Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

Who would be more at fault?

  • 14-10-2019 1:28pm
    #1
    Posts: 0 Kali Fit Steak


    This is purely hypothetical: Not seen it or involve in it, just unsure in my own head.

    Whole scenario is 50kmh limited.
    So you're on a minor road, waiting at junction to turn right.
    No traffic from the left but a line of traffic coming from the right.

    There is a gap in the traffic and there is plenty of time/space to pull across the lane and complete the turn to go right.
    Except the nearest oncoming car is actually travelling closer to 100km and closes the gap far faster than they should have, and now clips the rear corner of your car.

    Are you at fault for going through a gap, which SHOULD have had enough safe time to move?
    Or is the other driver taking the blame for going far too fast?


    Or a combination of both...


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 30,607 ✭✭✭✭ Penn


    This is purely hypothetical: Not seen it or involve in it, just unsure in my own head.

    Whole scenario is 50kmh limited.
    So you're on a minor road, waiting at junction to turn right.
    No traffic from the left but a line of traffic coming from the right.

    There is a gap in the traffic and there is plenty of time/space to pull across the lane and complete the turn to go right.
    Except the nearest oncoming car is actually travelling closer to 100km and closes the gap far faster than they should have, and now clips the rear corner of your car.

    Are you at fault for going through a gap, which SHOULD have had enough safe time to move?
    Or is the other driver taking the blame for going far too fast?


    Or a combination of both...

    You, imo. SHOULD have had time doesn't mean you had time. You would have failed to properly judge the speed of the traffic and therefore pulled out when there wasn't enough time/space to do so safely.

    Other driver may have been going too fast, but you would have failed to notice it and pulled out when it wasn't safe to do so.


  • Registered Users Posts: 384 ✭✭ durtybit


    This is purely hypothetical: Not seen it or involve in it, just unsure in my own head.

    Whole scenario is 50kmh limited.
    So you're on a minor road, waiting at junction to turn right.
    No traffic from the left but a line of traffic coming from the right.

    There is a gap in the traffic and there is plenty of time/space to pull across the lane and complete the turn to go right.
    Except the nearest oncoming car is actually travelling closer to 100km and closes the gap far faster than they should have, and now clips the rear corner of your car.

    Are you at fault for going through a gap, which SHOULD have had enough safe time to move?
    Or is the other driver taking the blame for going far too fast?


    Or a combination of both...

    Seen this type of scenario before only it was a motorbike doing speeds close to 100mph, lanes were split to allow for a junction, car indicates and maneuvers to go right (crossing the oncoming lane)... motorcycle unable to slow down in time hits the car. Motorcycle rider dies in the incident. The gentleman in the car I believe got done for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,282 ✭✭✭✭ bucketybuck


    Are you at fault for going through a gap, which SHOULD have had enough safe time to move?

    Should have had enough time in a hypothetical world.

    Didn't have enough time in the real world.

    Guess which world drivers have to operate in?


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    durtybit wrote: »
    Seen this type of scenario before only it was a motorbike doing speeds close to 100mph, lanes were split to allow for a junction, car indicates and maneuvers to go right (crossing the oncoming lane)... motorcycle unable to slow down in time hits the car. Motorcycle rider dies in the incident. The gentleman in the car I believe got done for it.
    that footage was released as a PSA (with the blessing of the mother of the dead motorcyclist) to serve as a warning, to motorcyclists and motorists alike.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,263 ✭✭✭ Allinall


    I was involved in something similar years ago.

    Joining a dual carriageway off a slip road with a STOP sign at the end.

    Stopped at the line and checked for oncoming traffic.
    Saw a car way off in the distance ( probably 3-400 yards). Pulled out into the lane and accelerated fairly quickly. Got rear ended.

    Insurance companies couldn't sort it out so it went to court.

    From recollection it was split 80-20. Me being found 20% at fault.

    I know it's not the same scenario, but these things are rarely black and white.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 43,471 Mod ✭✭✭✭ magicbastarder


    going by that distance - let's say it was 300m - if the other driver was doing 180km/h, and you'd simply pulled out to a dead stop, that would have given him or her 6 seconds reaction time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,263 ✭✭✭ Allinall


    going by that distance - let's say it was 300m - if the other driver was doing 180km/h, and you'd simply pulled out to a dead stop, that would have given him or her 6 seconds reaction time.

    Very true.

    He claimed he was a lot closer when I pulled out. No witnesses, so it came down to the judge.


  • Posts: 0 Kali Fit Steak


    going by that distance - let's say it was 300m - if the other driver was doing 180km/h, and you'd simply pulled out to a dead stop, that would have given him or her 6 seconds reaction time.

    Like we have not all seen people do the whole "accelerate up their arses, to show that they are slowing me down" mentality of people when you pull out well ahead of them...


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,946 ✭✭✭✭ Cuddlesworth


    Allinall wrote: »
    I was involved in something similar years ago.

    Joining a dual carriageway off a slip road with a STOP sign at the end.

    Stopped at the line and checked for oncoming traffic.
    Saw a car way off in the distance ( probably 3-400 yards). Pulled out into the lane and accelerated fairly quickly. Got rear ended.

    Insurance companies couldn't sort it out so it went to court.

    From recollection it was split 80-20. Me being found 20% at fault.

    I know it's not the same scenario, but these things are rarely black and white.


    Was the crash at the junction or some distance away from it(since you accelerated heavily)?
    Did he make any effort to break?

    I think there is a difference between pulling directly out in front of a vehicle, like in the OP's post and pulling out where there was a reasonable time for them to react but they failed to do so.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,314 ✭✭✭✭ Cookie_Monster




  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 Kali Fit Steak


    Wanted to let it have a few comments before I tainted it with a directing comment.

    There are many reasons why someone cannot judge the speed of an approaching car correctly. Which puts the blame mainly on the person pulling out, you cannot assume that you have time
    However; speeding through a junction regardless of right-of-way garners some fault also. Don't be a dick by accelerating to close a gap or be going so fast that others believ they have safe time


Advertisement