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

Overtaking; who is in the right?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Uriel.
    Registered Users Posts: 8,061 ✭✭✭Uriel.


    Trying be car A waiting for the legal overtake when a continuous white turns to a broken white but car b doesn't feel there is a need to wait


  • Options
    #63
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,657 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Some on the answers and reasoning here are frankly a bit scary.


  • Options
    #64
    Neilw
    Registered Users Posts: 3,779 ✭✭✭Neilw


    Car A 100% at fault.

    On a side note, underpowered cars and drivers who are afraid to drive a car properly are part of the problem too.

    Most drivers are afraid to rev a car and use the power or lack of it, they just put the foot down and take an age to overtake.


  • Options
    #65
    omb0wyn5ehpij9
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,095 ✭✭✭✭omb0wyn5ehpij9


    This is an absolute car crash of a thread (pun intended)!


  • Options
    #66
    Benildus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 336 ✭✭Benildus


    BDJW wrote: »
    This is an absolute car crash of a thread (pun intended)!

    As the OP I've gone from feeling vindicated as the driver of car B, to considering never overtaking again and downgrading to a 1l powered Dacia therefore ensuring I can never overtake anything.

    Or maybe I'll just cycle everywhere :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    V8 Interceptor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭V8 Interceptor


    People are disagreeing all over the shop. No wonder there's so much confusion on the roads.


  • Options
    #68
    seagull
    Registered Users Posts: 2,342 ✭✭✭seagull


    The concensus seems to be pretty much that A is at fault in the case of an accident, but that B could be driving like a dick depending on whether A has had adequate chances to pass.

    One thing to consider as B is what is A driving. If A is driving something small without much power, then what you consider suitable passing spots might not be. If you then bull past when A finally has a chance to get past, they might feel they are righteously aggrieved, while you think they've been acting the maggot in not passing before.


  • Options
    #69
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    V8 Interceptor wrote: »
    People are disagreeing all over the shop. No wonder there's so much confusion on the roads.

    Being wrong isn't disagreeing. It's not knowing what you're talking about.

    A is wrong.


  • Options
    #70
    Cortexiphan
    Registered Users Posts: 27 ✭Cortexiphan


    If A Car is a Toyota, and B Car is not a Toyota, then Car A is in the wrong.


  • Options
    #71
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,944 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    CeilingFly wrote: »
    Hard to say who is at fault without being there.

    Car B should give car A the opportunity to overtake first as common courtesy.

    If car B basically wanted to act the bollox and commence overtaking at first opportunity as some dicks do, then car B is totally at fault

    This ill informed opinion is a bit shocking, to be honest. It’s 100% clear that car A is in the wrong in the described situation. Nothing to do with “common courtesy” - you have a legal obligation to refrain from overtaking if you doing so will put anyone else in danger, and pulling out in front of a car that is already overtaking you is clearly putting them in danger.
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1964/si/294/made/en/print

    19.—(1) A driver shall not overtake (or attempt to overtake) if to do so would endanger, or cause inconvenience to, any other person.

    As for the bit about overtaking at the first opportunity being described as “acting the bollox”, this makes absolutely no sense. All things being equal, by definition the car in front (A) has the opportunity before the car behind (B) and didn’t take it.

    In any case, there’s nothing in the law that gives anyone preference over overtaking anyone else based on their order in a line of traffic.

    Also, it’s quite common for the car directly behind a truck or bus to have an obscured view of the road ahead due to the bus or truck being in the way, and a car behind them to have a clearer view, and therefore a safer opportunity to begin the overtaking manoeuvre first.

    It’s a bit shocking that this even needs to be debated. This is basic stuff.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    V8 Interceptor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭V8 Interceptor


    Guy:Incognito wrote: »
    Being wrong isn't disagreeing. It's not knowing what you're talking about. A is wrong.

    I'm still convinced in my A/B scenario that B is in the wrong.


  • Options
    #73
    road_high
    Registered Users Posts: 19,396 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Cortexiphan wrote: »
    If A Car is a Toyota, and B Car is not a Toyota, then Car A is in the wrong.

    It usually is. At the front of every jam you'll usually find a dithering Toyota driver.


  • Options
    #74
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    if the facts have been accurately portrayed by the OP then car A is to blame.

    It's a big If though, there are so many other factors and facts we might not be told, or the OP even aware of. For instance, it's assumed Car A didn't check his mirrors, but maybe car B didn't spot car A was indicating before he pulled out.


  • Options
    #75
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,275 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Isambard wrote: »
    if the facts have been accurately portrayed by the OP then car A is to blame.

    It's a big If though, there are so many other factors and facts we might not be told, or the OP even aware of. For instance, it's assumed Car A didn't check his mirrors, but maybe car B didn't spot car A was indicating before he pulled out.


    Indicating does not give right of way. If B starts their maneuver first then A is in the wrong.


  • Options
    #76
    omb0wyn5ehpij9
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,095 ✭✭✭✭omb0wyn5ehpij9


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Indicating does not give right of way. If B starts their maneuver first then A is in the wrong.

    Exactly. The level of bad information in this thread is frightening


  • Options
    #77
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Indicating does not give right of way. If B starts their maneuver first then A is in the wrong.

    My point is we can't be sure who was doing what and in what order.

    Indicating comes before Manoeuvre in my book in any case. (MSM)


  • Options
    #78
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    bren2002 wrote: »
    Both are wrong.

    Car B should not be overtaking 2 vehicles and Car A should have been more defensive and checked mirrors before beginning the overtake manoeuvre.

    At that stage the car B was only overtaking Car A.


  • Options
    #79
    creedp
    Registered Users Posts: 5,649 ✭✭✭creedp


    Reati wrote: »
    In his hand fitted, slim fit suit? Where would he tender his keys?

    More importantly I hope he remembers to unbutton before he swoops into his low slung sportscar


  • Options
    #80
    Benildus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 336 ✭✭Benildus


    Isambard wrote: »
    My point is we can't be sure who was doing what and in what order.

    Indicating comes before Manoeuvre in my book in any case. (MSM)


    It's there in the opening post


  • Options
    #81
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,275 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Isambard wrote: »
    My point is we can't be sure who was doing what and in what order.

    Indicating comes before Manoeuvre in my book in any case. (MSM)


    it certainly does. But you dont have right of way until you have maneuvered and are in an overtaking position.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    Benildus wrote: »
    It's there in the opening post

    the OPs version of what happened is in the first post. I thought my post 74 was quite clear.


  • Options
    #83
    Benildus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 336 ✭✭Benildus


    Isambard wrote: »
    the OPs version of what happened is in the first post. I thought my post 74 was quite clear.

    I am the OP


  • Options
    #84
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,275 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Isambard wrote: »
    the OPs version of what happened is in the first post. I thought my post 74 was quite clear.


    Clear but wrong. Whether Car A was indicating or not is irrelevant.


  • Options
    #85
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    Benildus wrote: »
    I am the OP

    The circumstances are your version of what happened, but you may , for instance, not have noticed the car in front indicating, the chances of that are about the same as him not noticing you indicating and pulling out. I'm just making the point that someone's version in any circumstance cannot be taken as gospel just because they post it on the 'net . I'm not at all saying you or car A are wrong, I wasn't there.

    As for someone saying that it would not make any difference if car A was indicating before car B, well obviously had you known he was indicating, you wouldn't have gone for the overtake.


  • Options
    #86
    grogi
    Registered Users Posts: 8,615 ✭✭✭grogi


    Isambard wrote: »
    The circumstances are your version of what happened, but you may , for instance, not have noticed the car in front indicating, the chances of that are about the same as him not noticing you indicating and pulling out. I'm just making the point that someone's version in any circumstance cannot be taken as gospel just because they post it on the 'net . I'm not at all saying you or car A are wrong, I wasn't there.

    As for someone saying that it would not make any difference if car A was indicating before car B, well obviously had you known he was indicating, you wouldn't have gone for the overtake.

    Indicating or not - it does not change anything in deciding who's at fault here. Car A still has on obligation to check if nobody is overtaking before starting the manoeuvre, regardless if they indicated or not.

    The indicator is just an expression of intend. Car B might have acted differently if have seen the indicator, but it does not reduce responsibilities of car A in any way.


  • Options
    #87
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,657 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    Benildus wrote: »
    A truck is being followed by car A then car B. This procession hits a straight stretch of road - broken white line and no oncoming traffic.

    Car B indicates and moves out to overtake both Car A and Truck. Car A then indicates and pulls out forcing Car B onto opposite verge and also to brake hard....

    Looks pretty clearcut to me. Car A is totally at fault.


  • Options
    #88
    The Rape of Lucretia
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭The Rape of Lucretia


    Benildus wrote: »
    A truck is being followed by car A then car B. This procession hits a straight stretch of road - broken white line and no oncoming traffic.

    Car B indicates and moves out to overtake both Car A and Truck. Car A then indicates and pulls out forcing Car B onto opposite verge and also to brake hard.

    Cue much gesticulating and offensive sign language between occupants of both cars (truck driver seem nonplussed)

    So who is in the right and who should have their license shredded?

    For how long were you indicating before you pulled out ?

    While you state Car A 'then indicates', while this is how you perceived it, it is not necessarily so that it had not indicated before you pulled out.


  • Options
    #89
    Isambard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,796 ✭✭✭Isambard


    exactly. Without carA's version and that of any independent witness, no one can judge what actually happened and who was right or wrong.


  • Options
    #90
    the_pen_turner
    Registered Users Posts: 7,507 ✭✭✭the_pen_turner


    what could have happened that would make car b resposible.

    the only facts that matter are that car a entered a lane that was being used by car b.

    car a is 100% at fault in every posible version of events i can think of


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    ExoPolitic
    Registered Users Posts: 353 ✭✭ExoPolitic


    Cut and dry car A is in the wrong,

    It is not illegal to overtake multiple vehicles.

    It is mandatory you check your mirrors.

    If car A had signalled an overtake before car B had engaged in their overtake, I'm sure car B would of let off car A.

    Car A was driving with without due care and attention (only looked ahead and signalled as they were pulling out by the sounds of it).

    If car A would of caused a collision they would easily be brought before the court and most likely summonsed with the charge of "dangerous driving"

    Which is;

    "Dangerous Driving
    This involves driving in such a way that it puts the public and other motorists at serious risk of harm. It does not matter whether or not the driving thinks they were driving safely. It considers whether the reasonable person would consider their driving to be dangerous."

    - Not checking mirrors and pulling out is dangerous in any situation, just this time it "only" almost caused a crash.


Advertisement