Who'd be at fault here

[john_p]

Cars #1 and #2 on a motorway, both in lane 1 doing 80 following each other

They close on a car in lane 1 doing 70

Car #1 takes their time to start their manoeuvre, car #2 at the back keeps a bit more momentum, gets impatient and starts to overtake, as car #1 starts to move over (indicating). Only sharp braking from #2 prevents an accident.

Is it #2 for overtaking badly or #1 for not looking out and "should have just overtaken quicker" ?

[deveng]

I'd say whoever is in the lane first has right of way in that lane. Gets a bit trickier though if both drivers are indicating as car 2 moves out because he can clearly see car 1 was trying to move out.

Which were you? car 1 or car 2?

Was the other car an Audi.


Scrap that, audi's don't use the inside lane, we stick to the outside lane.

[PaulB81]

Its a bit of both. Car 2 should have anticipated that Car 1 was about to overtake given that he was gaining on the other car. Car 1 should have started indicating earlier.

[Wocka]

did car 2 overtake someone indicating right? pisses me right off that does.

[Pferdestarke]

Car number 2 should anticipate that the first following car is going to pull out and therefore should hang back awaiting the inevitable.

[deveng]

Wocka said:

did car 2 overtake someone indicating right? pisses me right off that does.

and there in lies the issue, the OP didn't say anything about who indicated first, so its impossible to say.

[Wocka]

deveng said:

and there in lies the issue, the OP didn't say anything about who indicated first, so its impossible to say.

good point, well made.

[Stuey145]

Wocka said:

did car 2 overtake someone indicating right? pisses me right off that does.

on a motorway? Why is that an issue?

I'd say car 2 should have anticipated that car 1 was also going to pull into lane two and either allowed sufficient space or moved to lane 3

car 1 shouldn't have pulled into the path of lane two

Both at fault but if there had been a collision it would have been 90% car one for pulling into lane two

[goldblum]

Car 1 should have used their mirrors and seen car 2 pull out.Car 1 at fault.

The sensible thing would be for Car 2 to wait for Car 1 to overtake.Question is though how long do you wait? 20 secs? a minute?

[john_p]

Say #1 was indicating before #2 pulled out (but obviously indicating doesn't give you precedence..)

[davepoth]

Car 2 was in the wrong - there's a reason there are three lanes.

[deveng]

davepoth said:

Car 2 was in the wrong - there's a reason there are three lanes.

You're not required to move out the way of cars who are indicating out, who said lane 3 was clear? Who said there were 3 lanes?

[deveng]

Wocka said:

deveng said:

and there in lies the issue, the OP didn't say anything about who indicated first, so its impossible to say.

good point, well made.

mercy buckets

[Wocka]

john_p said:

indicating doesn't give you precedence

No but it shows intent, meaning he's checked mirros, blindspot, singaled and is now starting his maneuver. Driving alongside a car indicating right is asking for trouble, right of way or not. Moving out into lane 3 would have prevented a near miss.

[goldblum]

john_p said:

Say #1 was indicating before #2 pulled out (but obviously indicating doesn't give you precedence..)

If you overtake ANY car that's already indicating don't expect much sympathy when/if things go pear shaped.