Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Would you be at fault in this situation?

  • 06-06-2010 3:14pm
    #1
    Cianos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭


    Imagine you were driving at ~120kph, in the left lane and keeping a safe distance from the car in front of you. Up ahead there is a car moving very slowly, which you aren't able to see properly because the vehicle in front of you is in the way.

    The driver waits until the last few seconds to overtake the very slow moving car, and unless you react quick enough, and have opportunity to overtake, you will hit in to it because you are gaining ground on it so quickly.

    I've never been in this kind of situation but was wondering who would be at fault. Does the driver ahead of you have responsibility for your safety? Are you at fault if you hit the slow moving car?


Comments

  • #2
    freighter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 332 ✭✭freighter


    You would be at fault. Driving without due care and attention. You should be looking at what the vehicle is doing 5-6 cars up as well as the one in front of you. Anyway if you were keeping a safe distance you would have sufficent time to change lanes.


  • #3
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 84,762 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    Cianos wrote: »
    Imagine you were driving at ~120kph, in the left lane and keeping a safe distance from the car in front of you. Up ahead there is a car moving very slowly, which you aren't able to see properly because the vehicle in front of you is in the way.

    Are you at fault if you hit the slow moving car?

    You are driving too fast for the conditions and so it would be your fault. You should always have an adequate gap left between you and the car infront to brake in the event they need to stop without warning, even at 120kph.


  • #4
    cats.life
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 884 ✭✭✭cats.life


    i was in that situation , so what i did is just slow down and hold back untill car in front over toke the auld wan in front. i always look ahead say about 3-4 cars and there break lights.simple easey thats why i dont have accidents but few close ones .


  • #5
    unnameduser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,081 ✭✭✭unnameduser


    I believe that you should keep far enough away from vehicles in front of you so that you can always be in a position to stop.

    I'd imagine you were in the wrong. How can you be travelling at 120KPH, keeping a safe distance from the car in front at that speed, and not be able to see cars in front of that car?


  • #6
    Cianos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Cianos


    Points taken. But what if you're driving behind a lorry on a long straight stretch of road, and you don't have a clear view of the cars up ahead. Legally should you be allowing a stopping distance long enough to be able to break to a complete stop before hitting a stationary object?


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,537 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    definitly you are at fault. You would be clearly travelling too close to the vehicle in front if you don't have time to move or enough distance to brake down to 50 (the slowest you are allowed to go on the motorway anyway) or in fact 0 in an emergency.

    it's rare enough not to be able to see far enough in front of you on a motorway to notice other vehicles and this would also indicate you are too close to the vehicle in front of you


  • #8
    Carstuck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 439 ✭✭Carstuck


    You be at fault. Any car hit from the back it is the person who hit them that is responsible as they should be paying attention, even if they brake suddenly.


  • #9
    Cookie_Monster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,537 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Cianos wrote: »
    Points taken. But what if you're driving behind a lorry on a long straight stretch of road, and you don't have a clear view of the cars up ahead. Legally should you be allowing a stopping distance long enough to be able to break to a complete stop before hitting a stationary object?

    yes.

    but if going to overtake you obviously won't be leaving this distance, you should still be able to see the road ahead though when pulling out slightly to be viewing oncoming cars and pull back accordingly.


  • #10
    sesna
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭sesna


    Reason why I hate being stuck behind lorries or big dirty knacker vans.

    Always try to overtake to improve my view of road ahead, or if I can't I keep further back.


  • #11
    Aids By Google
    Closed Accounts Posts: 220 ✭✭Aids By Google


    Cianos wrote: »
    Points taken. But what if you're driving behind a lorry on a long straight stretch of road, and you don't have a clear view of the cars up ahead. Legally should you be allowing a stopping distance long enough to be able to break to a complete stop before hitting a stationary object?


    Due care and attention. You should always have a good breaking distance and you should be ready for anything, always looking in your mirrors, in front of you, behind you etc.

    Anything can happen while driving.

    I'm a fairly placid driver most of the time but at times, like last night, one has to get somewhere quicker than one usually would. While on the M50 I would be looking at all the cars around me, as far as I can see. All it takes is one of them to tap someone else in a bad lane change to cause mayhem. There were a lot of people doing 120+ on the M50 yesterday evening. Or what if one had a blow out? What if one breaked suddenly!

    You always have to be paying attention. Anything could happen. In any scenario.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    TestTransmission
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,106 ✭✭✭✭TestTransmission


    sesna wrote: »
    Reason why I hate being stuck behind lorries or big dirty knacker vans.

    Always try to overtake to improve my view of road ahead, or if I can't I keep further back.

    What's a dirty knacker van?


  • #13
    sesna
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭sesna


    TestTransmission wrote: »
    What's a dirty knacker van?

    An unwashed van, driven by members of travelling community or other lower socioeconomic group. I have often witnessed them driven dangerously at excess speed around where I live.


  • #14
    TestTransmission
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,106 ✭✭✭✭TestTransmission


    sesna wrote: »
    An unwashed van, driven by members of travelling community or other lower socioeconomic group. I have often witnessed them driven dangerously at excess speed around where I live.

    A lower socioeconomic group...


  • #15
    sesna
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,229 ✭✭✭sesna


    TestTransmission wrote: »
    A lower socioeconomic group...

    Yes... Would you like to know what a lorry is too ?


  • #16
    TestTransmission
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,106 ✭✭✭✭TestTransmission


    sesna wrote: »
    Yes... Would you like to know what a lorry is too ?

    Aren't you a little smartass


  • #17
    EPM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,822 ✭✭✭✭EPM


    TestTransmission wrote: »
    Aren't you a little smartass

    I'd call him much worse...


  • #18
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    sesna wrote: »
    ...big dirty knacker vans.
    sesna wrote: »
    An unwashed van, driven by members of travelling community or other lower socioeconomic group.

    Drop the stereotypes please
    sesna wrote: »
    Yes... Would you like to know what a lorry is too ?

    ...and the sarcasm.
    TestTransmission wrote: »
    Aren't you a little smartass

    And you can drop the tone.

    Attack the post, not the poster.


  • #19
    cats.life
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 884 ✭✭✭cats.life


    it was such a good thread too. now ruined:(


  • #20
    -Chris-
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,035 ✭✭✭✭-Chris-


    How so?


  • #21
    Tigger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,705 ✭✭✭✭Tigger


    you should be able to stop by where you can see to you should always have a route

    and thats from someone who drives fast but with care


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    D_murph
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 773 ✭✭✭D_murph


    If you hit someone from behind, you are always in the wrong in the eyes of the law. End of story.


  • #23
    Max Power1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,272 ✭✭✭✭Max Power1


    D_murph wrote: »
    If you hit someone from behind, you are always in the wrong in the eyes of the law. End of story.
    Almost.

    There is an exception to every rule. Say if you change lane without indicating from lane 1 to lane 2 on a dualway for example (lane 2 being at the median) without indicating, causing a rear on impact. That would be the fault of the driver changing lane as he didnt have right of way


Advertisement