How would blame be split?

[Dr Jekyll]

Heading south on the M1 near Luton, in a section where the hard shoulder is sometimes open for traffic but wasn't at that time. Then the hard shoulder came to an end and was replaced by a new inside lane. I was in lane 1, naturally wanted to move left as my lane became lane 2, but saw a van coming down the hard shoulder a good 20MPH faster than me. If I hadn't checked my mirrors the van could quite possibly have hit me in the first few yards of the new lane, and the van driver would no doubt have complained that I'd pulled in front of him.

Obviously it would have been mainly the van drivers fault, but how much blame would I have had for not checking my mirrors?

[Retroman]

Probably both at fault.

The van shouldn't be driving there so that would be considered negligent, as would changing lanes without checking it's clear to do so.

[Toltec]

With respect, you did look after all, you were the one changing lanes so it is mainly up to you to make sure it is safe to do so irrespective of the other driver being an impatient idiot.

To put it another way one driver's mistake does not make another's OK.

[KrazyIvan]

Toltec said:

To put it another way one driver's mistake does not make another's OK.

This

At best you'd get 50/50

The hard shoulder is part of the carriageway so should be treated as any other lane, IE assume that there is another vehicle there unless you've checked to make sure its clear. Just because the Van drive went from the HS to the new lane 1 does not absolve another drive of his responsibility.

[blueg33]

If the van had previously stopped on the HS, he should accelerate to the speed of the traffic before leaving the HS, maybe he was doing this?

I would say 100% ops fault, if you are changing lanes its your responsibility to make sure its safe to do so. There are all sorts of circumstances when its legitimate for other vehicles to use the HS

[Dr Jekyll]

blueg33 said:

If the van had previously stopped on the HS, he should accelerate to the speed of the traffic before leaving the HS, maybe he was doing this?

No, he was driving along the hard shoulder at about 80 (temporary but compulsory 60 limit) passing lane 1 traffic.

blueg33 said:

I would say 100% ops fault, if you are changing lanes its your responsibility to make sure its safe to do so. There are all sorts of circumstances when its legitimate for other vehicles to use the HS

I don't think exceeding the speed limit along a hard shoulder then passing someone on the nearside when it was obvious they were likely to change lanes to the left would have been regarded as legitimate if I'd done it.

[anonymous-user]

Dr Jekyll said:

I don't think exceeding the speed limit along a hard shoulder then passing someone on the nearside when it was obvious they were likely to change lanes to the left would have been regarded as legitimate if I'd done it.

It's "one of those"

Could go 50/50 at best - possible entirely against the lane changer.

[blueg33]

Regardless of the speed limit, I would still expect the Op to be at fault, changing lanes when its not safe to do so.

In terms of speed of the van, without other witnesses or cctv evidence it would be your word against his on the speeding.

If you observation is so poor that you move into its path and a collision occurs, it could possibly be argued that your observation was too poor to see a vehicle on the hard shoulder that was accelerating to join the carriageway

Basically, I wouldn't want to hang my defence for being crap at observation on the fact that someone else may have been speeding

[Pica-Pica]

Toltec said:

With respect, you did look after all, you were the one changing lanes so it is mainly up to you to make sure it is safe to do so irrespective of the other driver being an impatient idiot.

To put it another way one driver's mistake does not make another's OK.

Ditto

[Joeguard1990]

He is in the wrong for speeding and undertaking, and can be punished separately for that if caught, but if you change lanes and hit him, that's 100% your fault for not checking, regardless of him being an idiot.

MSM - Mirror, Signal & Manouver - every time.

[Steve57]

As above, yes Mr van driver was wrong for doing it, BUT if you pulled across in front of him (or an emergency vehicle? ) it would have been your fault. (IMHO)

[TwigtheWonderkid]

100% your fault I reckon. I bit like hitting an illegally parked car. Yes, he shouldn't have been there, but the punishment for that should be a fine, not being hit by someone not looking where they are going.

[speedking31]

Get similar all the time in bus lanes. Numpties who don't realise that the Bus Lane is not operational and then swing across where the bus lane ends without checking whether there are vehicles (legitimately) using it.

[anonymous-user]

The van is "established" in his lane (regardless of anything else he may or may not be doing). You change lanes into his path..... 100% your fault. I had a similar insurance incident and was rightly able to claim establishment to obtain full recovery of loss.

[Dr Jekyll]

Andy-IM said:

The van is "established" in his lane (regardless of anything else he may or may not be doing). You change lanes into his path..... 100% your fault. I had a similar insurance incident and was rightly able to claim establishment to obtain full recovery of loss.

So if I go steaming down a hard shoulder, passing traffic on the nearside, and continue doing so even when road markings clearly indicate that lane 1 traffic is to pull into the left, any collision isn't my fault?

[anonymous-user]

Dr Jekyll said:

Andy-IM said:

The van is "established" in his lane (regardless of anything else he may or may not be doing). You change lanes into his path..... 100% your fault. I had a similar insurance incident and was rightly able to claim establishment to obtain full recovery of loss.

So if I go steaming down a hard shoulder, passing traffic on the nearside, and continue doing so even when road markings clearly indicate that lane 1 traffic is to pull into the left, any collision isn't my fault?

Sorry, I assumed you were requesting opinions, now I see that you were only requesting validation of YOUR opinion. My fault entirely!

[blueg33]

Dr Jekyll said:

Andy-IM said:

The van is "established" in his lane (regardless of anything else he may or may not be doing). You change lanes into his path..... 100% your fault. I had a similar insurance incident and was rightly able to claim establishment to obtain full recovery of loss.

So if I go steaming down a hard shoulder, passing traffic on the nearside, and continue doing so even when road markings clearly indicate that lane 1 traffic is to pull into the left, any collision isn't my fault?

Just by doing that you haven't caused a collision. If you do it and run into a stationary vehicle then it is your fault. If another vehicle pulls into your path without looking then its their fault.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Dr Jekyll said:

So if I go steaming down a hard shoulder, passing traffic on the nearside, and continue doing so even when road markings clearly indicate that lane 1 traffic is to pull into the left, any collision isn't my fault?

If that collision occurs because someone from lane 1 pulls into your lane without checking, then yes.

Along with hundreds of other scenarios where doing the wrong thing doesn't make you responsible for the accident.

"So if I go steaming down the high street, blind drunk, and continue doing so even though I know I shouldn't be driving, and I stop at the red light and get hit up the back, the collision isn't my fault?" Errr, that's correct.

[Dr Jekyll]

Andy-IM said:

Dr Jekyll said:

Andy-IM said:

The van is "established" in his lane (regardless of anything else he may or may not be doing). You change lanes into his path..... 100% your fault. I had a similar insurance incident and was rightly able to claim establishment to obtain full recovery of loss.

So if I go steaming down a hard shoulder, passing traffic on the nearside, and continue doing so even when road markings clearly indicate that lane 1 traffic is to pull into the left, any collision isn't my fault?

Sorry, I assumed you were requesting opinions, now I see that you were only requesting validation of YOUR opinion. My fault entirely!

My opinion was that IF there had been a collision, and there wasn't, some blame would attach to both sides, I was asking for opinions on the split.

This doesn't mean I have to agree with those who say it would have been entirely my fault.

[CYMR0]

The question is, as ever, who owes a duty to whom.

Do you have a duty to take reasonable care when driving? Yes. Does this "reasonable care" include driving down the hard shoulder 20 mph faster than surorunding traffic when their lane is coming to an end? I would say no - so there is a breach of duty by the hard shoudler driver.

Does it incldue checking your mirrors before merging/changing lanes? Yes, assuming there is a lane change at least and the hard shoulder doesn't just end abruptly. Would failure to look and spot the hazard be a breach of duty? Yes.

Whose is more serious? There's room for serious disagreement here but I'd say it starts 50:50 and then extends to take into consideration what each driver could actually see and then gets pulled out for that. To the individual driver, the apportionment makes little difference, except in terms of the proportion of their excess and personal injury damages they get to keep. Either way, they have a fault claim against them.