Another "Who's at fault" game...

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Another "Who's at fault" game...

Jeeves

240 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 57

Topic # 240029 16-Aug-2018 09:31

A work colleague's partner got into a prang the other day.

Let's set the scene: https://goo.gl/maps/bRSR8yaSbzt

Their car was about where the silver car is. There were no cars parked in the car park lane at the time. Someone was turning right into the street on the right, much the same as the dark grey car is in the google link.

If you swivel to the left, you'll see that down the road is an intersection where there are two lanes, but have long since merged into one.

So my colleagues partner swerved to the left to under-take the turning vehicle. Unfortunately a small truck still hadn't merged from the previous two lane intersection and was more or less beside them, and so they collided.

The truck driver is claiming that it was an unsafe lane change, my colleague's partner is claiming they shouldn't have been there as it was a single lane road.

What say you, geekzone?

1 | 2

1359 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 344

Reply # 2074327 16-Aug-2018 09:38

2 people support this post

So there was already a truck in the spot where your friends partner tried to swing into to undertake the car turning right ? If so I personally would say your friend didn't look to see if it was clear and is at fault, and should have just waited for the right turning car to move off.

wellygary

3308 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 888

Reply # 2074333 16-Aug-2018 09:48

There were no cars parked in the car park lane

This is not a thing unless there is a clearway, In this case the parks are regular p60,

So there is no traffic lane to the left of the silver car....

But you say there was no one in the parks, where was the truck?

tripp

3001 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 754

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2074334 16-Aug-2018 09:48

Mark:

So there was already a truck in the spot where your friends partner tried to swing into to undertake the car turning right ? If so I personally would say your friend didn't look to see if it was clear and is at fault, and should have just waited for the right turning car to move off.

Yes but if it's a single lane road then the truck was under passing the car on the left hand side which I would think would mean he is at fault. You can only pass cars on the left if the other car is turning right (on this kind of road anyway).

muppet

1992 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 751

Trusted

Reply # 2074337 16-Aug-2018 09:50

5 people support this post

Replace the truck with a pushbike and who'd be a fault?

Hint: Not the pushbike.

trig42

Banana?
4425 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1052

Subscriber

Reply # 2074339 16-Aug-2018 09:56

2 people support this post

Yep, not checking their surroundings.

The truck probably shouldn't have been there, and if the car parks were full, probably wouldn't have been, but the driver moving to the left should have made sure the way was clear.

tripp

3001 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 754

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2074341 16-Aug-2018 09:57

One person supports this post

trig42:

Yep, not checking their surroundings.

The truck probably shouldn't have been there, and if the car parks were full, probably wouldn't have been, but the driver moving to the left should have made sure the way was clear.

This also, Ring the insurance company you are with and let them deal with it.

Coil

5960 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1793

Trusted

Reply # 2074350 16-Aug-2018 10:07

2 people support this post

I watched this crash happen, I was on site. Was a bit of an interesting one.
Your mate is at fault, effectively it is a single lane and your mate should have merged earlier "like a zip" instead he took the path as if he was turning right to wait behind the one already waiting, then darted in front of a HEAVY vehicle to be cut off and have a collision. As far as I am concerned as a local this is how we drive on this exact road, sure the law may beg to differ but driver behavior like my description above helps us get around easier.

MikeAqua

4952 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2010

Reply # 2074351 16-Aug-2018 10:12

2 people support this post

I don't think the position of the truck was unreasonable given they were also positioned to pass the right turning car and assumed your colleague's partner's car was turning right from it's road position - i.e. not on the left hand side of the left hand lane where a non-turning vehicle should be.

IMO best case scenario for your colleague's partner is shared responsibility - on the basis the truck should have noticed the lack of right indicator and not tried to pass on the left.

WCS : Your colleague's partner made a late, rapid and un-signalled lane change and is entirely at fault.

I'm guessing the truck end up with much less damage?

Mike

Jeeves

240 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 57

Reply # 2074369 16-Aug-2018 10:33

Coil:

I watched this crash happen, I was on site. Was a bit of an interesting one.
Your mate is at fault, effectively it is a single lane and your mate should have merged earlier "like a zip" instead he took the path as if he was turning right to wait behind the one already waiting, then darted in front of a HEAVY vehicle to be cut off and have a collision. As far as I am concerned as a local this is how we drive on this exact road, sure the law may beg to differ but driver behavior like my description above helps us get around easier.

Interesting to hear another perspective. I wasn't here or there as to who was to blame, thought I would just relay the water-cooler conversation we had this morning to see what the greater public thought.

But having heard your account, I wouldn't be pointing my finger at the truck driver.

RunningMan

5043 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1618

Reply # 2074379 16-Aug-2018 10:44

5 people support this post

Don't forget that more than one party can be at fault in a crash.

Coil

5960 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1793

Trusted

Reply # 2074381 16-Aug-2018 10:45

One person supports this post

Jeeves:

Coil:

I watched this crash happen, I was on site. Was a bit of an interesting one.
Your mate is at fault, effectively it is a single lane and your mate should have merged earlier "like a zip" instead he took the path as if he was turning right to wait behind the one already waiting, then darted in front of a HEAVY vehicle to be cut off and have a collision. As far as I am concerned as a local this is how we drive on this exact road, sure the law may beg to differ but driver behavior like my description above helps us get around easier.

Interesting to hear another perspective. I wasn't here or there as to who was to blame, thought I would just relay the water-cooler conversation we had this morning to see what the greater public thought.

But having heard your account, I wouldn't be pointing my finger at the truck driver.

Yeah it is not their fault, We all want to get through that intersection and when people use driving behavior that suggests something against what they will instantaneously do it ends pretty bad. 90% driver and 10% road layout.

tehgerbil

395 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 185

Reply # 2074421 16-Aug-2018 11:25

One person supports this post

Both at fault, one for not checking their blind spot and the truck driver for driving in the car park bays and having done so for clearly quite a few meters!

It can't be an 'unsafe lane change' if there is only 1 lane as clearly evident...

bmt

432 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 129

Reply # 2074724 17-Aug-2018 09:34

I don't know the law but I want to say that the truck driver is in the wrong. If your friend wasn't indicating or slowing to turn then what justification does the truck driver have to undertake, other than his perception of the situation?

I go through a similar situation on my way to work. There are cars parked on the left, but a gap where cars turn right which allows other cars to swing around and undertake. Generally there is a lot of traffic turning right and it can back up as the gap is not huge. One time there was a car turning right and another car waiting behind it. As I went to undertake the front car turned into the street and the car behind was going straight, and so we almost had a collision. I feel I was in the wrong as the other car was ahead of me and I mistakenly assumed he was turning right.

bmt

432 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 129

Reply # 2074725 17-Aug-2018 09:39

Also, its ambiguous situations like these - split second should I or shouldn't I decisions - that can cause bad traffic. Another example is a double laned roundabout - you MUST give way to all traffic on your right, but if a car is in the inside lane and you are wanting to turn into the outside lane, and they illegally change lanes, you're at fault. So do you wait for both lanes to be clear before moving, and potentially hold up all traffic?

mclean

347 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 72

Subscriber

Reply # 2074735 17-Aug-2018 10:34

This has arisen out of the two vehicles failing to merge after passing through the earlier intersection so they ended up sharing the lane. Why didn't they merge? In my experience, when two vehicles enter a merge area together the one on the left will usually yield (I guess because the right-hand vehicle is sort of in an overtaking position). If one is behind the other the one behind will usually yield to the one ahead. But there seems to be no rule covering this.

So I wonder why the truck didn't yield at the merge point and let the car go ahead. Was he being a prick, or was there another vehicle on his right preventing it? Too many unknowns.

I'm not sure where I'd place the blame for the collision, but I think most drivers coming out of a merge situation keep pretty close track of any vehicle on their left.

McLean

1 | 2