Whos fault would this be?

[Jonny671]

I use this bit of road every day, its a 50mph limit and always moves about 30-40mph.

I'm the green car, and am going about 40mph as its not too busy this morning, black vehicle is a BMW.. I've just joined the A3 and there is nothing in the right lane, I go to indicate and move over but BMW comes from no-where and comes up the side, not slowly either!

If I had indicated and started moving across and the BMW did the same as it done this morning, and had gone into me would that be my fault or his fault?

[hurstg01]

So you went into lane 2 without indicating thinking it was clear, but Mr BMW was there who shot past you at an advanced rate of leptons?

blame would be 50/50 - your fault for not looking properly and his for leptonning it too much

[RobM77]

Firstly, you've drawn the black car as crossing some hatchings, which adds confusion to the matter. That aside though, I personally would go with the innocent party as being the one that indicates first, and the guilty party as the one that indicated second. Before you indicated, you are supposed to check around you for other cars, so the second guy to indicate would have seen the other's intentions to move to lane two and therefore had the option to not move with that knowledge, regardless of whether the manouvre was in the Highway Code or not.

I've seen countless near misses on motorways, many like this, almost all of which have been caused by people not indicating properly and other people not seeing indications and acting on them. For example, only yesterday someone pulled round to undertake me whilst I was changing lanes from 3 to 2, having indicated well in advance, and then had the cheek to flash me and get angry because I had changed lanes! Undertaking, althogh unexpected and against the Highway Code in most situations, I don't have an issue with, it's people who are too thick to indicate before they move, and notice other people doing so and work out what's happening next - that's what causes accidents. It's not exactly top level chess

Think about this as an analogy: you're working late and a cleaner puts a cable across a corridor at work and you trip on it and break your arm. Whose fault is that? It entirely depends on whether the cleaner popped over to your desk first to warn you about the cable. If he warned you properly, it's your fault; if he didn't warn you, then it's his fault.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 9th September 14:07

[PHmember]

hurstg01 said:

leptonning it too much

LMAO!

I HATE the use of 'leptons', but that made me PMSL.

[magnus911]

hurstg01 said:

So you went into lane 2 without indicating thinking it was clear, but Mr BMW was there who shot past you at an advanced rate of leptons?

blame would be 50/50 - your fault for not looking properly and his for leptonning it too much

I don't think the Beemer's speed is relevant. You should have seen him unless he was doing 250mph.

Also, were you pulling out to overtake something?

[twazzock]

hurstg01 said:

So you went into lane 2 without indicating thinking it was clear, but Mr BMW was there who shot past you at an advanced rate of leptons?

blame would be 50/50 - your fault for not looking properly and his for leptonning it too much

Looks like he's going into L1 from the slip, and the BMW is going straight to L2 from the slip, across the hatchings.
BMW's fault I reckon, impatient tit.

[bigandclever]

Jonny671 said:

comes from no-where

As soon as you said this I thought "100% your fault". Didn't bother reading the rest

[RobM77]

To summarise my post above, I think it depends on who indicated first.

The black car has to take some blame though, because overtaking a RHD car on a left hand bend is very dodgy, for obvious reasons.

[Jonny671]

hurstg01 said:

So you went into lane 2 without indicating thinking it was clear, but Mr BMW was there who shot past you at an advanced rate of leptons?

blame would be 50/50 - your fault for not looking properly and his for leptonning it too much

I said, 'Go to indicate and move over'.. So checked before I indicated and BMW was already passing behind me. So in the end, didn't indicate to move, stayed until traffic had passed then indicated and moved out.

RobM77 said:

Firstly, you've drawn the black car as crossing some hatchings, which adds confusion to the matter. That aside though, I personally would go with the innocent party as being the one that indicates first, and the guilty party as the one that indicated second. Before you indicated, you are supposed to check around you for other cars, so the second guy to indicate would have seen the other's intentions to move to lane two and therefore had the option to not move with that knowledge, regardless of whether the manouvre was in the Highway Code or not.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 9th September 14:07

This is correct I had just passed the hatchings and joined, BMW came across hatchings as many of this kind do, BMW/Audi/Passat kind of driver, you know..

As above, I hadn't indicated because I was checking around me before indicating.

magnus911 said:

Also, were you pulling out to overtake something?

Yes, there is always traffic slightly further on from this sliplane as 200m on or so there is a turn off for the university which is traffic light controlled and traffic builds onto the A3.

[kambites]

Both of you would be at fault, to my mind.

[Jonny671]

bigandclever said:

Jonny671 said:

comes from no-where

As soon as you said this I thought "100% your fault". Didn't bother reading the rest

Apologies, I wasn't 100% sure if it was hyphenated or not, or two seperate words.

[magnus911]

bigandclever said:

Jonny671 said:

comes from no-where

As soon as you said this I thought "100% your fault". Didn't bother reading the rest

+1. sorry

woohoo 200 posts!

[Jonny671]

kambites said:

Both of you would be at fault, to my mind.

Even though BMW crossed hatchings, was over the speed limit and drove into the back of the vehicle?

Hmm.. It always happens on this road because of the traffic and impatience.

[Jonny671]

magnus911 said:

bigandclever said:

Jonny671 said:

comes from no-where

As soon as you said this I thought "100% your fault". Didn't bother reading the rest

+1. sorry

woohoo 200 posts!

Cool, doesn't bother me chap. Move along

[10 Pence Short]

If by moving across you caused him to alter course or speed you shouldn't have done it.

[TuxRacer]

twazzock said:

BMW's fault I reckon, impatient tit.

What should he be more patient about? What would you be waiting for? They could carry on down the road for six more miles and the BMW could try and overtake only for the OP to try and do the same.

[RobM77]

Jonny671 said:

hurstg01 said:

So you went into lane 2 without indicating thinking it was clear, but Mr BMW was there who shot past you at an advanced rate of leptons?

blame would be 50/50 - your fault for not looking properly and his for leptonning it too much

I said, 'Go to indicate and move over'.. So checked before I indicated and BMW was already passing behind me. So in the end, didn't indicate to move, stayed until traffic had passed then indicated and moved out.

RobM77 said:

Firstly, you've drawn the black car as crossing some hatchings, which adds confusion to the matter. That aside though, I personally would go with the innocent party as being the one that indicates first, and the guilty party as the one that indicated second. Before you indicated, you are supposed to check around you for other cars, so the second guy to indicate would have seen the other's intentions to move to lane two and therefore had the option to not move with that knowledge, regardless of whether the manouvre was in the Highway Code or not.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 9th September 14:07

This is correct I had just passed the hatchings and joined, BMW came across hatchings as many of this kind do, BMW/Audi/Passat kind of driver, you know..

As above, I hadn't indicated because I was checking around me before indicating.

magnus911 said:

Also, were you pulling out to overtake something?

Yes, there is always traffic slightly further on from this sliplane as 200m on or so there is a turn off for the university which is traffic light controlled and traffic builds onto the A3.

Yep, that's why you didn't have an accident, because you looked before you indicated and moved.

If you had just pulled out without looking or indicating and got hit by the BMW, then I would still place some blame at your door for not looking properly. What if the BMW had been a police car or ambulance? Obviously though, some blame has to be placed with the BMW for giving confusing signals (there's no signal for "changing two lanes" - ergo if there are people about then one should really pause between lanes and signal again to show one's intentions), and for crossing hatchings. So probably 50/50 from me in that instance.

[kambites]

Jonny671 said:

kambites said:

Both of you would be at fault, to my mind.

Even though BMW crossed hatchings, was over the speed limit and drove into the back of the vehicle?

Yes. Had there been an accident, it would have been partially because the green car had pulled out without adequate warning and/or without sufficient checks that it was safe to do so. That would be poor observation and/or signaling. The driver of the black car was just clearly driving like an idiot.

However, there wasn't an accident, so presumably your checks were good enough.

Edited by kambites on Thursday 9th September 14:26

[cmackay81]

sorry but this doesn't really make sense,,,

if the beamer cut across two lanes to get to the exit as your pictures describes, then he would have been closer to hitting you as he passed you in the middle lane than when he was completely over. This would have only been the case if he was going faster than you or same speed though.
If he was going slower and moved over, then the diagram would make sense, or if he broke really hard in the right hand lane after getting there.
-in these cases he's at fault more than you

Then again, in your text you say he came past you in the right lane.
-in this case you're at fault more than him

You also say he moved into the right hand lane behind you then passed you.
-this all depends on how close to you he was when he changed lanes, and exactly the position of the cars, more most likely more your fault.

please can you explain a bit more. maybe a stage by stage description?

Edited by cmackay81 on Thursday 9th September 14:28

[Jonny671]

cmackay81 said:

sorry but this doesn't really make sense,,,

if the beamer cut across two lanes to get to the exit as your pictures describes, then he would have been closer to hitting you as he passed you in the middle lane than when he was completely over. This would have only been the case if he was going faster than you or same speed though.
If he was going slower and moved over, then the diagram would make sense, or if he broke really hard in the right hand lane after getting there.

please can you explain a bit more. maybe a stage by stage description?

So, green vehicle has just came up the slip lane with the black vehicle behind it.. Green vehicle moves onto D/C after hatchings, and BMW now moves from slip lane, across hatchings through L1 behind green vehicle, into L2 and past.

Meanwhile, green vehicle has just joined D/C, looks around, goes to indicate to move to L2 and black vehicle then comes into view through Rear mirror, Right mirror as passing in L2.