Right of way query
Discussion
cmaguire said:
On a 'dead end' roundabout (that's my terminology to describe a roundabout that could be a T-junction in other circumstances) that has a two-lane approach, anybody that thinks the left lane is appropriate for turning right is a pillock. If that is acceptable practice then we can just as easily say the right hand lane is also appropriate for turning left, which it obviously isn't .
You mean like this one, approaching from the bottomhttps://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3823688,-0.77419...
Every man and his bloody dog takes the LH lane to turn right!!!!!!!!!
TooMany2cvs said:
Cliftonite said:
OP gets rammed by a car that is in a wrong lane
Two lane roundabout.The other car is in the LH lane.
The OP is in the RH lane, trying to change into the LH lane to take the single-lane next exit.
Whether the other car should have taken the previous exit or not is academic. They didn't. The OP was aware of their presence, but changed lane anyway. "Almost stationary" is moving.
Without seeing the video, all we can go on is what the OP is telling us, which you can bet is the best available gloss...
The insurers have seen the video.
akirk said:
this discussion has been had on here before, once on a roundabout a car is allowed to sit in the left lane and circle the roundabout all day...
if you wish to exit the roundabout by crossing that lane then you need to give way to what is in that lane, how they came onto the roundabout is irrelevant...
read the highway code!
so yes, I would agree with the insurance company - it is a common misunderstanding amongst drivers
I know my Highway Code pretty well. Where does it say that you can use the left lane to turn right?if you wish to exit the roundabout by crossing that lane then you need to give way to what is in that lane, how they came onto the roundabout is irrelevant...
read the highway code!
so yes, I would agree with the insurance company - it is a common misunderstanding amongst drivers
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
Genuine question, and this was the reason for my thread - perhaps I've mis-understood something during driving training or learning the HC.
RobM77 said:
I know my Highway Code pretty well. Where does it say that you can use the left lane to turn right?
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
Even if it said you can't - which it doesn't - then that still doesn't mean you can change lane into their path... Rules 187 and 147 (points ii and iii), remember...? 187 explicitly says watch out for people doing what this guy did, and give them room.http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
BTW, official Highway Code is at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code
TooMany2cvs said:
RobM77 said:
I know my Highway Code pretty well. Where does it say that you can use the left lane to turn right?
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
Even if it said you can't - which it doesn't - then that still doesn't mean you can change lane into their path... Rules 187 and 147 (points ii and iii), remember...? 187 explicitly says watch out for people doing what this guy did, and give them room.http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
BTW, official Highway Code is at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code
RobM77 said:
akirk said:
this discussion has been had on here before, once on a roundabout a car is allowed to sit in the left lane and circle the roundabout all day...
if you wish to exit the roundabout by crossing that lane then you need to give way to what is in that lane, how they came onto the roundabout is irrelevant...
read the highway code!
so yes, I would agree with the insurance company - it is a common misunderstanding amongst drivers
I know my Highway Code pretty well. Where does it say that you can use the left lane to turn right?if you wish to exit the roundabout by crossing that lane then you need to give way to what is in that lane, how they came onto the roundabout is irrelevant...
read the highway code!
so yes, I would agree with the insurance company - it is a common misunderstanding amongst drivers
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/roundabouts.html
Genuine question, and this was the reason for my thread - perhaps I've mis-understood something during driving training or learning the HC.
people get very hung up on roundabouts and lane discipline, but there is no law to prevent someone in the left lane continually circulating - i.e. while it is advised that certain lanes are used for certain exits, they are not compulsory choices in law - which means it is totally legal for anyone to come onto a roundabout from any lane / exit from any lane / exit at any exit...
once you accept that, you realise that the way it works is a combination of two things:
- a standard approach (which wasn't in play here)
- being cautious of other drivers' movements for the times when something else happens (i.e. here)
both of these are outlined in the Highway Code - as quoted above...
So, while there may be a norm, the exception is not illegal - so the other driver is allowed to enter from the left lane and exit right - not advisable, but legal.
Therefore the question simply comes down to car positions - were you cutting across in front of him to take the exit (Insurance company question ref. who entered the roundabout first), or did he accelerate up on your inside and hit you...
had he hit you on the back of your car, then clearly you would already have been ahead and had priority (and much better to consider this about priority, not right of way) - but hitting you on the side suggests that you were cutting across his path...
so what would have been the correct option - simply to either out-accelerate the other chap, or to brake and pull in behind him...
it is frustrating because most drivers feel more comfortable when everyone drives to a simple pattern - but our laws are not that proscriptive - and for good reason - you may misunderstand the directions when joining the roundabout and get the wrong lane - you might suddenly look at the exit sign and realise that actually you need the next exit - lots of reasons... so when you are on a roundabout, part of your driving the roundabout is observing / understanding / fitting in with other drivers... even if they march to a different logic from everyone else
One of the big reasons for roundabout accidents is that drivers have their method / rules in their mind and assume that everyone else will fit in with them, so drive the roundabout ignoring everyone else - not suggesting that you were doing that here, your comments suggest otherwise, however you didn't fully anticipate what they would do, and the HC does expect you to take into account other drivers' movements, even when not logical!Thank you. In answer to your question, I forced a merge, and given that I was in front, I thought it made the most sense if I stayed in front. I didn't accelerate to achieve this, we both just gently merged onto the exit, slowing as we went. It was only after I was almost stationary behind the queue of cars on the exit road that he changed his mind and barged through to be in front. It was without doubt a separate move and not linked to the merge. I was still moving at a crawl purely because I could see the queue was about to move, so rather than faff about with the handbrake, I selected first on a roll and prepared to drive off. At the moment of impact I was crawling and almost stationary, whereas he was accelerating forwards past me.
RobM77 said:
Thank you. In answer to your question, I forced a merge, and given that I was in front, I thought it made the most sense if I stayed in front. I didn't accelerate to achieve this, we both just gently merged onto the exit, slowing as we went. It was only after I was almost stationary behind the queue of cars on the exit road that he changed his mind and barged through to be in front. It was without doubt a separate move and not linked to the merge. I was still moving at a crawl purely because I could see the queue was about to move, so rather than faff about with the handbrake, I selected first on a roll and prepared to drive off. At the moment of impact I was crawling and almost stationary, whereas he was accelerating forwards past me.
Fair points, but he still had initial priority as you were crossing his lane - to be able to 'force a merge' you need his permission as such and you clearly hadn't established that (at least not in his mind)...and this is not a zip-merging that is for when two lanes going forwards come down to one lane - not when two lanes have an exit to the left - think of my dual carriageway description above - would you zip-merge into a left turn, of course not - and the car in the left lane has the priority if they choose to continue in their lane - like it or not you have to give way... 'forcing a merge' is just shorthand for 'I cut across his lane and he drove into me'
the issue here starts with the belief that certain lanes onto a roundabout will always exit in certain directions... once you accept that it is only legally a guide and once on the roundabout you need to think in terms of changing lanes exactly as you would on a dual carriageway or motorway, then it makes sense that from the right-hand lane you can't just drive across in front of a car in the left lane to take an exit - they will either be taking that exit, or continuing - in either case they have priority, not you...
akirk said:
RobM77 said:
Thank you. In answer to your question, I forced a merge, and given that I was in front, I thought it made the most sense if I stayed in front. I didn't accelerate to achieve this, we both just gently merged onto the exit, slowing as we went. It was only after I was almost stationary behind the queue of cars on the exit road that he changed his mind and barged through to be in front. It was without doubt a separate move and not linked to the merge. I was still moving at a crawl purely because I could see the queue was about to move, so rather than faff about with the handbrake, I selected first on a roll and prepared to drive off. At the moment of impact I was crawling and almost stationary, whereas he was accelerating forwards past me.
Fair points, but he still had initial priority as you were crossing his lane - to be able to 'force a merge' you need his permission as such and you clearly hadn't established that (at least not in his mind)...and this is not a zip-merging that is for when two lanes going forwards come down to one lane - not when two lanes have an exit to the left - think of my dual carriageway description above - would you zip-merge into a left turn, of course not - and the car in the left lane has the priority if they choose to continue in their lane - like it or not you have to give way... 'forcing a merge' is just shorthand for 'I cut across his lane and he drove into me'
the issue here starts with the belief that certain lanes onto a roundabout will always exit in certain directions... once you accept that it is only legally a guide and once on the roundabout you need to think in terms of changing lanes exactly as you would on a dual carriageway or motorway, then it makes sense that from the right-hand lane you can't just drive across in front of a car in the left lane to take an exit - they will either be taking that exit, or continuing - in either case they have priority, not you...
Toltec said:
akirk said:
RobM77 said:
Thank you. In answer to your question, I forced a merge, and given that I was in front, I thought it made the most sense if I stayed in front. I didn't accelerate to achieve this, we both just gently merged onto the exit, slowing as we went. It was only after I was almost stationary behind the queue of cars on the exit road that he changed his mind and barged through to be in front. It was without doubt a separate move and not linked to the merge. I was still moving at a crawl purely because I could see the queue was about to move, so rather than faff about with the handbrake, I selected first on a roll and prepared to drive off. At the moment of impact I was crawling and almost stationary, whereas he was accelerating forwards past me.
Fair points, but he still had initial priority as you were crossing his lane - to be able to 'force a merge' you need his permission as such and you clearly hadn't established that (at least not in his mind)...and this is not a zip-merging that is for when two lanes going forwards come down to one lane - not when two lanes have an exit to the left - think of my dual carriageway description above - would you zip-merge into a left turn, of course not - and the car in the left lane has the priority if they choose to continue in their lane - like it or not you have to give way... 'forcing a merge' is just shorthand for 'I cut across his lane and he drove into me'
the issue here starts with the belief that certain lanes onto a roundabout will always exit in certain directions... once you accept that it is only legally a guide and once on the roundabout you need to think in terms of changing lanes exactly as you would on a dual carriageway or motorway, then it makes sense that from the right-hand lane you can't just drive across in front of a car in the left lane to take an exit - they will either be taking that exit, or continuing - in either case they have priority, not you...
akirk said:
Toltec said:
akirk said:
RobM77 said:
Thank you. In answer to your question, I forced a merge, and given that I was in front, I thought it made the most sense if I stayed in front. I didn't accelerate to achieve this, we both just gently merged onto the exit, slowing as we went. It was only after I was almost stationary behind the queue of cars on the exit road that he changed his mind and barged through to be in front. It was without doubt a separate move and not linked to the merge. I was still moving at a crawl purely because I could see the queue was about to move, so rather than faff about with the handbrake, I selected first on a roll and prepared to drive off. At the moment of impact I was crawling and almost stationary, whereas he was accelerating forwards past me.
Fair points, but he still had initial priority as you were crossing his lane - to be able to 'force a merge' you need his permission as such and you clearly hadn't established that (at least not in his mind)...and this is not a zip-merging that is for when two lanes going forwards come down to one lane - not when two lanes have an exit to the left - think of my dual carriageway description above - would you zip-merge into a left turn, of course not - and the car in the left lane has the priority if they choose to continue in their lane - like it or not you have to give way... 'forcing a merge' is just shorthand for 'I cut across his lane and he drove into me'
the issue here starts with the belief that certain lanes onto a roundabout will always exit in certain directions... once you accept that it is only legally a guide and once on the roundabout you need to think in terms of changing lanes exactly as you would on a dual carriageway or motorway, then it makes sense that from the right-hand lane you can't just drive across in front of a car in the left lane to take an exit - they will either be taking that exit, or continuing - in either case they have priority, not you...
1. Other driver used what most competent drivers would consider to be the wrong lane.
2. RobM77 changed lanes when he should have given way instead.
3. Other driver decided to accelerate into a closing gap, caused an collision and fled the scene.
Neither covered themselves in glory, but s
t happens.Maybe Rob should take the hit, but insist the police follow up on a charge of leaving the scene of an accident.
Toltec said:
The OP was not expecting the other driver to use the wrong lane then be a dick about it so by the same logic it isn't his fault either. Given there was a car on his right with only one exit to the right it would be expected of any averagely competent driver to realise this was the intent even without an indicator to reinforce it. Deliberate would just make the difference between careless and dangerous driving.
1. Other driver used what most competent drivers would consider to be the wrong lane.
2. RobM77 changed lanes when he should have given way instead.
3. Other driver decided to accelerate into a closing gap, caused an collision and fled the scene.
Neither covered themselves in glory, but st happens.
Maybe Rob should take the hit, but insist the police follow up on a charge of leaving the scene of an accident.
except that the HC says that you should allow for others to do what you don't expect on a roundabout, plus you give way when crossing someone else's lane...1. Other driver used what most competent drivers would consider to be the wrong lane.
2. RobM77 changed lanes when he should have given way instead.
3. Other driver decided to accelerate into a closing gap, caused an collision and fled the scene.
Neither covered themselves in glory, but s
t happens.Maybe Rob should take the hit, but insist the police follow up on a charge of leaving the scene of an accident.
on the leaving an accident - agree
silverfoxcc said:
cmaguire said:
On a 'dead end' roundabout (that's my terminology to describe a roundabout that could be a T-junction in other circumstances) that has a two-lane approach, anybody that thinks the left lane is appropriate for turning right is a pillock. If that is acceptable practice then we can just as easily say the right hand lane is also appropriate for turning left, which it obviously isn't .
You mean like this one, approaching from the bottomhttps://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.3823688,-0.77419...
Every man and his bloody dog takes the LH lane to turn right!!!!!!!!!
From the sound of the OP, it’s quite possible the other car decided to try and undertake the op, and misjudged things. op, it would really help people here if you uploaded the footage. Not illegal, and we’re interested.
On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes ts up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...
On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes t
s up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...Solocle said:
From the sound of the OP, it’s quite possible the other car decided to try and undertake the op, and misjudged things. op, it would really help people here if you uploaded the footage. Not illegal, and we’re interested.
On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes ts up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...
It is not undertaking for the other car to be in its lane and decide to turn left - all the onus is on the OP to ensure that he does his move without a collision - he was the one crossing the other driver's lane... If the OP out accelerates the other driver around the roundabout (which he must to have come on second and be attempting to leave first) then he basically did an overtake which went wrong...On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes t
s up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...The OP's question was based on was the other driver in the wrong because having been in the left lane he should have turned left - and the B&W answer is no - the other driver is allowed to continue in the left lane to the right-hand turning if they wish... every other part of the various car moves was down to the OP
akirk said:
Solocle said:
From the sound of the OP, it’s quite possible the other car decided to try and undertake the op, and misjudged things. op, it would really help people here if you uploaded the footage. Not illegal, and we’re interested.
On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes ts up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...
It is not undertaking for the other car to be in its lane and decide to turn left - all the onus is on the OP to ensure that he does his move without a collision - he was the one crossing the other driver's lane... If the OP out accelerates the other driver around the roundabout (which he must to have come on second and be attempting to leave first) then he basically did an overtake which went wrong...On the illegal point, read the highway code folks. Just because a manoeuvre isn’t illegal doesn’t make you blameless iff it goes t
s up. Undertaking isn’t illegal. It still can be taken into account as a cause of an accident. After all, accidents aren’t illegal...The OP's question was based on was the other driver in the wrong because having been in the left lane he should have turned left - and the B&W answer is no - the other driver is allowed to continue in the left lane to the right-hand turning if they wish... every other part of the various car moves was down to the OP
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff