car accident.. am i liable?

Forums › Off topic › car accident.. am i liable?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

6233 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683450 9-Sep-2012 16:24

Checkout this intersection. You can turn left then right, even though there is a not right hand turn side at the right hand turn.
http://maps.google.co.nz/?ll=-36.862017,174.782218&spn=0.000004,0.004128&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=-36.862129,174.782476&panoid=fA5hZEMZCwR4iqW3VEwLJA&cbp=12,306.09,,0,13.07

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Broadband troubleshooting and master filter installs.
Starlink installer - one month free: https://www.starlink.com/?referral=RC-32845-88860-71
Wi-Fi and networking
Cel-Fi supply and installer - boost your mobile phone coverage legally

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683452 9-Sep-2012 16:45

i think there is no point stressing out. first, see how much you have to pay.

if it is a lot, maybe you can try getting some advise from advice bureau. that intersection is interesting. i may have done similar mistake.

lesson learnt - get 3rd party insurance for peace of mind.

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683455 9-Sep-2012 16:50

Actually I would be jumping the gun and getting a claim in with the bus company for the damage to the door.

Richard rich.ms

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683459 9-Sep-2012 16:56

richms: Actually I would be jumping the gun and getting a claim in with the bus company for the damage to the door.

i guess it depends on how much effort and time you want to put into it.

i may have done the same. i dont know if OP can spare time and effort to do it if he is not from chch.

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683460 9-Sep-2012 17:00

well in any case whatever you do, don't accept any liability, apologize etc for this

Richard rich.ms

cep32

50 posts

Geek

#683483 9-Sep-2012 17:28

The green sign is irrelevant as far as the road rules go. It's purely there for your information and has no authority to direct you to a particular lane or route through the two intersections.

With the lane lines shown in the aerial leading straight through on Kilmore St and two exit lanes on Kilmore St to the west then it is reasonable to assume you can travel through to Kilmore on both. Without arrows in the lanes between the two intersections you are allowed to make any movement you like from any lane as long as you indicate your intent and give way. The more I look at it the more I'm sure the bus is technically and legally in the wrong.

For work I regularly do safety audits of intersections and routes just like this and would have refused to audit it and sent it straight back for a redesign if it came to me like it is now.

The only way to make it clearer is to shorten up the lanes lines (instead of the usual 3m line and 7m gap) so that more lines can be marked to show that the through movement is all the way though on Montreal St.

StuntCommando

41 posts

Geek

#683485 9-Sep-2012 17:31

I drive this intersection every day and could see how it would be confusing to a newcomer to ChCh. It has been this way for as long as I can remember!

Unofrtunately though, I think you are in the wrong. No doubt the intersection could be improved though.

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683486 9-Sep-2012 17:33

cep32:
With the lane lines shown in the aerial leading straight through on Kilmore St and two exit lanes on Kilmore St to the west then it is reasonable to assume you can travel through to Kilmore on both. Without arrows in the lanes between the two intersections you are allowed to make any movement you like from any lane as long as you indicate your intent and give way. The more I look at it the more I'm sure the bus is technically and legally in the wrong.

agreed.

mattwnz

20157 posts

Uber Geek

#683487 9-Sep-2012 17:34

KevinL:
mattwnz:
coffeebaron: There are two big clearly marked green signs on the approach to this intersection. Definitely very clear cut OP was in the wrong.

I can see those signs now, but they are not exactly accurate, as they show it to be a smooth curve. But the actual intersection appears to be 2 x 90 degree turns.

It's actually fairly accurate if you look at the aerial shot and the road markings at the intersection:?http://goo.gl/maps/7xhBC

That is the sort of sign you have on a motorway, where it isn't complicated by other roads and intersections, and you are traveling at speed. eg they have tried to adapt it for an inner city street. I think the real problem is that the intersection is being treated in a different way depending on which road you approach it, which means they can't put road markings on teh actual intersection, which created confusion for the OP. The original road was probably never designed for this type of layout, where it looks more like a grid layout. I have never come across such an intersection before.

gzt

17125 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#683488 9-Sep-2012 17:34

Before sharing google links tick the 'short link' box after clicking the link icon on google maps. Gives this: http://goo.gl/maps/RfZJv

The long links distort the page display on some systems. Not needed.

KevinL

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#683513 9-Sep-2012 18:57

You know, regardless of what the true answer is, it terrifies me that there seems to be an equal number of people who think the bus is at fault vs the OP is at fault.

Terrifying.

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#683521 9-Sep-2012 19:07

Yeah the overall standard of nz drivers scares the piss out of me!

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#683527 9-Sep-2012 19:11

Actually I think it more reflects on the crapness of that intersection than NZ drivers.

It really depends if it is one intersection or 2, if they can PROVE that the car came from the place with those lane markings on it etc. Its a total ballsup of an intersection and the road really should go up the middle of that park space and be a straightfoward 4 way intersection.

Richard rich.ms

kingjj

1728 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#683537 9-Sep-2012 19:22

richms: Actually I think it more reflects on the crapness of that intersection than NZ drivers.

It really depends if it is one intersection or 2, if they can PROVE that the car came from the place with those lane markings on it etc. Its a total ballsup of an intersection and the road really should go up the middle of that park space and be a straightfoward 4 way intersection.

Straight through a square that's been there over 100 years? A less drastic measure might be redesigning the intersection or improving the intersection... perhaps a large blinking neon sign for those who don't understand the traffic flow.

If the CCC gets its way, $71 million of tax payers money could be spent changing Montreal and Kilmore streets back to two-way, that would surely correct this issue! (and introduce 100 others...)

TheUngeek

924 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#683539 9-Sep-2012 19:25

Don't get why it's confusing. The signs make it quite clear. I think some people are failing to take into account the effect the traffic lights have on the directions ;)

Anyway this thread also highlights one of the big failings of NZ drivers. Situational awareness. Failing to take note of and think about what is around you.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9