Collision on roundabout

Melted

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458264#Comment_121458264

Ah here if this is the round about that the incident happened on and you proceeded on green yer one 100% ran through a red light. unless it was bumber to bumper and she was after passing her light? and sitting in traffic?

Eggs For Dinner

The truth is only what you can prove, nothing else. Possession of the road would appear to be with the other party. Witnesses and dashcam are your only friends

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121459864#Comment_121459864

That would be my thought.

I know the roundabout well and people are all over it, changing lanes and breaking lights, especially in rush hour.

There's a clear view to your right, and I'm sure you would have seen the car not stopping.

A friend is a solicitor and told me once that if a person crashes in a place they know to be dangerous, the court is more likely to rule against them since there is a known danger than was ignored.

It's up to the insurance or a court to decide however and best of luck because it's a sh#t situation.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458334#Comment_121458334

waffle. its also illegal to break a redlight. there are many roundabouts with traffic lights, and I have even come across roundabouts where there is a predestrian crossing which takes priority over traffic on the roundabout... or traffic coming off the roundabout - which still causes traffic on the roundabout to stop

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458336#Comment_121458336

safe to do so, would mean the way in front is clear though. not if there is likelihood of side impact. the same could be said for a traffic lgith cross road

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121459089#Comment_121459089

i didnt read beyond the ROTR, but the way being clear means the road in front is empty, not that some lunatic could side swipe you. the interpretation in this forum is beyond what is reasonably practical and practicable for any driver.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121459864#Comment_121459864

what utter BS. the truth is the truth is the truth. proving the truth is a different matter. t this thread is littered in loonies that I hope don't have a driving licence. the op is not even 1% at fault. This will come out in the insurance investigation.

josip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458981#Comment_121458981

In the absence of a dashcam did you get the details of any driver behind you who might be prepared to give a statement that you proceeded on green?

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121459908#Comment_121459908

is your solicitor Saul Goodman per chance? or Slipping Jimmy?

Padre_Pio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460044#Comment_121460044

He's good is what he is.

Eggs For Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460040#Comment_121460040

The truth is irrelevant when it comes to deciding liability in an accident. It will come down to physical evidence, witnesses, dashcam etc. What either party declares in the event of conflict will have little bearing.

Calahonda52

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460040#Comment_121460040

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/cyclist-who-broke-red-light-and-got-hit-by-car-settles-court-action-for-e190000-1541216.html

..

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460207#Comment_121460207

he sounds it, probably has a Wikipedia page to back up his stats bro. plus a randomer on boards. now that's next level bro.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460851#Comment_121460851

fantastic, you were able to quote a completely different accident, and draw similarities. that's next level woke man,. you should write the ROTR man, id defo buy it. 🤣.

P.S. Given the challenge of distinguishing dreams from reality, it's important to be clear—I must emphasize that the previous statement was purely sarcastic

Yeah Right

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458334#Comment_121458334

This is raising more questions for me than anything else.........

You've just said you should give way to cars on the right, why are you bemoaning the fact that cars coming from your right won't let you on in the very next sentence? Why would they let you on? Why would you try and enter if there's cars coming from your right?

Have you a source on the illegality of stopping on the roundabout? There's plenty of light-controlled ones near me where there is literally no other option at times. Even regular ones can be busy roundabouts at times with traffic backed up and cars stopped.......there's no way the correct course of action is "welp, 'tis illegal to stop, so I'm just gonna plough through the lad in front of me".

Viscount Aggro

You're not supposed to enter a standard roundabout unless you're clear to exit on the other side.

Yeah Right

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121462404#Comment_121462404

Absolutely 100% wrong. Please go hand in your licence if that's what you think. This is a roundabout, not a yellow box.

You're not supposed to enter a standard roundabout if (i) there is traffic already on it or (ii) there is traffic on your right about to enter it. That's it. There is nothing in the RotR that prevents anyone doing what you've said above. In fact, it actually indirectly contradicts what you say.....you HAVE TO enter the roundabout if your entry is clear.

Treat the roundabout as a junction. You must yield to traffic coming from the right, but keep moving if the way is clear.

artanevilla

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121462404#Comment_121462404

Incorrect.

Also a number of roundabouts you won't be able to see your exit at the entry point.

Viscount Aggro

OK.

Spook_ie

Ah sure yous have all been doing RaBs wrong since they were invented.

You stop, close your eyes and count to some random number between 1 and 10 and then hoof it outta there!

Unrealistic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121460026#Comment_121460026

So on the one hand we have your 'unique' interpretation that, when the RSA goes to the trouble of highlighting in a brightly coloured box that, "a green light is not a right of way, it is an indication that you may proceed with caution, but only if the way is clear", they are really saying you are not allowed to drive into someone in front of you but you are allowed to drive into the path of someone already in the lane you are about to enter.

And on the other hand we have insurance companies and judges saying the opposite in real life cases, that you do not have the right to move into someone's path and cause a collision, even if they shouldn't have been there in the first place.

Thanks for sharing your opinion, I guess, but I know which one I'll be relying on.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121467150#Comment_121467150

saul goodmans id guess? in the case of the OP, the way was clear. person changed lanes, and proceeded thru a red light. split it anyway you want, but its a real stretch to conclude the OP is liable.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121467150#Comment_121467150

nevermind, i see from your username that you are giving ironic answers. good one, you got me :P

Cuddlesworth

The Rules of the Road, are not the laws of the Road. They are guidelines for driving.

Dashcam would have saved your arse there, showing she broke the red.

Unrealistic

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121468667#Comment_121468667

That's true but it's also not the whole story. The Rules of the Road is intended to be readable version of our traffic legislation and also to provide guidelines. If it uses the word 'must' it is communicating that this is the law and if it uses the word 'should' then it is indicating that it is a guideline. But even the guidelines have legal implications. The law says nothing about what constitutes Careless Driving or Dangerous Driving, but just lists the penalties for these offences. The Gardai can rely on some of the 'shoulds' from the Rules of the Road to support a Careless or Dangerous Driving charge.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121462530#Comment_121462530

no, you don't yield to traffic "about to enter the roundabout" if you are already at it, then you are "about to enter it" you give right of way to whoever is on the roundabout.

if i am at a roundabout an there is nobody on it, i can proceed. if there is a car aggressively speeding towards the roundabout and likely to hit me if i pull out, i still have right of way because I'm on the roundabout before they enter it.

dulpit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121458264#Comment_121458264

I live in Cork, I go through this roundabout at least once a day most days. My usual route is coming from Douglas direction so that would be where the person who crashed into the OP was coming from. The distance between the red light there and the cars joining at bottom of airport hill is big enough. This tells me that either the OP didn't spot that the car had cleared the lights but there was traffic, or else the car who crashed into OP was going at a fair speed. Without dash cam/etc, there's not much else to go by - so I assume the insurers will figure it out.

_Kaiser_

I know the roundabout in question myself and its a mess - people regularly breaking red lights, changing lanes halfway across (and the majority of drivers in Cork don't indicate for some reason which is a personal bug-bear) and cutting others off in the process, so this doesn't surprise me at all.

Cork driver usage of roundabouts in general is shocking. This'll go 50/50 I'd say.

rob316

Just to update, dispute settled completely in my favour, third party paying for all damages to mine and her's vehicle.

standardg60

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121794947#Comment_121794947

Good stuff OP and proper order, clearly she ran the red.