Discussion
If one is waiting to cross a busy A-road from one minor road to another, crossroads affair, and the car approaching from the right is indicating left as if he is going to turn into the road you are waiting in, and you pull out - if it turns out that he had not intention of turning and there was a collision, who is at fault?
Him for spurious indicating, or crosser for making assumptions based on spurious indicating?
Him for spurious indicating, or crosser for making assumptions based on spurious indicating?
The Crack Fox said:
Insurer would probably blame the 'puller out' I think.
They would increase the premium of the puller out and probable increase the premiums of 6 innocent passers by and a couple of people that have viewed this thread, who's names they pulled out of a black bag at random, just to be on the safe side. 
Almost certainly, that doesn't mean the other driver wasn't partly at fault, though. 
Bushi said:
Second bullet of 104 very appropriate. Was a good half a mile from anywhere he could previously have turned left, so bloody ineptitude.thismonkeyhere said:
Second bullet of 104 very appropriate. Was a good half a mile from anywhere he could previously have turned left, so bloody ineptitude.
I think its just being polite, would be poor form to write: "Do not risk your safety and expensive belongs on the possible indications of others, some road users are retarded."
Bushi said:
I think its just being polite, would be poor form to write:
"Do not risk your safety and expensive belongs on the possible indications of others, some road users are retarded."
Have you honestly never accidentally left an indicator on for long enough to approach another junction? I know I have. "Do not risk your safety and expensive belongs on the possible indications of others, some road users are retarded."
kambites said:
Have you honestly never accidentally left an indicator on for long enough to approach another junction?
Not quite sure how that is meant to be worded? "for long enough to approach a junction?"
That's exactly how you are meant to use an indicator.
Edit: Sorry, I see what you are saying, yes, I have accidentally done quite a few retarded things whilst driving, and always expect others to do similar.
Edited by Bushi on Wednesday 4th September 10:22
Dear tmh,
somewhere in the dim and distant (and IIRC) I've got the idea that you need at least two criteria before the signaller can be held to be at fault e.g. signalling and slowing, changes mind, bang.
In many cases and when one's been driving a few years the spidey sense subconciously integrates the criteria and you think "hang on, this person isn't actually turning",
regards,
Jet
somewhere in the dim and distant (and IIRC) I've got the idea that you need at least two criteria before the signaller can be held to be at fault e.g. signalling and slowing, changes mind, bang.
In many cases and when one's been driving a few years the spidey sense subconciously integrates the criteria and you think "hang on, this person isn't actually turning",
regards,
Jet
Bushi said:
kambites said:
Have you honestly never accidentally left an indicator on for long enough to approach another junction?
Not quite sure how that is meant to be worded? "for long enough to approach a junction?"
That's exactly how you are meant to use an indicator.
Edit: Sorry, I see what you are saying, yes, I have accidentally done quite a few retarded things whilst driving, and always expect others to do similar.
thismonkeyhere said:
If one is waiting to cross a busy A-road from one minor road to another, crossroads affair, and the car approaching from the right is indicating left as if he is going to turn into the road you are waiting in, and you pull out - if it turns out that he had not intention of turning and there was a collision, who is at fault?
Him for spurious indicating, or crosser for making assumptions based on spurious indicating?
The purpose who pulled out. If you are on a GIVE WAY, then that's what you do. And if you pulled out in front of a car (indicating or not), it is completely your fault.Him for spurious indicating, or crosser for making assumptions based on spurious indicating?
Indicate = " To suggest or demonstrate the necessity, expedience, or advisability of"
Indicating is precisely that, it is not a certainty of turning.
jet_noise said:
Dear tmh,
somewhere in the dim and distant (and IIRC) I've got the idea that you need at least two criteria before the signaller can be held to be at fault e.g. signalling and slowing, changes mind, bang.
In many cases and when one's been driving a few years the spidey sense subconciously integrates the criteria and you think "hang on, this person isn't actually turning",
regards,
Jet
Totally agree. Normally I'm pertty cautious and quite good at judging what the intentions of the other car are. I really thought the indicating car was slowing as well, but I guess I just fsomewhere in the dim and distant (and IIRC) I've got the idea that you need at least two criteria before the signaller can be held to be at fault e.g. signalling and slowing, changes mind, bang.
In many cases and when one's been driving a few years the spidey sense subconciously integrates the criteria and you think "hang on, this person isn't actually turning",
regards,
Jet
ked this one up!thismonkeyhere said:
Totally agree. Normally I'm pretty cautious and quite good at judging what the intentions of the other car are. I really thought the indicating car was slowing as well, but I guess I just fked this one up!
I like your attitude but the best case scenario on this one for the puller-out is split liability; even if there is a duty owed (to give correct signals) and a breach of that duty (which I think is arguable) it doesn't change the fact that the indicator is not binding and the puller-out should only make the manoeuvre when safe to do so. Had the driver cancelled his signal (quite properly) and carried on, the accident would still have occurred. The majority of the blame (even if not 100%) will always lie with the driver pulling out in this scenario.ked this one up!Unless there is personal injury or a substantial excess, there's no benefit to the driver pulling out in fighting this one as insurance will cover it.
A 'finger in the air' suggests 80:20 in favour of the signaller so if you fought, you might get £100 of a £500 excess back.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff