After some advice after accident

[tony wright]

LoonR1 said:

It was meant to be "solid whites and stop lines"

They are advisory and there is no specific offence or requirement to follow them.

Really... Then surely you could overtake any where you want and totally disregard any solid white lines as your not committing an offence. Not sure the unmarked police car following you would agree.

Know this is totally irrelevant but, I've received two, on the spot fines in Germany for not bringing my car to a complete standstill at a stop line. Wouldn't of been so bad but the fact you could see 200m either direction was the knock out blow, barstewards...

[LoonR1]

tony wright said:

LoonR1 said:

It was meant to be "solid whites and stop lines"

They are advisory and there is no specific offence or requirement to follow them.

Really... Then surely you could overtake any where you want and totally disregard any solid white lines as your not committing an offence. Not sure the unmarked police car following you would agree.

Know this is totally irrelevant but, I've received two, on the spot fines in Germany for not bringing my car to a complete standstill at a stop line. Wouldn't of been so bad but the fact you could see 200m either direction was the knock out blow, barstewards...

That's out of context. My earlier post was a victim of autocorrect. Read the two together and it makes more sense. What I said was that painted directional road markings are advisory and not compulsory, unlike solid white lines and Stop lines, which are compulsory.

Clearer?

[tony wright]

Yes, much clearer now thats cleared up

[sim72]

LoonR1 said:

That's out of context. My earlier post was a victim of autocorrect. Read the two together and it makes more sense. What I said was that painted directional road markings are advisory and not compulsory, unlike solid white lines and Stop lines, which are compulsory.

Although oddly, that's not what happened to a colleague of mine.

M1 Junction 15, southbound exit, roundabout, splits to 3 lanes.
Lane 1: marked and signed as left only
Lane 2: marked as left or straight on
Lane 3: marked as straight on or right.

My colleague was in Lane 2 indicating left. She turned to the left (was indicating) and the vehicle in Lane 1 attempted to go straight on and collided with her nearside wing. This went 100/0 as the other vehicle was not following the signing. Is this different because the signing is clear as well as the markings?

[LoonR1]

sim72 said:

Although oddly, that's not what happened to a colleague of mine.

M1 Junction 15, southbound exit, roundabout, splits to 3 lanes.
Lane 1: marked and signed as left only
Lane 2: marked as left or straight on
Lane 3: marked as straight on or right.

My colleague was in Lane 2 indicating left. She turned to the left (was indicating) and the vehicle in Lane 1 attempted to go straight on and collided with her nearside wing. This went 100/0 as the other vehicle was not following the signing. Is this different because the signing is clear as well as the markings?

the thing is I can't speak for every single individual claim. The overarching precedent is Grace vs Tanner. I'm sure there are other scenarios where it's gone 100/0 the other way too. The principle remains. It won't be exclusively down to the road signing.

[Robins]

Right chaps, that's the roundabout in question. My movement is the yellow line and the other party is the red line. She said to me she was going straight on, so she had taken the exit but come across into my lane on exiting, which I was just completely not expecting. No indication and still not sure how/if I should have been anticipating it.

[allergictocheese]

Highway Code says;

Highway Code said:

185 When reaching the roundabout...

...Watch out for all other road users already on the roundabout; be aware they may not be signalling correctly or at all...

187 In all cases watch out for...

...traffic which may be straddling lanes or positioned incorrectly

You had a duty anticipate someone might be in the wrong lane and cut across you, as equally they had a duty to make sure they wouldn't cut across you if they failed to take the exit.

By your description and map it looks to me as Tanner should apply. If you get 100% in your favour, count your blessings!

Edited by allergictocheese on Tuesday 27th January 09:16

[TooMany2cvs]

Robins said:

still not sure how/if I should have been anticipating it.

Simple. Never sit alongside somebody on a two-lane roundabout or as you exit it. People do all sorts of strange things.

If she hit your front corner, then there can't have been much overlap - sitting just a metre or two further back would have avoided contact.

[JustinP1]

Robins said:

Right chaps, that's the roundabout in question. My movement is the yellow line and the other party is the red line. She said to me she was going straight on, so she had taken the exit but come across into my lane on exiting, which I was just completely not expecting. No indication and still not sure how/if I should have been anticipating it.

Grace v Tanner applies here then.

From your description I mentioned the possibility that if the road markings were like I thought it may go your way, but this is a standard roundabout.

The difference would have been if the left hand lane had dashed white lines to the right hand side showing that lane could only go left or straight on. Then she would have had to have effectively indicated right, and waited for a gap to move right. That's why our case went our way.

So, officially 50/50. However, I would press upon the admittance of liability at the roadside. There's also the issue that for some reason she's gone from the left lane to the right lane on the exit...!?

However, IMHO this is not enough unless you can get admittance of fault.

[JustinP1]

TooMany2cvs said:

Robins said:

still not sure how/if I should have been anticipating it.

Simple. Never sit alongside somebody on a two-lane roundabout or as you exit it. People do all sorts of strange things.

If she hit your front corner, then there can't have been much overlap - sitting just a metre or two further back would have avoided contact.

This. Although the OP has my sympathies.

This is exactly what I told my wife when it happened to her. You simply have to presume every other driver is not going to make diligent checks. So, I never coast in people's blind spots etc, and in that exact situation, I hang back and wait until someone has actually definitely moved to exit the roundabout before presuming they will.

[Robins]

I suppose I'll have to see how it goes.
I guess I'm just really surprised I can be held as much at fault as her but, I guess it will make me a better driver, every cloud and all that...
I'll certainly be more cautious on roundabouts in the future

[jhfozzy]

Robins said:

I suppose I'll have to see how it goes.
I guess I'm just really surprised I can be held as much at fault as her but, I guess it will make me a better driver, every cloud and all that...
I'll certainly be more cautious on roundabouts in the future

I would also be surprised and shocked if this was me and it went 50/50. What was her reason for not exiting in lane 1 as she should?

My wife has a nasty habit of exiting a roundabout with a two lane exit in lane 2 similar to this for some reason, something about her "instructor mentioned it once". But not if she had gone (almost) straight on as in this example.

Certainly be more cautious on roundabouts though, there are a few roundabouts local to me where you can turn right in the left hand lane!

On Junction 43 of the M4, westbound, both lanes 1 & 2 go north up the A465. Eastbound, both lanes turn left, again up the A465. Coming south down the A465 towards junction 43, both lanes can go right onto the motorway westbound, this causes lots of fun in heavy traffic.

https://goo.gl/maps/ujo5N

Edited by jhfozzy on Tuesday 27th January 10:55

[allergictocheese]

For anyone interested in the reasoning behind Grace v Tanner, here's the judgment from the Court of Appeal in that case;

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/354.h...

[Robins]

When I got out she come over and asked 'what happened then?' I said she come over into my lane blocking my exit, and that she could only turn left or go straight on in that lane. Her reply was, 'Well where was I going then?' my response was something along the lines of 'you tell me' to which she said I was going straight on'
She then went back into her car made a phone call and came back and apologised, saying it was her fault, I'm so so sorry.

We exchanged details etc and we both went on our way

[The Red Baron]

If she's admitted fault get her to put that in writing. She may well be advised to change her story if it goes to court. At least if you have it on paper with her signature you have a better chance of avoiding any portion of blame.

It seems these sorts of events, if they end up in court are assessed as to whose story is the most believable, even if someone has altered their story a bit. If it's not clear cut it may well be ruled as 50/50.

I had a court hearing last week for an accident that she admitted at the time was her fault, but modified her version of the events subsequently to try and implicate me as at fault. I didn't think to get her to write that down at the time. Fortunately in court she wasn't a very good liar and it became obvious to all who was in the wrong. Thankfully the judge threw her case out and told her she was 100% at fault. Phew! Despite me being sure I was not at fault any seed of doubt in the judge's mind might have meant a different outcome.

[STW2010]

Robins said:

Right chaps, that's the roundabout in question. My movement is the yellow line and the other party is the red line. She said to me she was going straight on, so she had taken the exit but come across into my lane on exiting, which I was just completely not expecting. No indication and still not sure how/if I should have been anticipating it.

From my experience of living in Milton Keynes, where there are hundreds of fking roundabouts like that, the best approach is not to be alongside cars on roundabouts unless you can help it. So, for example, if I pulled up alongside someone else whilst we waited for the RA to clear then I often just move off slowly to let them get slightly ahead of me. Cars behind them, who may overlap my car slightly, then have a good view of what I'm doing and I have a good view of what the first car is doing. Chances of collision are reduced (unless someone truly is a retard- there's little you can do about mongs who are determined to hit you).

Defensive driving. I learned this quite quickly in Milton Keynes as idiots cut across lanes (the racing line) across roundabouts, realise they're in the wrong lane etc. Whilst the markings suggest that you can be in the right-hand lane to go straight on, it is easier to see others when you're in the left lane, so I always try to be in lane 1 on the approach to roundabouts.

Just a few tips, all based on experience.

[Sheepshanks]

Robins said:

I said she come over into my lane blocking my exit,

Based on the picture she didn't - you cut across her lane. While it's not as advised in the Highway Code, there's nothing illegal in treating a roundabout as a straight road with lots of left turns - and you wouldn't generally turn left from the right lane on a normal road.

I know it's easier said than done in the cut & thrust of daily driving but you need to keep a clear bubble around you and not get caught next to people in situations like this.

[Moily]

Sheepshanks said:

Based on the picture she didn't - you cut across her lane. While it's not as advised in the Highway Code, there's nothing illegal in treating a roundabout as a straight road with lots of left turns - and you wouldn't generally turn left from the right lane on a normal road.

I know it's easier said than done in the cut & thrust of daily driving but you need to keep a clear bubble around you and not get caught next to people in situations like this.

If the arrows drawn on the picture are accurate, then it appears as though they both exited the roundabout at the same exit but in doing so she moved from Lane 1 to Lane 2 of the road they both joined, so looks a different scenario to Grace v Tanner based on that info - i.e the woman wasn't continuing on the roundabout to the next exit.

I'd be upset if this happened to me and it was found at 50/50.

[allergictocheese]

The OP's original description and the picture contradict one another. In the opening post he says that the woman failed to take the exit. On his picture the story has changed and now she's taken the exit and changed lanes beyond the roundabout. I tend to prefer his first description, as saying that someone failed to exit is very specific and not easy to mistake for something else, compounded with the fact that the picture was created in response to comments on here, many of which surprised the OP by attaching blame when he thought there wouldn't be any. Changing the facts helps alleviate the blame.

[Sheepshanks]

Moily said:

If the arrows drawn on the picture are accurate, then it appears as though they both exited the roundabout at the same exit but in doing so she moved from Lane 1 to Lane 2 of the road they both joined,

Fair enough - I read it so far (as pointed out above) that she was continuing around the roundabout. If she did change lanes on exit then that's a very odd thing to do and hopefully will be clearly her fault.