Driving through hatched area
Discussion
I was involved in a minor bump this afternoon here
I was aiming to turn right. There was a queue of stationary traffic to the left of the lane which I was passing slowly (circa 10mph).
Someone pulled out of the road to the left between the stationary cars and was aiming to turn right. I was already alongside by the time they pulled out and she simply drove into the left corner of my rear bumper.
No obvious damage to her car and most of mine has polished out. However it looks like my bumper hanger might be broken and not sure what other damage could be underneath the bumper.
Could she claim against me for having a wheel width into the hatched area? It's not bordered by a solid white line so I think I was OK to enter it to get to the lane to turn right.
If I claim on insurance, is it likely to end up costing more than it's worth (increase in premium even if agreed no-fault)?
I was aiming to turn right. There was a queue of stationary traffic to the left of the lane which I was passing slowly (circa 10mph).
Someone pulled out of the road to the left between the stationary cars and was aiming to turn right. I was already alongside by the time they pulled out and she simply drove into the left corner of my rear bumper.
No obvious damage to her car and most of mine has polished out. However it looks like my bumper hanger might be broken and not sure what other damage could be underneath the bumper.
Could she claim against me for having a wheel width into the hatched area? It's not bordered by a solid white line so I think I was OK to enter it to get to the lane to turn right.
If I claim on insurance, is it likely to end up costing more than it's worth (increase in premium even if agreed no-fault)?
Edited by ecs0set on Saturday 23 January 17:41
Edited by ecs0set on Saturday 23 January 17:42
That'll be a split liability (not necessarily 50/50) - she ought to have checked (perhaps she was waved out/flashed by a vehicle waiting to go ahead) but you ought not to have moved your right filter point back to the junction. The right filter arrow is after the left hand junction for a reason and the hatched area isn't hatched opposite the junction for a reason.
So, you were travelling forward, and her car struck your rear quarter? 100% her fault.
There is nothing you could have done to avoid the collision (as long as you were travelling at a reasonable speed and were showing due care). You were perfectly entitled to cross the broken hatchings at this point.
There is nothing you could have done to avoid the collision (as long as you were travelling at a reasonable speed and were showing due care). You were perfectly entitled to cross the broken hatchings at this point.
chazwind said:
So, you were travelling forward, and her car struck your rear quarter? 100% her fault.
There is nothing you could have done to avoid the collision (as long as you were travelling at a reasonable speed and were showing due care). You were perfectly entitled to cross the broken hatchings at this point.
Yes there is. If the OP hadn't decided to split lanes when he did his car would have been visible to those turning out of the side road. His car was concealed by stationary traffic going straight ahead, before the start of the filter lane shown in the photo. The filter lane markings are there for a purpose, disregarding them will not go in his favour. There is nothing you could have done to avoid the collision (as long as you were travelling at a reasonable speed and were showing due care). You were perfectly entitled to cross the broken hatchings at this point.
Riley Blue said:
Yes there is. If the OP hadn't decided to split lanes when he did his car would have been visible to those turning out of the side road. His car was concealed by stationary traffic going straight ahead, before the start of the filter lane shown in the photo. The filter lane markings are there for a purpose, disregarding them will not go in his favour.
For the sake of argument, this was an 'overtake' by the OP. From his description, it was perfectly valid, and he committed no offence. On the other hand, anyone pulling out from a side road has to ensure that their coast is totally clear (in both directions) before doing so. If their view is obstructed, then it's their responsibility to be super-extra careful. Someone flashing you out doesn't give you right of way. Which is why you should never do it; give the exiting vehicle room, and leave it up to them.
OP was struck in the rear quarter, which is absolutely key. He didn't collide with the other vehicle. Their vehicle collided with his. Totally the other car's fault.
chazwind said:
For the sake of argument, this was an 'overtake' by the OP. From his description, it was perfectly valid, and he committed no offence.
That's probably a key part. Was it an overtake? Because you shouldn't overtake near a junction on either side of the road and for a proper overtake on an A-road, I would not do so... or at least not without satisfying myself that there was no risk.The road at this point is easily wide enough for two cars. If a road has two lanes, do they have to be marked accordingly?
I'm normally pretty hot on watching for cars pulling out under similar circumstances, looking through windows and using axle view to find the muppet. However in this case, I think the front of my car was genuinely alongside the gap as she started pulling out. I suspect she was more occupied with thanking the driver who had let her out than looking in front of her.
Edited by ecs0set on Sunday 24th January 12:59
ecs0set said:
chazwind said:
For the sake of argument, this was an 'overtake' by the OP. From his description, it was perfectly valid, and he committed no offence.
That's probably a key part. Was it an overtake? Because you shouldn't overtake near a junction on either side of the road and for a proper overtake on an A-road, I would not do so... or at least not without satisfying myself that there was no risk.The road at this point is easily wide enough for two cars. If a road has two lanes, do they have to be marked accordingly?
I'm normally pretty hot on watching for cars pulling out under similar circumstances, looking through windows and using axle view to find the muppet. However in this case, I think the front of my car was genuinely alongside the gap as she started pulling out. I suspect she was more occupied with thanking the driver who had let her out than looking in front of her.
Edited by ecs0set on Sunday 24th January 12:59
Similarly, the OP put himself at increased risk by doing what he did. But in his position, although I wouldn't have enjoyed it, I'd probably have slowed right down and done just the same.
And as far as fault goes under these circumstances, he was hit in the rear at a perpendicular angle - absolutely the other driver's fault.
dacouch said:
MarkwG said:
I know that road pretty well: as above, she made the manoeuvre without fully assuring herself the route was safe, so her responsibility for the accident. However, if it goes to the insurer, expect there to be some garbage thrown about.
RubbishMarkwG said:
dacouch said:
MarkwG said:
I know that road pretty well: as above, she made the manoeuvre without fully assuring herself the route was safe, so her responsibility for the accident. However, if it goes to the insurer, expect there to be some garbage thrown about.
Rubbish
dacouch said:
MarkwG said:
I know that road pretty well: as above, she made the manoeuvre without fully assuring herself the route was safe, so her responsibility for the accident. However, if it goes to the insurer, expect there to be some garbage trash thrown about.
RubbishSeveral years ago my father manged to collide with about 3 other vehicles - he used the hatched section down the centre of the road to overtake midway through a staggered junction (left then right) approaching the brow of a hill on a bend. The van he was overtaking moved right without warning, forcing him to move even further right. Another vehicle pulled out of the junction to his right without checking to their left.
My father was astounded not to be held at fault on any count - the van should have checked the right-turn filter lane was clear before moving into it, and the guy turning left should have checked the road was clear in both directions before entering the major road. Plenty of broken white lines and hatchings.
I think the OP will be fine.
My father was astounded not to be held at fault on any count - the van should have checked the right-turn filter lane was clear before moving into it, and the guy turning left should have checked the road was clear in both directions before entering the major road. Plenty of broken white lines and hatchings.
I think the OP will be fine.
What does the team think of the following scenario?
Some years ago, I was pulling out of Tesco at the junction shown HERE: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6967193,0.108021...
Heavy, crawling traffic both directions. A car in the position of the Google camera was slow to move forward when the car in front of him moved, so I edged out halfway across the road, stopped and waited for traffic from my left to have a break. The car to my right then moved forwards so there was no gap to my right. As I waited, a car driven by an old boy drove up the "middle lane" past the queuing cars and smacked into the nose of my stationary car which was sticking into that middle section. On the one hand, he was allowed to do so because the lines around it are broken, but on the other hand it is quite plainly just a continuation of the lane for traffic turning right into Tesco - see the white arrow on the road. Where was he planning on going next?
So was he in the wrong to be there or not? How much blame should I take?
(I asked a member of public if he clearly saw what happened, he said yes so I gave him to the insurance company as a witness only to find he came out with a pack of lies, about my car being moving at the time (the witness marks on the dents showed that my car had not been moving forward) and hitting the car while it was in lane one, so I had to take an insurance hit on that one.)
Some years ago, I was pulling out of Tesco at the junction shown HERE: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6967193,0.108021...
Heavy, crawling traffic both directions. A car in the position of the Google camera was slow to move forward when the car in front of him moved, so I edged out halfway across the road, stopped and waited for traffic from my left to have a break. The car to my right then moved forwards so there was no gap to my right. As I waited, a car driven by an old boy drove up the "middle lane" past the queuing cars and smacked into the nose of my stationary car which was sticking into that middle section. On the one hand, he was allowed to do so because the lines around it are broken, but on the other hand it is quite plainly just a continuation of the lane for traffic turning right into Tesco - see the white arrow on the road. Where was he planning on going next?
So was he in the wrong to be there or not? How much blame should I take?
(I asked a member of public if he clearly saw what happened, he said yes so I gave him to the insurance company as a witness only to find he came out with a pack of lies, about my car being moving at the time (the witness marks on the dents showed that my car had not been moving forward) and hitting the car while it was in lane one, so I had to take an insurance hit on that one.)
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff