Who's fault

[lesstatt]

Driving down a country road earlier when a car behind decided to overtake, half way through the overtake we came close to a junction on the right where a car started to pull out, this cars vision was restricted by trees and pulled out. Now it wasn't quite a head on but if it had been whose fault would it have been

1, Car overtaking
2, Car pulling out

I think car pulling out as we were on the main road etc, opinions please ?

[iva cosworth]

Car pulling out should look BOTH ways before pulling out.

Overtaking with junction on the right is not advisable either.

[DervVW]

Did the road not have solid lines as their was a junction coming up? So no over taking?
But i'd have thought the car entering the main road would be at fault for not ensuring the road was clear?

[Mave]

Was there a sign on the main road warning there was a side road coming up? If so, assuming the other guy was creeping out due to the restricted visibility, I'd put most of the blame on the overtaker.

Edited by Mave on Saturday 14th September 17:36

[GC8]

Neither would have been free from blame. Whose, not who's (contraction of who is) btw. Whose fault? Who's to blame?

[Fleckers]

its got to be the overtaker as he is on the wrong side of the road going past a side road

unless side road had a stop sigh and line then you give way to traffic coming from your right so in theory you could just pull out with out looking left

[Rumple]

GC8 said:

Neither would have been free from blame. Whose, not who's (contraction of who is) btw. Whose fault? Who's to blame?

Brilliant PH style answer.

[Magic919]

And from a poster that doesn't even type apostrophes as a rule.

[GC8]

Well observed.

Im so forum...

[Puddenchucker]

TSRG said:

Except as provided by paragraphs (3) to (6), the requirement conveyed by the transverse lines shown in diagram 1003, whether or not they are placed in conjunction with the sign shown in diagram 602 or 1023, shall be that no vehicle shall proceed past such one of those lines as is nearer the major road into that road in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

1003



602


So, whilst it's inadvisable to overtake approaching a junction, it us up to the driver entering the main road to ensure it's safe to do so.

Edited by Puddenchucker on Saturday 14th September 16:30

[DervVW]

Puddenchucker said:

TSRG said:

Except as provided by paragraphs (3) to (6), the requirement conveyed by the transverse lines shown in diagram 1003, whether or not they are placed in conjunction with the sign shown in diagram 602 or 1023, shall be that no vehicle shall proceed past such one of those lines as is nearer the major road into that road in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

1003



602


So, whilst it's inadvisable to overtake approaching a junction, it us up to the driver entering the main road to ensure it's safe to do so.

Edited by Puddenchucker on Saturday 14th September 16:30

I'd be inclined to agree with you. But I also wonder if there was a solid line on the main road as well, because that would infer that the overtaking car shouldn't overtake. But if there was no restriction in place how could he know at the time of overtake that a car would enter the main road?

[leafspring]

GC8 said:

Well observed.

I'm so forum...

It was the car pulling out at fault as vehicles on the road they're joining have priority (I think)

ETA if the car overtaking wasn't there would he have just pulled out and hit you instead?

Edited by leafspring on Saturday 14th September 17:06

[GC8]

leafspring said:

GC8 said:

Well observed.

I'm so forum...

Come here and give me a cuddle.

Edited by GC8 on Saturday 14th September 17:11

[leafspring]

GC8 said:

There is a chasm between thinking that youre clever and actually being clever. Ponder that, soft lad.

There's also a page that won't load properly on an smartphone with a cracked screen involved

I've only just found Magic919's post

[10 Pence Short]

GC8 said:

There is a chasm between thinking that youre clever and actually being clever. Ponder that, soft lad.

Ironic, indeed.

Oh, and to answer the OP, both drivers have been careless.

[GC8]

leafspring said:

GC8 said:

There is a chasm between thinking that youre clever and actually being clever. Ponder that, soft lad.

There's also a page that won't load properly on an smartphone with a cracked screen involved

I've only just found Magic919's post

[lesstatt]

leafspring said:

It was the car pulling out at fault as vehicles on the road they're joining have priority (I think)

ETA if the car overtaking wasn't there would he have just pulled out and hit you instead?

Edited by leafspring on Saturday 14th September 17:06

No because the car that pulled out was going in the opposite direction

[fausTVR]

Neither OP, your fault for going too slow.

[lesstatt]

fausTVR said:

Neither OP, your fault for going too slow.

Nope I was at national speed limit

[tenohfive]

Both were at fault - the overtaker shouldn't have overtaken past a junction (and shouldn't have overtaken if they couldn't see that the whole stretch was free of junctions) and the second driver should still have checked both ways.

That being said the overtaker is more at fault in my eyes.