Hit in rear whilst performing a 3 point turn - liability
Discussion
Hol said:
Apologies to the OP for saying this, but I am finding it very hard not to draw a parallel between this incident and those not unsimilar incidents we all suffer where somebody pulls out on you from a side road - basing their entire move on the fact that you will have to brake/scrub speed to avoid rear ending them.
SIMDSY for the bikers reading.
heebeegeetee said:
Hol said:
Apologies to the OP for saying this, but I am finding it very hard not to draw a parallel between this incident and those not unsimilar incidents we all suffer where somebody pulls out on you from a side road - basing their entire move on the fact that you will have to brake/scrub speed to avoid rear ending them.
It would have to be a very short car though to disappear from view in the traffic.
MYOB said:
I was in a Q7 (not mine) at the time! I was hardly hidden from view. Plus at that point the traffic had moved forward some distance. You simply could not miss me!
Many years ago I was a witness to an accident where someone pulled out on a double decker bus. You're right - he didn't miss you, hence this thread...
MYOB said:
Let me clarify. At the point I reversed and touched the kerb behind, I saw the car join the road some 200m away, I then completed the turn very quickly, and had straightened up and got up to 20+mph before getting rear ended. The third party claims I pulled out in his path.
you spotted the 3rd party when you were furthest back into the queue of traffic (hiding you from his view).You concluded you had to hurry the turn to get out in front of him.
You pulled out in front of him.
You think he was to blame
heebeegeetee said:
And how would the driver who failed to see the car in front be painted?
Depends who's questioning him. If it's the opposition it'll still be difficult for them. How about:"So you set off from the lights in the 30mph limit in your drag car and managed to get to 200mph in 200 yards so as to deliberately crash into the back of my kitten and nun carrying client. Would you say that's the actions of a sensible driver?"
Du1point8 said:
Everyone is supposed to wait for you to finish?
If someone is performing a legitamte manoeuvre in the road, and has started that manoeuvre when the road was clear and it was safe to do so, then my view is that yes, any traffic that subsequently arrives at the point where the manoeuvre is being executed should treat it in the same way as any other hazzard, and slow down and be prepared to stop until the manoeuvre is complete.For example, I've seen many situations where a lorry needs to reverse into a side road, drive, etc and therefore first pulls lengthways accross all lanes to line up the reverse, only for idiots who arrive after the manoeuvre has commenced to continue driving behind the lorry, whilst it is in the reversing phase.
Common sense dictates that ignoring the hazzard of the reversing lorry and driving on obliviously behind it is dangerous, and any resulting collision should be the fault of the driver continuing to drive on, who did not react appropriately to the hazzard presented to them.
I don't know the specific circumstances of the OP's collision, and how visible he was to approaching traffic, but if he was part way through the turn around manoeuvre, then the expectation is for traffic who approach the hazzard to react to it appropriatelly and not carry on driving through the hazzard.
The analogy of emerging from a side road doesn't particularly hold water, since the OP was already established on the main road and he was not emerging from a side road where priority is required to be ceded.
LoonR1 said:
Most, if not all, drivers will slow down and stop if necessary when presented with a hazard, if they have a chance. It's more than likely that the other driver didn't have that chance.
I can assure you he did. Otherwise I would admit liability. No harm or shame in admitting this if this we this was the case. Mandat said:
The analogy of emerging from a side road doesn't particularly hold water, since the OP was already established on the main road and he was not emerging from a side road where priority is required to be ceded.
What's your criteria for being "established" on the main road?1) Turn completed and facing direction of travel, or
2) Turn completed, up to speed and out of the braking distance of other traffic?
LoonR1 said:
Most, if not all, drivers will slow down and stop if necessary when presented with a hazard, if they have a chance. It's more than likely that the other driver didn't have that chance.
I agree, however I read the OP's account that he commenced the 3 point turn when the road was appropriatelly clear of traffic and that the third party was the type of person described in my previous example, as someone who was too important to slow down or stop when necessary. A Q7 is hardly inconspicuous, therefore it's not as if the OP would not have been visible from 200m down the road. Mave said:
Mandat said:
The analogy of emerging from a side road doesn't particularly hold water, since the OP was already established on the main road and he was not emerging from a side road where priority is required to be ceded.
What's your criteria for being "established" on the main road?1) Turn completed and facing direction of travel, or
2) Turn completed, up to speed and out of the braking distance of other traffic?
Mandat said:
I agree, however I read the OP's account that he commenced the 3 point turn when the road was appropriatelly clear of traffic and that the third party was the type of person described in my previous example, as someone who was too important to slow down or stop when necessary. A Q7 is hardly inconspicuous, therefore it's not as if the OP would not have been visible from 200m down the road.
Is it just me, or is 200 metres a huge distance for a car to travel? I mean, it's twice as long as 100 metres.Has a link to the google map of the road been posted?
Mandat said:
I was thinkg more along the lines of already being in the same carriageway as the third party durign the 3 point turn, rather than emerging from a side road into the carriageway in question.
Guess it depends if he was in and blocking the 3rd parties carriageway, or somewhat reversed at the end of the 2nd point with the 3rd party expecting him to stay put.Mave said:
Mandat said:
I was thinkg more along the lines of already being in the same carriageway as the third party durign the 3 point turn, rather than emerging from a side road into the carriageway in question.
Guess it depends if he was in and blocking the 3rd parties carriageway, or somewhat reversed at the end of the 2nd point with the 3rd party expecting him to stay put.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.
Obviously, if someone pulls out to start a turn, which forces you to take avoiding action to prevent a collision, then that is completely wrong. But that is not what the OP describes occured in his case.
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.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.
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.
Mave said:
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.
In everyday driving we all get in each other's way all the time, requiring a change in speed or direction; be it turning left, turning right, parking, stopping at traffic lights or zebra crossings, doing u or multi point turns, etc. It's called traffic and we all have to adapt to the hazzards and circumstances that we encouter all the time on the roads. 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.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff