to all readers, your feedback and in particular those who were able to understand my point.

I did approach the relevant authorities when NTUC Income found me 100% liable.

I wrote to LTA and was referred to TP.

Then I went  TP to make a report and submitted the video, knowing that I won't be 100% correct or 100% at fault.

Their investigation took two months to complete and I received their reply in two sentences :-
"Our investigation has not produced any substantive result.  However, this does not preclude further prosecution should new evidence emerge later"

I still did not get a firm answer and wondered how NTUC Income made their assessment since TP could not find substantive result.

I wrote to LTA again and subsequently got an answer that it was advisable for vehicles turning right to keep to the right lane and that some motorists may be unfamiliar with the surrounding. And  they were also working on enhancing the lane and arrow markings to improve the lane indications at this location.

When I informed NTUC Income about this, they said this case was already closed.

Recently these enhanced lanes and arrows marking have been completed. I test drove into the roundabout from all the four entrances and confirmed the the left-lane vehicles have only two exit options( 1st-exit; left OR 2nd -exit; straight) from any point of entry.

It is exactly the same concept as the illustrated diagram in the highway code manual !

(Message to NTUC Income:- Please sent to your staff there to understand the true concept of a roundabout rules)

AFTER MATCH OF NTUC INCOME ASSESSMENT

Since NTUC Income already closed this case, I requested for their detail report as I want to know what true supporting evidences they have.

But they cannot accede to my request. 29 July 2013 they wrote this:-

7th  and 17 May 2013 they wrote this:-

We have watched the video and I still don't understand how NTUC Income made such assessment.

It seems like NTUC Income is pushing the buck to Fidrec and don't want to take responsibility.

ISN'T IT NORMAL FOR INSURER TO GIVE OUT A FULL REPORT (UPON REQUEST) WHEN A CLAIM WAS MADE AGAINST YOUR POLICY??

Recently LTA have added new road marking on Pandan Circle to reinforce roundabout rules :-
Dotted lane marking to guide left-lane vehicles out of the roundabout. (see photo)

Even with this new dotted line , I still see some left-lane vehicles do not follow but proceed further to the next exit.

If insurance company do not want to endorse the roundabout rules, whatever LTA does to improve roundabout's safety will go to waste!!
Insurance company said the other party is not at fault and will compensate them fully for the accident.