Bus Lanes - Who has right of way?

cyclopath2001

kbannon wrote:

Which implies that he was driving without due care and attention or that the intentionally hit her car. There is nothing to support either but as the OP mentioned "Obviously, my wife should have checked more fully before changing lane" Im inclined to disbelieve either theory.

The rights and wrongs of who did what do not always translate into a equal outcome in court.

Because it was the motion of the taxi that caused the damage, that puts the taxi driver in a position (should it go to court) of having to defend himself, placing him/her initially at a disadvantage. How appropriate his speed was, would be judged, not by reference to the speed limit, but to to conditions at the time and whether of not it would be reasonable to expect him to anticipate a car intruding into the lane while he was (legally) overtaking on the inside.

As a cyclist, I'm frequently obstructed by drivers illegally blocking cycle lanes while waiting to join other traffic. So, I have to take account of this behaviour in exercising reasonable care on the road.

My bet would be on them settling on the steps of the court and each paying their own damage.

XJR

Given the general paucity of knowledge of rules of the road displayed here I surprised (as a bike driver and pedestrian) that I've lived so long.

seamus

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Because it was the motion of the taxi that caused the damage, that puts the taxi driver in a position (should it go to court) of having to defend himself, placing him/her initially at a disadvantage. How appropriate his speed was, would be judged, not by reference to the speed limit, but to to conditions at the time and whether of not it would be reasonable to expect him to anticipate a car intruding into the lane while he was (legally) overtaking on the inside.

I'm sorry, but because she was the one who changed lanes without failing to yield the right of way to the taxi, the onus would be on her to prove that the taxi driver deliberately went out of his way to hit her and didn't take evasive action.
You can equally argue that it was the motion of her car that caused it to hit the taxi.

You're right in one thing - "Right of way" isn't a right to shove people out of it, or demand that people get out of your way. It's a direction to the people that *don't* have right of way that they *must* yield to traffic that has the right of way.

All things being equal in an accident, the person who made the first error will shoulder most of the blame. In order to implicate anyone else, they would need to show that the other driver also made an error. In this case, it would appear that she pulled in front of the taxi driver because she failed to look over her shoulder and lost her wing mirror. Based on the OP's description, there is no evidence to show that the taxi driver made an error.

You could argue for any accident that if any of the parties involved had taken more care, then the accident wouldn't have occured. This is why we rely on what actually happened, and actual errors, as opposed to "what ifs" and "but ifs". Actual facts - she pulled in front the taxi driver and hit him.

Spook_ie

As has been stated in different posts there are two ways a bus lane terminates ( temporary or permanent )

Type 1 The bus lane ends and ALL traffic is forced out of the bus lane to join the "normal" traffic, as a norm there would be a give way line and signage and the onus would be on the user of the bus lane to yield

Type 2 The bus lane is temporaraly suspended ( to allow traffic to turn left at a junction and (usualy ) becomes back in force at the other side of the junction ( signage would also usualy include "Turn left unless bus" the onus would be on users changing into the left hand lane to yield.

A good site for most people to read would be http://www.drivingschoolireland.com



As for the OP if it took the taxi 30 meters to stop I would query if he was within the speed limit!

franksm

XJR wrote:

Given the general paucity of knowledge of rules of the road displayed here I surprised (as a bike driver and pedestrian) that I've lived so long.

LOL - we could learn a lot from motorcyclists about ROR :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

seamus wrote:

Actual facts - she pulled in front the taxi driver and hit him.

Missing information is how much time elapsed between the time she pulled in front of the taxi and collision taking place.

seamus wrote:

You can equally argue that it was the motion of her car that caused it to hit the taxi.

Not if her car was stationary at the time of the collision.

But, you're right, we're drifting off into what' if's. The most important thing to recognise is that 'right of way' plays only a small role in determination of liability.