Hit in rear whilst performing a 3 point turn - liability

[Mave]

silentbrown said:

So likely the other guy didn't see the first part, because they were joining his road from the lights. And they were 200M away. At 25MPH that's about 18 seconds. And he claims to have driven maybe 10 seconds after completing the turn before the accident. This just doesn't stack up.

and he got hit just as he was straightening up. I'd expect to be well on my way 10 seconds after straightening up..

[Mark-C]

pork911 said:

6 pages????

OP, 50/50 is a very favorable split for you

Have just gone through the thread and was about to say the same. I get the rights and wrongs of the assorted scenarios played out above but the OP should absolutely grab the 50/50 whilst he has the chance!

[silentbrown]

MYOB said:

I have no idea where people have got 2-300mph from! 30mph is roughly 80ft per second, circa 250m in the 10 seconds from when I saw him turn into the road. Do the maths!

Except 30mph is 44ft/s, he was going from a standing start, and by the time of impact you claim to be doing 20-30MPH yourself.

OP, how far away was he when you started the final part of the turn - pulling forwards into his lane? What was his speed

[silentbrown]

Mandat said:

...parked up and having a cuppa between each phase of the 3 point turn..

My point was that you will be -briefly- stationary, while you change gears and check it's safe to continue.

As for handbrake, weren't you taught to do that for your test? Never seen anybody do it since, but the OP might...

It's difficult to tell much more without a view of the road -particularly the width, and parking situation.

[MYOB]

Some people here haven't read my posts correctly. Don't bother commenting if you're going to misquote the situation I have set out.

[MYOB]

I have deliberately withheld what the third party's statement alleges. He says I was parked up and pulled out of a parking bay sharply right in his path.

Shows how much attention he was paying to the road. Especially as there are no parking bays there.

[MYOB]

I have deliberately withheld what the third party's statement alleges. He says I was parked up and pulled out of a parking bay sharply right in his path.

Shows how much attention he was paying to the road. Especially as there are no parking bays there.

[Du1point8]

I stated very early on... you said he was 200m away and started moving on 'your' road.

You got 20m before you got hit.

I have provided a link to a calculator that proves the other car must be going on average 90-100mph to catch and hit you, so must have hit 120-130mph in 200m on a 30mph road, so where is the newspaper article stating all this? As it would be in the paper someone doing 4 times the speed limit and crashing after all.

Show the damage of the crash as I don't believe your story and I believe that you didn't look and just pulled out assuming everyone is in the wrong and must stop for you and they didn't.

[heebeegeetee]

LoonR1 said:

I like your stubbornness, even coming up with ridiculously different scenarios like this one. The OP would be hidden to an extent within the traffic that he's turned round in, because he's too important / impatient / ignorant to queue up like other road users.

A lorry probably wouldn't be hidden.

Oh give over, it's a common enough scenario, one I'm sure we've all done or will do.

The bit I'm not getting is that cars are longer than they are wider, so how can the OP be hidden from view at any time?

[Jon1967x]

Du1point8 said:

I stated very early on... you said he was 200m away and started moving on 'your' road.

You got 20m before you got hit.

I have provided a link to a calculator that proves the other car must be going on average 90-100mph to catch and hit you, so must have hit 120-130mph in 200m on a 30mph road, so where is the newspaper article stating all this? As it would be in the paper someone doing 4 times the speed limit and crashing after all.

Show the damage of the crash as I don't believe your story and I believe that you didn't look and just pulled out assuming everyone is in the wrong and must stop for you and they didn't.

Not quite what true though, the OP started his move when the car was 200m away, it could easily have taken 5s just yo get straight on the road before accelerating. It's also probable that completing the move would have meant getting close to the curb. If the other driver only became aware late on Hed have seen the car close to the curb and pulling into the centre of the road.

If nothing else there is also no law in the Highway Code that says I'm in the right so I'll just drive into you. If you saw a car going a 3 point turn would you just drive at them?

There is plenty of subtly here in what may have happened. And I don't believe any reported detail is necessarily true as the mind plays tricks.

[Rick101]

This is getting silly OP why don't you post the pics so we can see whether is was a rear or a side impact.

[MYOB]

Rick101 said:

This is getting silly OP why don't you post the pics so we can see whether is was a rear or a side impact.

Trust me, it was a rear impact. Just trust me on this. I'm asking for views based on my opinions. I do not want to provide any clues such as redacted statements or photos as I'm a private kind of person!

[PurpleMoonlight]

MYOB said:

Trust me, it was a rear impact. Just trust me on this. I'm asking for views based on my opinions. I do not want to provide any clues such as redacted statements or photos as I'm a private kind of person!

Your opinion that the other party was 100% at fault is likely incorrect.

[pork911]

MYOB said:

I'm asking for views based on my opinions.

classic.

[pinchmeimdreamin]

MYOB said:

Trust me, it was a rear impact. Just trust me on this. I'm asking for views based on my opinions. I do not want to provide any clues such as redacted statements or photos as I'm a private kind of person!

Based on your opinions the 3rd party is 10,000% to blame.

However in any other scenario 50/50 is the best you are going to get.

[LoonR1]

heebeegeetee said:

Oh give over, it's a common enough scenario, one I'm sure we've all done or will do.

The bit I'm not getting is that cars are longer than they are wider, so how can the OP be hidden from view at any time?

Yes very good, because when you do a three point turn your car is at 90 degrees to the kerb and other traffic isn't it? Oh no, it's not, it's at an acute angle to the kerb amd easily merged in with traffic that rarely lines up perfectly nose to tail

Edited by LoonR1 on Saturday 21st February 17:07

[vonhosen]

MYOB

Did you do everything that it was reasonable to expect of you in your turn in the road?

Did you pick an appropriate place?
Was it a quiet road?
Would you have a sufficient unobstructed view at all times during the manoeuvre in the place you chose?
If you did all of the above were there then no visible vehicles or pedestrians moving towards you when you then started the manoeuvre?
Did you perform the manoeuvre with effective control & observations throughout the manoeuvre?
In performing the manoeuvre where you did, did it rely on anyone else having to alter their course or speed in order to avoid a collision with you whilst you were performing the manoeuvre?
If somebody or something else could get to you once you'd started the manoeuvre, what did you do to ensure there would be no collision?

If you haven't done everything it was reasonable to expect of you, then there is likely to be some degree of culpability on your part irrespective of whether there is culpable behaviour by the other party or not. The degree will depend on what the other partie's behaviour was & how that fell short of what was expected of them.

[g3org3y]

Mave said:

Mandat said:

If I was driving down the road and I saw someone ahead of me performing a 3 point turn, i would fully expect them to pull forward to complete the turn, rather than giving way to me by staying put after the reversing (point 2) phase.

In my view, they were comitted to the 3 point turn before I had arrived at the scene, hence they have priority to complete the manoeuvre.

In my view, the person performing a 3 point turn should make sure they don't impede other traffic.
If they have completed the second point, a someone appears on the other carriageway and there is room for them to pass then the 3 point turner should wait for them to pass, again to avoid impeding progress of the person established.

This is back to the essence of my earlier post - IMHO you shouldn't initiate a 3 point turn if you're not confident you can complete it without getting in anyone's way, especially on a main road.

If you lived by that point of view you'd never get the chance to perform a 3 point turn in/around London tbh.

Practicalities of modern day driving include compromise especially in urban/built up environments.

[vonhosen]

g3org3y said:

Mave said:

Mandat said:

If I was driving down the road and I saw someone ahead of me performing a 3 point turn, i would fully expect them to pull forward to complete the turn, rather than giving way to me by staying put after the reversing (point 2) phase.

In my view, they were comitted to the 3 point turn before I had arrived at the scene, hence they have priority to complete the manoeuvre.

In my view, the person performing a 3 point turn should make sure they don't impede other traffic.
If they have completed the second point, a someone appears on the other carriageway and there is room for them to pass then the 3 point turner should wait for them to pass, again to avoid impeding progress of the person established.

This is back to the essence of my earlier post - IMHO you shouldn't initiate a 3 point turn if you're not confident you can complete it without getting in anyone's way, especially on a main road.

If you lived by that point of view you'd never get the chance to perform a 3 point turn in/around London tbh.

Practicalities of modern day driving include compromise especially in urban/built up environments.

That's rubbish. I've managed to find safe & appropriate places to perform a turn in the road in London. It may mean I can't do it where I immediately am (and decide I want to go the other way) & having to wait until I've found a safe appropriate place, but that is not an unreasonable expectation or burden.

Stuff others & impeding their lawful progress because I want to do it now is not a reasonable expectation.

Once I start I also still have a duty of care to make sure I'm not party to any collision.

[Mave]

g3org3y said:

Practicalities of modern day driving include compromise especially in urban/built up environments.

And those compromises sometimes mean waiting until you can turn right into a minor road and performing your 3 point turn there.