Liability in roundabout crash

JumpShivers · 05-05-2015 10:58pm #1

On a roundabout that my boyfriend uses everyday on the way to work, the vast majority of drivers are taking the first exit off the roundabout and not indicating at all as seen in the attached gif meaning that drivers on the adjoining lane have to stop unnecessarily, because they think that the driver who is not indicating will be crossing their paths and taking the exit straight ahead.

See gif: http://goo.gl/NxALrf

This leads to a situation where people who genuinely ARE going straight ahead (and will consequently will not be indicating upon entering the roundabout) have people pulling out impatiently on front of them because they are expecting him to be taking the first exit and not indicating like the majority of drivers.

My boyfriend's car is orange on this one and the other cars are red.

see gif: http://goo.gl/2XRk5C

BTW, the cars who take the first exit without indicating are going onto a relief bypass road, so the majority of traffic go on it. Very few cars actually go straight ahead like my boyfriend does, which adds to people pulling out presumptuously on front of him.

If my boyfriend were to hit someone in the aforementioned circumstances because of someone suddenly pulling out on front of him, would be be liable for damages?

Is it time to get a dash cam?

Stheno · 05-05-2015 11:02pm

Technically he should be indicating at the halfway point between the two exits to signal his intention but herd traffic entering a roundabout has to give way to traffic in a roundabout

MarkAnthony · 05-05-2015 11:02pm

Yes get a dash cam.

However it's patently obvious the person on the roundabout has right of way. Never rely on indication, clue is in the name, it's an indication only.

Hopefully only some bent metal and all the human elements are fine.

Uncle Ben · 05-05-2015 11:03pm

If he's already on the roundabout he's in the clear.

JumpShivers · 05-05-2015 11:09pm

Stheno wrote: »

Technically he should be indicating at the halfway point between the two exits to signal his intention but herd traffic entering a roundabout has to give way to traffic in a roundabout

He does indicate at that point, but it doesn't stop other drivers from ignoring his signal, half drivers seem to not indicate and the other half ignore others' indications.

There was no accident, I'm just posting inquiring in case it ever did happen.

MarkAnthony · 05-05-2015 11:11pm

Tell the BF to get in lane, that orange thing is all over the place doing the standard Irish thing of being in both but neither lane! :pac:

murphthesmurf · 05-05-2015 11:29pm

Just go by the book and he'll be in the right. Make sure to be in the correct lane indicating as he should etc.
Many people haven't got a clue about islands. Drives me mad how many get in the right hand lane to go straight over. Then when they come to an island with white arrows telling them to use the right hand lane to go straight over, they use the left hand lane instead !! Why !! What kind of thought process goes on in their minds. Many see the world as Doogle from father ted did.

challengemaster · 05-05-2015 11:53pm

JumpShivers wrote: »

He does indicate at that point, but it doesn't stop other drivers from ignoring his signal, half drivers seem to not indicate and the other half ignore others' indications.

There was no accident, I'm just posting inquiring in case it ever did happen.

Right of way always lies with the person already on the roundabout. If someone pulls out in front of them, the person that pulls out is at fault. Doesn't matter what way the indicators are - they hold no legal bearing.

CiniO · 05-05-2015 11:55pm

challengemaster wrote: »

Right of way always lies with the person already on the roundabout. If someone pulls out in front of them, the person that pulls out is at fault. Doesn't matter what way the indicators are - they hold no legal bearing.

And that's wrong.
That's exactly the reason why no one in Ireland bothers to use them.

challengemaster · 05-05-2015 11:56pm

CiniO wrote: »

And that's wrong.

Find the part of the RTA that says indicators alter right of way. You'll be looking a while (forever).

Stheno · 05-05-2015 11:56pm

CiniO wrote: »

And that's wrong.
That's exactly the reason why no one in Ireland bothers to use them.

Ah ffs get over the generalisations

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:02am

challengemaster wrote: »

Find the part of the RTA that says indicators alter right of way. You'll be looking a while (forever).

No, no... you got me wrong.

I'm not saying you were wrong.
You are right - indicators here don't hold legal bearing.

All I was saying that fact that they hold no legal bearing is wrong.... It should be the other way.

Aint Eazy Being Cheezy · 06-05-2015 12:02am

CiniO wrote: »

That's exactly the reason why no one in Ireland bothers to use them.

And the only one's who wear 'L' plates are brides-to-be on their hen night.

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:03am

Stheno wrote: »

Ah ffs get over the generalisations

So what is the reason then?

If people who fail to indicate or indicate incorrectly were taken liable for accidents, then I'm sure people would actually start using indicators.

challengemaster · 06-05-2015 12:05am

CiniO wrote: »

No, no... you got me wrong.

I'm not saying you were wrong.
You are right - indicators here don't hold legal bearing.

All I was saying that fact that they hold no legal bearing is wrong.... It should be the other way.

Ah, gotcha.

Don't think so tbh, because then you'd have people slapping on an indicator and cutting in in front of cars, because suddenly they have right of way

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:12am

challengemaster wrote: »

Ah, gotcha.

Don't think so tbh, because then you'd have people slapping on an indicator and cutting in in front of cars, because suddenly they have right of way

I don't get your logic here.
Indicator can not give you right of way when you don't have it.
But they should take the right of way off you, when you have it.

Examples
1. You drive on lane 1, and indicate to change to lane 2. However you can not change lane to lane 2 as it's taken, and indicator doesn't give you right of way.

2. You drive on main road and approach a junction. There's car waiting to join main road. You indicate left, so the driver of other car thinks you will be turning, and pulls over from side road. You crash, and it should be your fault as you mislead him by incorrect indication.

Guy:Incognito · 06-05-2015 12:17am

CiniO wrote: »

I don't get your logic here.
Indicator can not give you right of way when you don't have it.
But they should take the right of way off you, when you have it.

Examples
1. You drive on lane 1, and indicate to change to lane 2. However you can not change lane to lane 2 as it's taken, and indicator doesn't give you right of way.

2. You drive on main road and approach a junction. There's car waiting to join main road. You indicate left, so the driver of other car thinks you will be turning, and pulls over from side road. You crash, and it should be your fault as you mislead him by incorrect indication.

You're opening up a huge can of worms there for no reason.

Who determines fault if number 2 happens only the car wasn't indicating at all, but the person that pulls out just decides to say it was (after all, they would be entitled to a claim and not be held liable under your system, thats a massive incentive to lie )?

Stheno · 06-05-2015 12:20am

CiniO wrote: »

So what is the reason then?

If people who fail to indicate or indicate incorrectly were taken liable for accidents, then I'm sure people would actually start using indicators.

I'm more objecting to your blanket statements about Irish driving
You never go through checkpoint s ergo no one does
No one indicates rtf
frankly I'm sick of both your generalisations and your posting about you speeding and not getting caught

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:26am

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

You're opening up a huge can of worms there for no reason.

Who determines fault if number 2 happens only the car wasn't indicating at all, but the person that pulls out just decides to say it was (after all, they would be entitled to a claim and not be held liable under your system, thats a massive incentive to lie )?

In short saying you weren't indicating is not enough.
In Poland if you can prove that someone else was (or wasn't) indicating and this mislead you, then this might affect liability. I definitely think this should be also the case in Ireland.

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:28am

Stheno wrote: »

I'm more objecting to your blanket statements about Irish driving
You never go through checkpoint s ergo no one does
No one indicates rtf

Well in place I live and drive that's a fact.
Maybe it's not like that all over the country, but if in my town 90% of drivers don't bother using indicators, and there wasn't a check point for last 40 years, so what else am I supposed to say?

frankly I'm sick of both your generalisations and your posting about you speeding and not getting caught

How could I get caught if there's no checkpoints, speed checks or speed cameras in places I drive?

I you are sick of this, just ignore me.

Stheno · 06-05-2015 12:28am

CiniO wrote: »

In short saying you weren't indicating is not enough.
In Poland if you can prove that someone else was (or wasn't) indicating and this mislead you, then this might affect liability. I definitely think this should be also the case in Ireland.

It a the opposite here for those indicating

Stheno · 06-05-2015 12:30am

CiniO wrote: »

Well in place I live and drive that's a fact.
Maybe it's not like that all over the country, but if in my town 90% of drivers don't bother using indicators, and there wasn't a check point for last 40 years, so what else am I supposed to say?

How could I get caught if there's no checkpoints, speed checks or speed cameras in places I drive?

I you are sick of this, just ignore me.

Post definitive proof of no checkpoint in forty years for speedingb drink driving or tax

Guy:Incognito · 06-05-2015 12:30am

CiniO wrote: »

In short saying you weren't indicating is not enough.
In Poland if you can prove that someone else was (or wasn't) indicating and this mislead you, then this might affect liability. I definitely think this should be also the case in Ireland.

That seems like a stupid system. They should adopt the Irish system.

How do you determine liability in your scenario (number 2 ) with no independent witnesses? Whoever holds the straightest face? So if you're in the right but the other guy is a better liar, tough, you lose out?

Right of way is with the person that has right of way. Thats simple and effective.

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:36am

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That seems like a stupid system. They should adopt the Irish system.

How do you determine liability in your scenario (number 2 ) with no independent witnesses? Whoever holds the straightest face? So if you're in the right but the other guy is a better liar, tough, you lose out?

You don't.
If person who pulled out from side road, can't definitely prove that other driver was indicating which mislead them, then there's no case.
Dashcam recording is one of the ways.
Other is good independent witness.

Right of way is with the person that has right of way. Thats simple and effective.

Yes, but you can't be talking about right of way when person is planning to turn and indicating this intention, as if that person really turned, there wouldn't be any collision-possibility situation.

evolving_doors · 06-05-2015 12:36am

CiniO wrote: »

So what is the reason then?

If people who fail to indicate or indicate incorrectly were taken liable for accidents, then I'm sure people would actually start using indicators.

Aye but theyre still only giving indications, not signing contracts.
Indicating can create ambiguities too, so at the end of the day you have to anticipate the worst and not 'relax' and drop your guard just cos some other joe sticks on his indicator.

I nearly got caught the other day when an old lady suddenly slowed down to pull into a driveway on a fast busy road. I was raging she hadnt indicated ...but hey, they onus was on me to be alert and think about breaking distance.
Basically dont be waiting for an indicator to warn you of their car changing direction.

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:37am

Stheno wrote: »

Post definitive proof of no checkpoint in forty years for speedingb drink driving or tax

I'm not going to.
Only proof is my word.

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:39am

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Aye but theyre still only giving indications, not signing contracts.
Indicating can create ambiguities too, so at the end of the day you have to anticipate the worst and not 'relax' and drop your guard just cos some other joe sticks on his indicator.

I nearly got caught the other day when an old lady suddenly slowed down to pull into a driveway on a fast busy road. I was raging she hadnt indicated ...but hey, they onus was on me to be alert and think about breaking distance.
Basically dont be waiting for an indicator to warn you of their car changing direction.

And that's exactly what I'm talking about.
Driving could be so much easier if everyone used indicators properly, as then there wouldn't really be a need to anticipate for idiots who don't.

Guy:Incognito · 06-05-2015 12:44am

It's needlessly complicating right of way. What happens when theres 2 turns in quick succession? Do you wait till you've gone by the first the indicate and turn all in one go in case someone at the first one gets the wrong idea?

visual · 06-05-2015 12:52am

I've noticed that failing to indicate is common and usually followed by a few driving errors like bad road position, wrong lane failing to stop before stop line at traffic lights. Nothing major but a series of small errors.

I'm convinced they have done this most days at same junctions that it's just habit

CiniO · 06-05-2015 12:53am

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It's needlessly complicating right of way. What happens when theres 2 turns in quick succession? Do you wait till you've gone by the first the indicate and turn all in one go in case someone at the first one gets the wrong idea?

Yes, of course.

Guy:Incognito · 06-05-2015 12:57am

So instead of using indicators to signal your intentions in good time to all those around you, your just indicating as you turn. Whats the point in that ? Who are you signalling your intention to turn to if your already turning? Completely negates the need for indicators.

Much the same as motorway drivers that change lanes and indicate at the same time. It's pointless. If you're not going to indicate, then dont. A token flash when everyone can already see what you're doing is only wasting your own time.

I think the Polish might need to learn to drive properly.:)

Pataman · 06-05-2015 1:39pm

An indicator just means the bulb is working. Never rely on them.

anniehoo · 06-05-2015 2:22pm

Stheno wrote: »

Technically he should be indicating at the halfway point between the two exits

Agree. If anyone knows the small roundabout leaving Blanchardstown SC, leading to the NAC (first exit), Waterville (second exit) and M50 (third exit) knows you almost have to crawl to give the herd traffic time to see you indicate for the second exit, the halfway point is so small. People are always jamming on their brakes because they assume you're taking the first left and not going straight on.

MarkAnthony · 06-05-2015 2:35pm

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So instead of using indicators to signal your intentions in good time to all those around you, your just indicating as you turn. Whats the point in that ? Who are you signalling your intention to turn to if your already turning? Completely negates the need for indicators.

Much the same as motorway drivers that change lanes and indicate at the same time. It's pointless. If you're not going to indicate, then dont. A token flash when everyone can already see what you're doing is only wasting your own time.

I think the Polish might need to learn to drive properly.:)

It annoys me everytime the wife is driving on the motorway.

As soon as I want to overtake I stick on the indicator; I don't move unless it's safe to do so but at least I'm signaling what I'm going to be doing. More often than not someone will ease off and let you out.

I actually think I'm in the wrong here and by the rules of the road you're not meant to indicate until it's clear? Mirror, signal, manoeuvre and all that. Seems a bit pointless to signal into an empty lane though no?

evolving_doors · 06-05-2015 3:09pm

I've seen idiots approach a roundabout, indicate left then right then left again... even though they just went straight through. They weren't lost or anything as they did the exact same thing the next roundabout too!

CiniO · 06-05-2015 3:23pm

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I've seen idiots approach a roundabout, indicate left then right then left again... even though they just went straight through. They weren't lost or anything as they did the exact same thing the next roundabout too!

Maybe they are just from abroad, and are not familiar with Irish way of indicating on roundabouts.

slimjimmc · 06-05-2015 11:25pm

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I've seen idiots approach a roundabout, indicate left then right then left again... even though they just went straight through. They weren't lost or anything as they did the exact same thing the next roundabout too!

I knew someone in 30's who used to do that for years. He was convinced that he had to have his right indicator on because he was 'turning' right (clockwise) on a roundabout. It's a mystery but it wasn't something he was taught as he passed his driving test. He eventually copped on and does it properly now.

anonanymore · 07-05-2015 12:03am

CiniO wrote: »

Maybe they are just from abroad, and are not familiar with Irish way of indicating on roundabouts.

You mean the Irish way of NOT indicating.

anonanymore · 07-05-2015 12:09am

slimjimmc wrote: »

I knew someone in 30's who used to do that for years. He was convinced that he had to have his right indicator on because he was 'turning' right (clockwise) on a roundabout. It's a mystery but it wasn't something he was taught as he passed his driving test. He eventually copped on and does it properly now.

That used to be the old way, first exit indicate left, other exits indicate right then indicate left before exiting.

The problem with today's rule is if somebody is not indicating are they exiting at 12 o'clock, or are the just not indicating.

Voodoomelon · 07-05-2015 12:20am

I've a funny feeling that is someone indicated incorrectly, causing you to crash into them, even if you supplied dashcam footage of the event the insurance company would still rule against you or settle 50:50 at best.

I can't see an insurance company taking the risk of going to court with unverified dashcam footage.

MarkAnthony · 07-05-2015 2:01am

slimjimmc wrote: »

I knew someone in 30's who used to do that for years. He was convinced that he had to have his right indicator on because he was 'turning' right (clockwise) on a roundabout. It's a mystery but it wasn't something he was taught as he passed his driving test. He eventually copped on and does it properly now.

I was taught right indicator until I passed the junction immediately before my turn, left indicator. Even when proceeding 'straight over'.

Liability in roundabout crash

Comments