Crash Liability

[Fatman2]

Hi all

I had a minor knock the other day and while the insurance company takes aeons to sort it all out, I thought I'd get some opinions regarding liability.

Does anyone know if the lanes marked out on road signs are suggestions only or do they stipulate the rules of the road ?

I was basically going round a roundabout in the inside lane and wanting to take the 2nd exit. The chap that hit me was in the middle lane and wanted the 1st exit (1st exit at 12 o'clock and 2nd at 2 o'clock). As he attempted to take the 1st exit he collided with my rear bumper and alloy causing a fair amount of damage. Having said that we were only going about 15-20mph so fortunately no major worries.

Now before everyone starts raising their eyebrows at someone taking the 2nd exit on the inside lane the sign on approach to the roundabout is clearly marked as follows:

Inside lane: 1st and 2nd exit only.
Middle lane: 2nd exit only.
Outside lane: 3rd exit only.

I'm pretty sure he was in the wrong because a) he was in the middle lane trying to cut across the inside lane, b) 90% of my car was in front of him when he hit my rear bumper.

However I'm not 100% if road sign are the law or just an indication of direction. I understand that all other road signs are the law but don't know about directional signs.

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

[Andrew_M]

Lets see the roundabout...

[944fan]

IIRC the highway code says that you should use the left had lane for turns less than 12 O'clock UNLESS the road markings dictate otherwise. Given that you were in the correct lane and he wasn't he was not following the highway code and so he is negligent and thus bears the liability.

Whether his insurance company will see it this way is another matter!

[Fatman2]

Andrew_M said:

Lets see the roundabout...

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...

Here you go. Street view is better. The road sign is on the left showing all three lanes.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...

To be fair the roadworks make the roundabout a nightmare but that's no excuse (in my book) to cut across the inside lane. Hopefully the insurance will see it this way.

Cheers.

Edited by Fatman2 on Friday 21st May 16:20

[Andrew_M]

So you went right in the left lane toward the A421 and the chap that hit you was in lane 2 heading for exit 1 Crawly [I think]? If this is the case, they guy is in the wrong. I have had a similar accident and got 100% back. Fight until the death if I have understood it correctly. Remember stick to the facts and NOTHING more. i.e I was in lane one and adhered to the highway code as stated in the above post....

p.s it took over 12 months to sort out the insurance, in the interim period I had to pay as though I had a claim against me and lost no claims. I did get it all back but it was a fight!

Edited by Andrew_M on Friday 21st May 16:31

[Mr AJ]

He changed lanes when it wasn't clear, Surely that puts him at fault regardless of what the signs say. If his exit wasn't clear, he should of gone around the roundabout again.


You get it quite a lot with a roundabout near me.

Lane 1 serves Exits 1,2 and 3, Lane 2 Serves Exits 3,4,5 Routinely get people entering on Lane 2 and then trying to take Exit 2 Cutting across the front of whoever may be in that lane at the time.

Edited by Mr AJ on Friday 21st May 16:30

[vonhosen]

Roundabout collisions are a nightmare & insurance companies invariably go for joint liability.

Avoid.

[10 Pence Short]

vonhosen said:

Roundabout collisions are a nightmare & insurance companies invariably go for joint liability.

Avoid.

Random Driver said:

Well, I was going to have an accident on a roundabout, but then I read somewhere on the internet about it being an insurance nightmare, so I went for the central reservation of the M55 instead.

[Fatman2]

Andrew_M said:

So you went right in the left lane toward the A421 and the chap that hit you was in lane 2 heading for exit 1 Crawly (I think)? If this is the case, they guy is in the wrong. I have had a similar accident and got 100% back. Fight until the death if I have understood it correctly. Remember stick to the facts and NOTHING more. i.e I was in lane one and adhered to the highway code as stated in the above post....

You're spot on with the interpretation. That's exactly how it happened.

I think the lady in the call centre thought I was full of BS when I tried to tell her that the inside lane was supposed to go right round the roundabout. I guess under normal circumstances the inside lane is only for all exits up to 12 o'clock so she did lots of "uhuh, hmmm-hmmm, yeaaah I see".

Many thanks for the advice though. Hopefully it will be clear cut but I'll fight it out if need be.

Cheers.

Edited by Fatman2 on Friday 21st May 16:39

Edited by Fatman2 on Friday 21st May 16:40

[The Hitman]

Can you tell me the area of damage on the Third Party's car?

Also, were there any witnesses that came forward? Doesn't count passengers in either car as they are seen as biased.

It depends what he says to his insurance. If the damage is on his front N/S and there are no independant witnesses then he could claim that you changed lanes and cut him up instead.

This is where taking photos comes in handy.

[Fatman2]

10 Pence Short said:

vonhosen said:

Roundabout collisions are a nightmare & insurance companies invariably go for joint liability.

Avoid.

Random Driver said:

Well, I was going to have an accident on a roundabout, but then I read somewhere on the internet about it being an insurance nightmare, so I went for the central reservation of the M55 instead.

Was just thinking the same thing.

Sadly I did try to avoid but the other chap put paid to that idea

[Atomic Gibbon]

Fatman2 said:

Andrew_M said:

Lets see the roundabout...

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...

Edited by Fatman2 on Friday 21st May 16:20

Sorry Fatman, you're in the wrong here. According to google street view, you went round the roundabout backwards, then accross the middle, before exiting at exit 2. I'm sure THAT isn't in the highway code =)

[Fatman2]

The Hitman said:

Can you tell me the area of damage on the Third Party's car?

Also, were there any witnesses that came forward? Doesn't count passengers in either car as they are seen as biased.

It depends what he says to his insurance. If the damage is on his front N/S and there are no independant witnesses then he could claim that you changed lanes and cut him up instead.

This is where taking photos comes in handy.

The damage was on my driver side rear bumper and his passenger side front bumper.

Sadly it was rush hour so no one was fussed about stopping I do have photos but as it was rush hour we both thought it sensible not to stand in the middle of the roundabout taking snaps. Rush hour does funny things to people and folks don't seem to give a toss, so don't even slow down

You have a point though. Living in Milton Keynes I'm white hot on lane discipline (you need to be here) but that's not sufficient evidence at all. The damage on his car, relative to mine shows that he clearly hit me at an angle but with his word against mine, an assessor could view it either as me cutting him up or him hitting me.

I think the only clear thing I have is that he was in the middle lane trying to cut across and that I was hit from behind.

[Andrew_M]

Here is the evidence

The B road [marked in white], is where 3rd party was heading, but in lane 2.

Fatman was heading down the A??? in lane 1 [the correct lane]

3rd party crossed lane 1 heading for the 1st exit and swiped fatman.

[10 Pence Short]

Fatman2 said:

I think the only clear thing I have is that he was in the middle lane trying to cut across and that I was hit from behind.

The difficulty is that if he hit you fromm behind, he is going to have a logical case to say he could see you in front of him, but you might not have seen him in your mirrors.

Now, is it more likely that he saw you and chose to drive into you regardless, or is it more likely you realised late you were in the wrong lane, manoevered without using your mirrors and collided with a vehicle alongside you?

Which story sounds more convincing?

[Fatman2]

10 Pence Short said:

Fatman2 said:

I think the only clear thing I have is that he was in the middle lane trying to cut across and that I was hit from behind.

The difficulty is that if he hit you fromm behind, he is going to have a logical case to say he could see you in front of him, but you might not have seen him in your mirrors.

Now, is it more likely that he saw you and chose to drive into you regardless, or is it more likely you realised late you were in the wrong lane, manoevered without using your mirrors and collided with a vehicle alongside you?

Which story sounds more convincing?

But I wasn't in the wrong lane The inside and middle lanes are both for the A421.

In my report I stated that I could see him in my wing mirror signaling left but what could I do when he was behind me ? I entered the roundabout slightly before him so was in a more advanced position.

In any case people signal left every day as the A421 merges into a single after the exit so most people signal left to indicate that they're filtering in. It's just that he wasn't filtering in at all.

[vonhosen]

Fatman2 said:

10 Pence Short said:

vonhosen said:

Roundabout collisions are a nightmare & insurance companies invariably go for joint liability.

Avoid.

Random Driver said:

Well, I was going to have an accident on a roundabout, but then I read somewhere on the internet about it being an insurance nightmare, so I went for the central reservation of the M55 instead.

Was just thinking the same thing.

Sadly I did try to avoid but the other chap put paid to that idea

But you didn't avoid it & as many have found to their cost their insurance company will take the view they could/should have done more than they did & as a result they aren't willing to fight in court for a 100% liability against the other party.

[Muzzer]

OP - I'm in a very similar position.

It must be something catching as a woman caved in my rear quarter on a roundabout in MK last week.

In my case, I was travelling on a dual carriageway, in L2 going straight on onto another DC.

She claims she thought I was going right and came into my lane, hitting my NSR quarter.

But I'm faced with the same difficulty regarding liability. I have no witnesses and she could just as easily claim that I cut across lanes leaving her nowhere to go

My only hope is that she either a) tells the truth or b) the photos I took at the scene prove she hit me rather than the other way round.

It all depends what the 3rd party tells the insurance company. If he bare-faced lies, you have little recourse as it's your word against his.

[vonhosen]

Fatman2 said:

But I wasn't in the wrong lane The inside and middle lanes are both for the A421.

In my report I stated that I could see him in my wing mirror signaling left but what could I do when he was behind me ? I entered the roundabout slightly before him so was in a more advanced position.

You saw the potential problem & could have taken the first exit to avoid the collision, equally he should have seen the problem & could gone around the roundabout & tried to get it next time.

I'd personally rather take a junction I initially didn't want to, or circumnavigate the roundabout, if it meant I could avoid a collision.

[MacW]

Muzzer said:

It must be something catching as a woman caved in my rear quarter on a roundabout in MK last week.

A roundabout.. in Milton Keynes?

You jest surely...