Near Road Accident Legality Advice

lostgoat

Hi all,

I was wondering if I could get your opinions on the legality of a near incident I had during the harvest.

Myself and the boss man were drawing home bales of straw from some land away from the yard at the end of the harvest. I was first on the road, and he was following. I'll try my best to describe the road, as it is a little awkward to describe and visualise.

There is a straight stretch of flat road, approximately 300-400yards long. At the end of this, there is a humpback bridge which forms a bend on the road to the left. If the straight stretch of road was 12 o'clock on a clock face, the bend on the bridge was 10 o'clock, so a decent bend. There is then maybe twenty yards and a bend back to the right at possible 90 degrees (or three o'clock). This band is actually on a steep hill, maybe 50 - 70 yards long hill, where you would be dropping gears..

So I was leading the way on the straight stretch towards home, loaded (25' trailer). As I was coming to the bend on the bridge, I moved out to the centre of the road to take the bend (as anyone would have to - the bridge would only take a single car). As I was out on the road, I saw this Nissan Qashqai flying down the hill on the far side of the bridge (I was maybe 5 or 10 yards from the foot of the bridge). The minute I saw this car coming, I pulled the front wheels of the tractor in and stopped completely. By the time the driver stopped, her window was level with the steps of the tractor. I shook my head at her is amazement/shock (which was probably the wrong thing to do in hindsight). However she proceeded to let down the window and I opened the door to a lot of abuse!! (although she admitted she was travelling too hard and she was in the wrong). Eventually, my father walked up to see what had happened, she got very upset and ended up crying! And we all went away.


Although there was no damage done, if there had to of been contact. Who was right and who was wrong?

I acknowledge that nothing happened and it could have been worse, but out of curiosity.
Sorry for the long message!

lostgoat

pedigree 6

lostgoat wrote: »

Hi all,

I was wondering if I could get your opinions on the legality of a near incident I had during the harvest.

Myself and the boss man were drawing home bales of straw from some land away from the yard at the end of the harvest. I was first on the road, and he was following. I'll try my best to describe the road, as it is a little awkward to describe and visualise.

There is a straight stretch of flat road, approximately 300-400yards long. At the end of this, there is a humpback bridge which forms a bend on the road to the left. If the straight stretch of road was 12 o'clock on a clock face, the bend on the bridge was 10 o'clock, so a decent bend. There is then maybe twenty yards and a bend back to the right at possible 90 degrees (or three o'clock). This band is actually on a steep hill, maybe 50 - 70 yards long hill, where you would be dropping gears..

So I was leading the way on the straight stretch towards home, loaded (25' trailer). As I was coming to the bend on the bridge, I moved out to the centre of the road to take the bend (as anyone would have to - the bridge would only take a single car). As I was out on the road, I saw this Nissan Qashqai flying down the hill on the far side of the bridge (I was maybe 5 or 10 yards from the foot of the bridge). The minute I saw this car coming, I pulled the front wheels of the tractor in and stopped completely. By the time the driver stopped, her window was level with the steps of the tractor. I shook my head at her is amazement/shock (which was probably the wrong thing to do in hindsight). However she proceeded to let down the window and I opened the door to a lot of abuse!! (although she admitted she was travelling too hard and she was in the wrong). Eventually, my father walked up to see what had happened, she got very upset and ended up crying! And we all went away.


Although there was no damage done, if there had to of been contact. Who was right and who was wrong?

I acknowledge that nothing happened and it could have been worse, but out of curiosity.
Sorry for the long message!

lostgoat

It's hard to know who's at fault.
She saw you (I presume you had the flashers on) and you saw her before the bridge.
It's a thing of nothing really.

If that's the worst accident you've had your a lucky man.

Waffletraktor

You were stationary and I presume easily visible in the situation from my reading. She was speeding and driving without due care and attention on a hazardous stretch of road, her fault.
If you notice public buses(here at least) tend to just stop, dead and let you work past them if they meet a wide vehicle coming the other way as if they hit you it's their fault so long as you were stopped and made an effort to let them past.

Willfarman

I would say she was completely in the wrong and a bit of a bunt with it.. I think confrontation with people like this tends to stay in the mind for a time unless you are a sociopath. Try not to dwell on it and thank your lucky stars there wasn't a collision.

punisher5112

Buy a dash Cam or even set up old smart phone to record ahead of you.

She should be driving at appropriate speed to stop safe but may most likely be 50/50 as narrow roads and that.

lostgoat

Hi Guys,
Thanks for the input.

@pedigree 6
I understand and agree that its not really important, but, it just really urked me! And yes, thankfully, it is the only incident I have been near involved in. But at the same time, I would be a pretty cautious driver. I would only ever drive at 35kph with a 50 k box.

@Waffletraktor
That's a good point about the buses alright!

@Willfarman
Thanks, that's reassuring. It really did stick in the head. Then of course the water works arrived! She was a woman in her late 50s/early 60s

@punisher5112
That's actually my worry that it would come down to being 50/50! When myself and the father were discussing it in the yard later, he said he didn't know who would be in the right, because technically, I was taking up more than half the road (but I had to, to get around the bend...)

MF290

lostgoat wrote: »

Hi all,

I was wondering if I could get your opinions on the legality of a near incident I had during the harvest.

Myself and the boss man were drawing home bales of straw from some land away from the yard at the end of the harvest. I was first on the road, and he was following. I'll try my best to describe the road, as it is a little awkward to describe and visualise.

There is a straight stretch of flat road, approximately 300-400yards long. At the end of this, there is a humpback bridge which forms a bend on the road to the left. If the straight stretch of road was 12 o'clock on a clock face, the bend on the bridge was 10 o'clock, so a decent bend. There is then maybe twenty yards and a bend back to the right at possible 90 degrees (or three o'clock). This band is actually on a steep hill, maybe 50 - 70 yards long hill, where you would be dropping gears..

So I was leading the way on the straight stretch towards home, loaded (25' trailer). As I was coming to the bend on the bridge, I moved out to the centre of the road to take the bend (as anyone would have to - the bridge would only take a single car). As I was out on the road, I saw this Nissan Qashqai flying down the hill on the far side of the bridge (I was maybe 5 or 10 yards from the foot of the bridge). The minute I saw this car coming, I pulled the front wheels of the tractor in and stopped completely. By the time the driver stopped, her window was level with the steps of the tractor. I shook my head at her is amazement/shock (which was probably the wrong thing to do in hindsight). However she proceeded to let down the window and I opened the door to a lot of abuse!! (although she admitted she was travelling too hard and she was in the wrong). Eventually, my father walked up to see what had happened, she got very upset and ended up crying! And we all went away.


Although there was no damage done, if there had to of been contact. Who was right and who was wrong?

I acknowledge that nothing happened and it could have been worse, but out of curiosity.
Sorry for the long message!

lostgoat

Waffletraktor wrote: »

You were stationary and I presume easily visible in the situation from my reading. She was speeding and driving without due care and attention on a hazardous stretch of road, her fault.
If you notice public buses(here at least) tend to just stop, dead and let you work past them if they meet a wide vehicle coming the other way as if they hit you it's their fault so long as you were stopped and made an effort to let them past.

+1 some lorry drivers are the same, can be awful pussys about driving past you. Someone said that the public buses aren't allowed reverse?

Pet hate of mine is people giving out about 50k tractors going too fast, it's usually the cars that can't stop if they meet you on the road....

I wouldn't pay much attention to her reaction, probably just got a bit of a land herself.

emaherx

lostgoat wrote: »

@punisher5112
That's actually my worry that it would come down to being 50/50! When myself and the father were discussing it in the yard later, he said he didn't know who would be in the right, because technically, I was taking up more than half the road (but I had to, to get around the bend...)

Think this is the most likely outcome, had a similar incident a few weeks ago. Was driving a car on a narrow lane, I saw another car coming around the bend ahead, so I stopped, but the other car tried to continue pass me and hit my car. He proceeded to give out to me about being in the "middle of the road"... "sure look at his car is half way up the ditch". It was a bothereen only wide enough for one car, I was at a complete stop when he struck me but insurance company's said "narrow road means 50/50"

Just be glad you had a near miss. Think dash cam is the way to go.

ganmo

you stopped so worst case its 50/50 and you had your dad as another witness
dash cameras are very handy esp with the amount of uninsured drivers on the road its a great way of getting unquestionable evidence but im not sure where yad put it a tractor

emaherx

ganmo wrote: »

you stopped so worst case its 50/50 and you had your dad as another witness
dash cameras are very handy esp with the amount of uninsured drivers on the road its a great way of getting unquestionable evidence but im not sure where yad put it a tractor

His Dad is not an independent witness, wouldn't help too much.

Dash cam is the way to go, but we need about 10 here to cover all the vehicles.

Some scary videos on YouTube, with idiots jamming on breaks in front of other drivers just to get their claims in.

ganmo

emaherx wrote: »

His Dad is not an independent witness, wouldn't help too much.

Better than nobody though

the_syco

lostgoat wrote: »

The minute I saw this car coming, I pulled the front wheels of the tractor in and stopped completely. By the time the driver stopped, her window was level with the steps of the tractor.

Sounds like she was going too fast.

ganmo wrote: »

Better than nobody though

Actually, no. Equal to nobody.

=-=

If you have to take that road often, get a dash cam.

punisher5112

Also another option would be if possible have a warning car in front as to get others to slow. Could throw on an orange light and use to warn oncoming traffic

Bass Reeves

IMO a dash cam would have been no use. In reality it sounds like the road is a too narrow for two vehicles to pass ( I think a road has to be over 16' verge to verge to satisify such legality and green verges cannot be included). I do not think a judge would make a legal decision based on a dash cam no matter how lads would wish they did in such a situation. You have to prove visibility of other driver etc. Even with a dash cam I imagine 50/50 to both parties

punisher5112

Bass Reeves wrote: »

IMO a dash cam would have been no use. In reality it sounds like the road is a too narrow for two vehicles to pass ( I think a road has to be over 16' verge to verge to satisify such legality and green verges cannot be included). I do not think a judge would make a legal decision based on a dash cam no matter how lads would wish they did in such a situation. You have to prove visibility of other driver etc. Even with a dash cam I imagine 50/50 to both parties

So if I drive into a parked car who's fault is it? Dash Cam would prove very quick also CCTV is used daily.

Bass Reeves

punisher5112 wrote: »

So if I drive into a parked car who's fault is it? Dash Cam would prove very quick also CCTV is used daily.

In this case the vehicle was not parked but pulled up on the road. If I was out on ordinary road and stopped in the middle of the road on a turn and someone crashed into me who is in the wrong. As you see I stated that IMO a dash cam in this situation would have not have been any use. A dash cam cannot show the speed of the other car, it is unlikely to show anything but last few seconds of the collision in this case. On narrow roads AFAIK the legal opinion is that unless there is clear clearance for the two vehicles ( again as AFAIK it is a minimun of 16' of tarred road with no green verge on it) then it is deemed 50/50. Just because a bus or lorry stops and you are unable to pass it is not to assume that the travelling vehicle is in the wrong.

lostgoat

Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies.
Well, to be fair, the road itself is wide enough. (over 16 foot - probably 20 foot). It's just the bridge itself is narrow, which I hadn't reached.

I mentioned this to my office mates in work, and they also thought that my father wouldn't be worth anything as a witness. So does that mean if the other person involved in an accident had a friend or cousin in the car, they wouldn't be credible either?

So basically, what it comes down to is even though I did nothing wrong, I would have more than likely gotten 50% of the blame. Great! The injustice of it all!

Okay, thanks all.

lostgoat

rangler1

lostgoat wrote: »

Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies.
Well, to be fair, the road itself is wide enough. (over 16 foot - probably 20 foot). It's just the bridge itself is narrow, which I hadn't reached.

I mentioned this to my office mates in work, and they also thought that my father wouldn't be worth anything as a witness. So does that mean if the other person involved in an accident had a friend or cousin in the car, they wouldn't be credible either?

So basically, what it comes down to is even though I did nothing wrong, I would have more than likely gotten 50% of the blame. Great! The injustice of it all!

Okay, thanks all.

lostgoat

You're not supposed to cross the middle of the road unless it's safe to do so, you would be partially to blame, other driver wouldn't be expecting to meet someone on the wrong side of the road either, did she stay on her own side of the road.
Pity your father wasn't doing escort in front, if you were going to swing out on the road, where visibility was poor

Bass Reeves

lostgoat wrote: »

Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies.
Well, to be fair, the road itself is wide enough. (over 16 foot - probably 20 foot). It's just the bridge itself is narrow, which I hadn't reached.

I mentioned this to my office mates in work, and they also thought that my father wouldn't be worth anything as a witness. So does that mean if the other person involved in an accident had a friend or cousin in the car, they wouldn't be credible either?

So basically, what it comes down to is even though I did nothing wrong, I would have more than likely gotten 50% of the blame. Great! The injustice of it all!

Okay, thanks all.

lostgoat

If road is taht wide and you were partically out on other side of road and if other road user was on there own side then you would (more than likly) be in wrong. If you were on the narrow part of the bridge/road then 50/50 unless you are totaly on wrong side of road.

lostgoat

Well, it was safe to cross the road when I did so. Anyone on this road would have to do so even with a car. It was her speed that made it unsafe, as someone else mentioned earlier, on dangerous roads. You say that the other driver wouldn't be expecting to meet someone on the other side of the road, but as I was lining up to take the bridge, there is only one road.
Escort vehicle isn't necessary for agricultural vehicles under 3.5m. That would be the same as saying anyone driving a lorry would need an escort??


I would grudgingly accept that if it came down to it, I would probably be wrong based on the injustice of the system. However, it's for my own peace of mind that I wanted peoples thought on if I was right.

lostgoat

rangler1

lostgoat wrote: »

Well, it was safe to cross the road when I did so. Anyone on this road would have to do so even with a car. It was her speed that made it unsafe, as someone else mentioned earlier, on dangerous roads. You say that the other driver wouldn't be expecting to meet someone on the other side of the road, but as I was lining up to take the bridge, there is only one road.
Escort vehicle isn't necessary for agricultural vehicles under 3.5m. That would be the same as saying anyone driving a lorry would need an escort??


I would grudgingly accept that if it came down to it, I would probably be wrong based on the injustice of the system. However, it's for my own peace of mind that I wanted peoples thought on if I was right.

lostgoat

they'd need an escort if they were going to be driving over the white line,
obviously your view was impaired by a bend or a hill. and you took the chance

the_syco

Dash cam can be handy to rule out he said/she said arguments. Although it won't show the speed, it could show that the OP had stopped, and that the other car came around the bend at speed. It wonder could it also be used as a impartial witness?

9935452

lostgoat wrote: »

Well, it was safe to cross the road when I did so. Anyone on this road would have to do so even with a car. It was her speed that made it unsafe, as someone else mentioned earlier, on dangerous roads. You say that the other driver wouldn't be expecting to meet someone on the other side of the road, but as I was lining up to take the bridge, there is only one road.
Escort vehicle isn't necessary for agricultural vehicles under 3.5m. That would be the same as saying anyone driving a lorry would need an escort??


I would grudgingly accept that if it came down to it, I would probably be wrong based on the injustice of the system. However, it's for my own peace of mind that I wanted peoples thought on if I was right.

lostgoat

Ive seen a good bit of stuff like this over the years.
As the other lads say it would probably be 50 50 in insurance eyes.

Whats going against you here is you you were in the middle of the road.
#the term ' if it is safe to do so' comes to mind. You say it was safe when you moved but if there was an accident , was it safe to do so?
Her insurance would state that it was safe to start the manouver but not to complete it
I know of a contractor in clare coming home from work with an agitator one night driving in the hard shoulder letting off cars. A car drove into the back of him. He was at fault because you can use the hard shoulder to let off cars if it is safe to do so. if there is an accident it obviously wasnt safe to do so.

Another thing is she got over the bridge before you . She might have thought you were waiting at that side of the bridge to let her off only to get to the other side to find you blocking her half of the road.

Because of your higher driving position you saw her coming too fast.
You could see her , she probably couldnt see you . you could have used your horn to alert her of your presence and got her to slow down.
If there was a tip her speed wouldnt come into it, she would claim that she was going at a safe speed. You would see her story changing a lot if there was a tip.

You seem to be getting defensive when rangler mentioned an escort .
It might not be required by law but wouldnt it have been good practice and common sense if you father went in front of you. ? especially when ye knew there was a narrow bridge with bends that ye knew you would have to cross over the middle of the road.
If there was an accident im sure the insurance company would have questioned this.
Whenever we are out with the bale trailer the loader tractor always does escort duty for that exact reason, to slow cars down.
A contractor up the road always sents an escort out in front of the harvester even though its not legally required but advised to do so by the insurance company. it might just be a silage trailer out in front.


Im not trying to point fingers or assign blame here but i know from my own experience that when it comes to cars/tractors on the road generally the tractor has to give way more often and take more care and pay more attention on the road.
ive seen a good few accidents involving young lads at silage where the yound lad technically would be in the right but a bit of common sense and experience and the accident would never have happened.

lostgoat

Hi 9935452,

She only got over the bridge before me because of her speed and that I was able to stop in good time.

Why wouldn't her speed come into it? That's a genuine question, I thought you should be able to travel at a speed that you can stop without damage to anyone/anything? Expect the unexpected?

My father was pulling a trailer of straw also, so sending him first is much for muchness. I am fairly sure you legally have to have an escort for a harvester - either a car or tractor, whatever. Open to correction on that though.

I would definitely agree that her story would be quite different if this had turned out differently!

I'm not at all trying to sound defensive and I am taking all your points on board. I really appreciate all points. But it is infuriating being told that you would be wrong. Again, I am thankful that this is all just a memory of a near miss..

Thanks again for all,
lostgoat

Base price

lostgoat wrote: »

Well, it was safe to cross the road when I did so. Anyone on this road would have to do so even with a car. It was her speed that made it unsafe, as someone else mentioned earlier, on dangerous roads. You say that the other driver wouldn't be expecting to meet someone on the other side of the road, but as I was lining up to take the bridge, there is only one road.
Escort vehicle isn't necessary for agricultural vehicles under 3.5m. That would be the same as saying anyone driving a lorry would need an escort??


I would grudgingly accept that if it came down to it, I would probably be wrong based on the injustice of the system. However, it's for my own peace of mind that I wanted peoples thought on if I was right.

lostgoat

I think that the overall width limit for "normal" tractor & trailers is 2.55m and bigger tractors with unladen weight of 7.25 tons can be 2.75m. There are additional widths for tractors with flotation/dual tyres and forage harvesters.
If your trailer was carrying a double row of 4' bales on the flat of the trailer then you are under the width limit but if the bales are 4'6" then you are over the legal width.

9935452

lostgoat wrote: »

Hi 9935452,

She only got over the bridge before me because of her speed and that I was able to stop in good time.

Why wouldn't her speed come into it? That's a genuine question, I thought you should be able to travel at a speed that you can stop without damage to anyone/anything? Expect the unexpected?

My father was pulling a trailer of straw also, so sending him first is much for muchness. I am fairly sure you legally have to have an escort for a harvester - either a car or tractor, whatever. Open to correction on that though.

I would definitely agree that her story would be quite different if this had turned out differently!

I'm not at all trying to sound defensive and I am taking all your points on board. I really appreciate all points. But it is infuriating being told that you would be wrong. Again, I am thankful that this is all just a memory of a near miss..

Thanks again for all,
lostgoat

As i said she would claim she was going at a safe speed.
You say she admitted she was going too fast but this was after a near miss when she was in shock after being told by a farmer and his son she was going too fast.
Looking at it from her side, she came down the road, bridge was clear crossed the bridge only to find a tractor stopped up blocking the road for which she stopped without hitting it.
Plus what speed was she doing? you dont really know , its an opinion she was going too fast. She could be at home saying to her husband that the tractor was going too fast for the load he was carrying , road conditions etc which put him in the middle of the road stopped.


Regarding the escort issue, up to 3.5m wide you dont need an escort for self propelled agricultural machinery. Above this you do.
Around me most harvesters are 3.0m wide because of the pickup is a 3m pickup. Some of the bigger stuff is hitting 11 feet because of tyres but this still falls with the 3.5 m limit.
IMO its just good practice to have an escort regardless
Its in the RSA documents
http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Revised%20Standards%20for%20Agricultural%20Vehicles%202015%20Nov.pdf

BTW you said in a post above that an escort vehicle isnt needed for agricultural vehicle under 3.5m. Now you are saying you are pretty sure one is needed.??

Another thing that makes me think is, you say the road is probably 20 feet wide. A car is in or around 6 feet wide. To block her from passing you, you must have been well over on her side of the road .

lostgoat

I'm not trying to wage a war here or anything, just trying to get informed and peoples opinions, and hopefully learn something that can help me in the future.

Would brake marks not account for a measure of the other vehicles speed?
If there had to have been an accident, would the guards have been able to see that the road conditions were okay and the load was fine?

With all respect, and I mean this, you are kind of implying that we jumped down off the tractor and shouted at her that she was in the wrong. I never left the tractor and my father wandered up after a while with his hands behind his back to see if all was okay. She did 85% of the talking. She actually said first that she was going too fast, that she was in a hurry. I never got the opportunity to "accuse" her.

The straight stretch of the road, is probably 20ft, but I have yet to see a bridge that is only wide enough for one car to appear in the middle of a road that wide. You have to see that the sides of the road taper into the bridge (which is one car wide) and the bridge is an actual bend in the road. There is no 'her side' of the road on a one car bridge..

So do you think I was wrong to stop the tractor? Should I have kept driving over the bridge?

I said that I am fairly sure you need an escort for a harvester - as it is over 3.5. (a modern combine harvester - if we are splitting hairs the smaller ones would be under 3.5, but a modern high output machine would be over 3.5, plus it could probably have the header in tow.

Yeah, they were 4' bales, so we were under.

Bass Reeves

lostgoat

At the end of the day if the road was too narrow then it would end up 50/50. You would still be the loser as more than likely the most of the damage would be done to her car. You were right to stop and hope for the best. A Garda could not give a professional opinion and in reality if called unless someone was killed or seriously injured they tell you it was a civil matter for both parties. It is highly unlikly that they would measure the road and give an opinion. Remember in court you get the law not justice.

What she said to you was immaterial as it is your word against her's. If there was an accident she would be much more composed before the Gardai arrived. Also IMO no judge will give an opinion of speed off any camera. There has been cases thrown out of court over speeding camera's and guns not being calibrated. Treat it as a near miss and learn from it it was a cheap lesson

rangler1

lostgoat wrote: »

I'm not trying to wage a war here or anything, just trying to get informed and peoples opinions, and hopefully learn something that can help me in the future.

Would brake marks not account for a measure of the other vehicles speed?
If there had to have been an accident, would the guards have been able to see that the road conditions were okay and the load was fine?

With all respect, and I mean this, you are kind of implying that we jumped down off the tractor and shouted at her that she was in the wrong. I never left the tractor and my father wandered up after a while with his hands behind his back to see if all was okay. She did 85% of the talking. She actually said first that she was going too fast, that she was in a hurry. I never got the opportunity to "accuse" her.

The straight stretch of the road, is probably 20ft, but I have yet to see a bridge that is only wide enough for one car to appear in the middle of a road that wide. You have to see that the sides of the road taper into the bridge (which is one car wide) and the bridge is an actual bend in the road. There is no 'her side' of the road on a one car bridge..

So do you think I was wrong to stop the tractor? Should I have kept driving over the bridge?

I said that I am fairly sure you need an escort for a harvester - as it is over 3.5. (a modern combine harvester - if we are splitting hairs the smaller ones would be under 3.5, but a modern high output machine would be over 3.5, plus it could probably have the header in tow.

Yeah, they were 4' bales, so we were under.

You're not explaining it very well, usually the first person on the bridge has right of way, so was she first on the bridge and you blocked her exit,
If you had been on your own side of the road, would she have drove by without incident.
I've a yard on an outfarm and if an artic is collecting stock he reverses out on the road after, do i not need to stand on the road when he's reversing out.
He's under 3.5mtrs so doesn't need an escort.
Because that's basically what you're doing, making a dangerous manouvre without warning oncoming traffic

lostgoat

Rangler1
I know I'm not explaining it well. Sorry.
If I hadn't have stopped, I would have been first on the bridge, BUT I know 100% that if I had, she wouldn't have been able to stop without hitting me..

Well, would your suggestion about reversing the artic out be a different scenario? You would be entering a public highway (roadway). (that's a question, don't want to be termed as getting defensive again!

That's probably the truest words ever spoken! You get the law, not justice, thanks Bass Reeves! That in itself sums it up for me.

Muckit

rangler1 wrote: »

I've a yard on an outfarm and if an artic is collecting stock he reverses out on the road after, do i not need to stand on the road when he's reversing out.

If we're being technical, reversing ANY vehicle onto a public rd is illegal. You waving him out doesn't make a blind bit of difference. He should everse into your yard and drive out.

rangler1

Muckit wrote: »

If we're being technical, reversing ANY vehicle onto a public rd is illegal. You waving him out doesn't make a blind bit of difference. He should everse into your yard and drive out.

I know it's illegal, that's not my point, just demonstrating just because can't see cars coming doesn't mean you can drive across the road.
Artic usually comes here in the dark, he'd be reversing to his left if he reversed in, handier the other way, last week he had a left hand drive and it worked better.......45ft 4 deck sheep trailer......takes a bit of room

dzer2

I drive a truck part time the amount of people I meet and get over taken by that haven't got a clue what they are doing is manic. Speed and this is my road attitude when you meet others driving on minor roads. Got asked one day what the hell I was doing on her road i told the LADY that I was delivering to a business about a mile away. The lady told me there was no such place on her road. While unloading the truck the same lady drove into the house opposite.:D

Muckit

I don't know about not crossing the centreline crack. I've full coach licence and you have to cross line going round tight streets to make room when turning sharp corner.

In Galway city for example there are yellow box junctions at the bends the town hall side of he bridge crossing from cathedral. They are to allow buses and lorries to cross out onto other side to swing around bend. Anyone from the weestt will know the spot I'm talking about. If you didn't cross the line, you'd wrap your bus/lorry around the building.

Passing under arch of bridges is another. You have to straddle the line to get maximum overhead clearance and it is 100% legal to do so.

rangler1

Muckit wrote: »

I don't know about not crossing the centreline crack. I've full coach licence and you have to cross line going round tight streets to make room when turning sharp corner.

In Galway city for example there are yellow box junctions at the bends the town hall side of he bridge crossing from cathedral. They are to allow buses and lorries to cross out onto other side to swing around bend. Anyone from the weestt will know the spot I'm talking about. If you didn't cross the line, you'd wrap your bus/lorry around the building.

Passing under arch of bridges is another. You have to straddle the line to get maximum overhead clearance and it is 100% legal to do so.

legal or not, surely you have to wait till the road is clear before you cross the line

Muckit

rangler1 wrote: »

legal or not, surely you have to wait till the road is clear before you cross the line

Not necessarily. Whoever is nearest. The traffic approaching you have to have eyes in their heads too. A coach or lorry isnt exactly small and hard to see

9935452

lostgoat wrote: »

I'm not trying to wage a war here or anything, just trying to get informed and peoples opinions, and hopefully learn something that can help me in the future.

Would brake marks not account for a measure of the other vehicles speed?
If there had to have been an accident, would the guards have been able to see that the road conditions were okay and the load was fine?

With all respect, and I mean this, you are kind of implying that we jumped down off the tractor and shouted at her that she was in the wrong. I never left the tractor and my father wandered up after a while with his hands behind his back to see if all was okay. She did 85% of the talking. She actually said first that she was going too fast, that she was in a hurry. I never got the opportunity to "accuse" her.

The straight stretch of the road, is probably 20ft, but I have yet to see a bridge that is only wide enough for one car to appear in the middle of a road that wide. You have to see that the sides of the road taper into the bridge (which is one car wide) and the bridge is an actual bend in the road. There is no 'her side' of the road on a one car bridge..

So do you think I was wrong to stop the tractor? Should I have kept driving over the bridge?

I said that I am fairly sure you need an escort for a harvester - as it is over 3.5. (a modern combine harvester - if we are splitting hairs the smaller ones would be under 3.5, but a modern high output machine would be over 3.5, plus it could probably have the header in tow.

Yeah, they were 4' bales, so we were under.

Im not tring to have an argument here eithre but ill point out a few more things
This is the first you are mentioning of brake marks which i assume are skid marks. You can get a car to skid at 10mph, plus to be fair to her she was travelling down hill which could push her along a bit more. How long was the skid mark out of curiosity? im Thinking ABS here .

I never said that ye jumped off the tractor and shouted at her that she was driving too fast . What i i meant was it can be easy to influence a lady who could be in shock with 2 lady telling her that she was going to fast.
Im only getting details here that you left out in your first post, just like the skid marks.
I have to say though that i would find it hard to believe that the woman shouted abuse at you and then admitted straight after that it was her fault , and you never got down off the tractor even with her in tears.

Fair enough there is no 'her side of the road ' on the bridge but you were blocking the exit of the bridge on her side.
As one of the other posters said she was on the bridge first so she had right of way.
One thing that is confusing me a bit here is the description of the whole thing. it might help you understand why people are possibly point the finger at you. you are describing a humpback bridge on a bend in the road where you have to cross over to the other side of the road to make the bend.
If the bend is that bad , how can the car be going that fast considering its a humpback bridge.

So we are agreed about the whole escort thing? , less than 3.5m no escort required . Above 3.5m ,an escort is legally required.
I think part of the confusion here is you are referring to combine harvesters , im referring to forage harvesters, hence why i said my neighbour might just have a silage trailer as an escort. Combine harvesters are like hens teeth around here

alps

The only way to have found out what is correct in this situation is for both of you to have collided. ..then you would find out...The law is never straightforward nor would I suggest consistent...It can sometimes be up to the negotiating skills of the representitives and the "understanding" of the judge.

I'll give an example of a collision between an artic truck and a car.
The truck was coming southbound on a very narrow road between Castlecor (old Greenhall motors)(liscarroll) and cecilstown/mallow for those of you that know it. The road is twisty and on a bend to the right the tractor unit of the truck was as tight as feasible against the left fence, but the trailer was tracking out on the road not giving enough clearance for the car to pass. The oncoming car passed up the cab of the lorry and struck the first axle of the trailer.

The truck driver contended that he did what was possible as he had the truck against the fence on yhe left but the design of an artic truck meant that on a right hand curve the trailer would track further out on the road. This was not the fault of the truck driver and should be recognised by other road users. He contended that the car driver had time to see him and had not slowed down in time..He was stopped.

However the truck driver did not get a check to give evidence as the lady car driver gave evidence that the truck was taking over too much of the road and the judge asked where exactly did this take place. She described the stretch of road and the judge said."I know it well...got the fright of my life from a truck there myself"....

End of defence...

Waffletraktor

MF290 wrote: »

+1 some lorry drivers are the same, can be awful pussys about driving past you. Someone said that the public buses aren't allowed reverse?

Pet hate of mine is people giving out about 50k tractors going too fast, it's usually the cars that can't stop if they meet you on the road....

There is something in it all right about buses always stop to let you go buy and cant/wont reverse.
Its not all people giving out, we run 50k tractors and are now kitted out to do that with any implement you would. Sacked a student after a few hours on his first day carting for driving too fast, after first being told to slow down by the combine driver and then a phone call off a local farmer to say he will either kill someone or atleast roll a trailer..
Its a case of driving to the road/load and what you think some of the idiots might try next around you.

MIKEKC

If you were taking more than half the road I'd say 50--50

Muckit

alps wrote: »

I'll give an example of a collision between an artic truck and a car.

End of defence...

Sorry.... bit slow, who did the judge side with?

MF290

Waffletraktor wrote: »

There is something in it all right about buses always stop to let you go buy and cant/wont reverse.
Its not all people giving out, we run 50k tractors and are now kitted out to do that with any implement you would. Sacked a student after a few hours on his first day carting for driving too fast, after first being told to slow down by the combine driver and then a phone call off a local farmer to say he will either kill someone or atleast roll a trailer..
Its a case of driving to the road/load and what you think some of the idiots might try next around you.

Only place for him...

I can remember there was a new lad 'working' for our contractor driving like a maniac a few years ago. I still can't figure out how he was able to go so fast around and through a slatted shed with a 3k gallon tanker... mentioned it in passing to the cousin the next day, apparently it was his 2nd warning and he was gone.

Good loser

Surely the rule is/should be that you must be able to stop within the distance of clear road ahead of you. For head-on traffic.

So if the visibility is 20 ft or 60ft this will control the speed one is travelling.

In this case she couldn't stop until 4/5 ft beyond front of tractor; therefore she was wrong.

Insurance companies will argue one thing. Judges are unreliable.

alps

Muckit wrote: »

Sorry.... bit slow, who did the judge side with?

My point as good looser says...unreliable. .

You just don't know what may happen in court

Bass Reeves

Good loser wrote: »

Surely the rule is/should be that you must be able to stop within the distance of clear road ahead of you. For head-on traffic.

So if the visibility is 20 ft or 60ft this will control the speed one is travelling.

In this case she couldn't stop until 4/5 ft beyond front of tractor; therefore she was wrong.

Insurance companies will argue one thing. Judges are unreliable.

Ya we will all travel narrow roads ar 20km/hour. Truth is there is an onus on us when we drive tractors on narrow roads to take more care even if that means that we allow for the stupidity of other drivers. I myself have noticed that over the last year that drivers on side roads are more careless. This is down to people again being busy and in a hurry not condoning it but that is the reality.

The law cannot cater for every single one off incident. The old story holds true hard cases make bad law. This come from the thinking we cannot legislate for everything

Muckit

alps wrote: »

My point as good looser says...unreliable. .

You just don't know what may happen in court

That's what I'm trying to figure out! What did happen in court, what was the verdict?

Muckit

The other one apart from turning corners with trailers, are loaders.

I still can't figure out where the law stands on these. You see lads coming out gaps and side roads with loader jutting out onto road... all done totally blind.

I seen a lad drive up to white line coming out of side road. He had the loader up and a car zoomed past under the bale carrier! Grand but what if it was a curtainsider?

Reggie.

Muckit wrote: »

The other one apart from turning corners with trailers, are loaders.

I still can't figure out where the law stands on these. You see lads coming out gaps and side roads with loader jutting out onto road... all done totally blind.

I seen a lad drive up to white line coming out of side road. He had the loader up and a car zoomed past under the bale carrier! Grand but what if it was a curtainsider?

Happens to me alot during the summer but a certain amount of responsibility has to go to other drivers as I've never had a driver stop to let me out a gap. Some drivers have very little knowledge about large vehicles outside thier own car such as braking capabilities and manoverabilty/handling characteristics of agri machines or trucks in general

Bass Reeves

alps wrote: »

However the truck driver did not get a check to give evidence as the lady car driver gave evidence that the truck was taking over too much of the road and the judge asked where exactly did this take place. She described the stretch of road and the judge said."I know it well...got the fright of my life from a truck there myself"....

End of defence...

Muckit wrote: »

That's what I'm trying to figure out! What did happen in court, what was the verdict?

It obivious there was no point in trying to make a defence of the case as the judge had already made his mind up

Muckit wrote: »

The other one apart from turning corners with trailers, are loaders.

I still can't figure out where the law stands on these. You see lads coming out gaps and side roads with loader jutting out onto road... all done totally blind.

I seen a lad drive up to white line coming out of side road. He had the loader up and a car zoomed past under the bale carrier! Grand but what if it was a curtainsider?

You would be in the wrong as if coming out on to a road blind ( and I crawl out a gate with a tractor myself) the onus is on the person trying to come out of they cannot see to have someone directing them out onto the road.

MF290

Where does the heavier vehicle having the right of way come into all of this or is that made up?

kowtow

MF290 wrote:

Where does the heavier vehicle having the right of way come into all of this or is that made up?

Doesn't exist on the road does it? My son was suggesting similar the other day, and I told him that he was thinking of a "vessel constrained by draught" for which he would need 1. To be a ship 2. At sea and 3. To be showing the proper lights.