Getting hit by a car (not indicating) crossing a junction

jozi

It hasn't happened to me but there are plenty drivers out there who dont signal they are turning of a junction.

Earlier tonight was discussing the above with a friend and we wondered what if i walked out in front of a car turning of a junction, not indicating his intentions and there fore a pedestrian crosses the road. Does the pedestrian have a case because he/she got hit by a car which didn't signal their intention or is it a case of tough luck you should not be crossing the road any where other than at a pedestrian crossing?

matrim

As far as I'm aware, the pedestrian wouldn't have a case. Signaling intention (or lack of a signal) doesn't mean you have a right to cross the road.

FX Meister

Pedestrians and cyclists have right of way over cars at all times. FACT. I presume you don't have a driving license yet matrim.

maidhc

FX Meister wrote:

Pedestrians and cyclists have right of way over cars at all times. FACT. I presume you don't have a driving license yet matrim.

That is about the size of it. If a motorist hits a pedestrian he is facing an uphill struggle in the courts.

FX Meister

I've two friends who both had kids run into their cars, both hit the side of their cars and while there was nothing they could do about it when it happened the kids could still sue. Luckily both of them had decent parents who didn't persue the incident.

matrim

FX Meister wrote:

Pedestrians and cyclists have right of way over cars at all times. FACT. I presume you don't have a driving license yet matrim.

Not yet. I'm currently learning. I was thinking of it in terms of a car at a similar junction. Where if you pull out in front of someone who has signaled incorrectly you are still liable for pulling out in front of him.

Do you have the section of the rule of the road that says pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way over a car?

FX Meister

matrim wrote:

Do you have the section of the rule of the road that says pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way over a car?

Not to hand. I won €100 in a bet over this in the past though.

Here's a little something
http://www.drivinginfo.ie/search.php#rules-of-the-road-driver-ireland1

maidhc

matrim wrote:

Do you have the section of the rule of the road that says pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way over a car?

A pedestrian crossing at an unsignalised junction has a right of way over a car.

However I can assure you a judge in the District Court won't take too kindly to you asking him where in the ROTR it says a pedestrian has a right of way over a motorist. The reality is that it is the responsibility of a motorist to drive with due care and attention, if they knock down a person they have not helped very much to prove they were doing just that.

DMC2005

matrim wrote:

Do you have the section of the rule of the road that says pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way over a car?

From ROTR 2007 :

"Vehicles do not have an automatic right of way on the road. The overriding rule is, in all circumstances, proceed with caution. You must always yield to:
pedestrians already crossing at a junction"

So pretty much, if the pedestrian was already crossing the road, the car must yield. But the car also doesn't have the right to splat the pedestrians just because the driver feels he has some moral right of way.

So pretty much, if your driving a car, don't hit people. I would have hoped that people would have thought this without the relevent page from the rules of the road.....

Shiva

FX Meister wrote:

Pedestrians and cyclists have right of way over cars at all times. FACT. I presume you don't have a driving license yet matrim.

Pedestrians, yep...I knew that.

But cyclists ?! Are you sure ?

jjbrien

Simular thing happened to me today. I was on a straight road today. A foreign lady was parked across the road from me she was in a parking spot. I was driving along not minding my own business then she pulled out very quickly without even looking around her or checking her blind spot and not even indicating. I had to jamm the breaks on I would say I was 25cm away from her passenger door when my car came to a compete stop but I had to break very suddenly. I got the fright of my life but if I had hot her she would have been in the wrong.

FX Meister

Shiva wrote:

Pedestrians, yep...I knew that.

But cyclists ?! Are you sure ?

It's the way it used to be in the old rules. I knew about the pedo and when I looked it up to prove my side of the bet I found out about cyclists.
I presume it has to do with them being more vulnerable on the roads.

maidhc

FX Meister wrote:

It's the way it used to be in the old rules. I knew about the pedo and when I looked it up to prove my side of the bet I found out about cyclists.
I presume it has to do with them being more vulnerable on the roads.

Indeed. If a cyclist damages your car due to their own stupidity the wisest thing to do is ask them if they are ok, and let them off on their merry way.

the_syco

FX Meister wrote:

Pedestrians and cyclists have right of way over cars at all times. FACT. I presume you don't have a driving license yet matrim.

Highlighted part is interesting, as I once went through a car window, yet no-one was put at fault...

Wishbone Ash

jozi wrote:

or is it a case of tough luck you should not be crossing the road any where other than at a pedestrian crossing?

By that logic, pedestrians would not be permitted to cross 99.99% of the country's roads!

seamus

FX Meister wrote:

It's the way it used to be in the old rules. I knew about the pedo and when I looked it up to prove my side of the bet I found out about cyclists.
I presume it has to do with them being more vulnerable on the roads.

Pedestrians and cyclists don't have a right of way above everyone else at all other times. Nowhere in the rules of the road or in law does it say that.

Pedestrians and cyclists are equally bound as other road users to the rules of the road - this includes giving way, only crossing when it's safe, obeying road signs, obeying signals, etc.

When a pedestrian is a certain distance from a pedestrian crossing, they are obliged to use it. Outside of that, they must stand at the side of the road and wait for a suitable break in traffic. Once a pedestrian has started to cross (i.e. is on the road), other road users are obliged to allow them to finish crossing. That however, doesn't mean that a pedestrian can just stand onto the road in front of a vehicle and they are in the right - if they have failed to wait for a safe gap to cross, they are at fault. But this is what throws most people - 99.99% of the time, a court will rule in favour of the pedestrian. The reason is obvious - you have insurance and a small dent in your car, they have no insurance and broken limbs.

Cyclists will equally get favourable treatment in the courts, but not to the same extent as pedestrians.