Swerve situation- responsibility

cantdecide

I've always wondered.

For example- I'm in the overtaking lane, overtaking someone who hasn't seen me and they sling out. If they really go deep and all but smash into me, if I swerve, run off the road and damage my car, who is considered responsible if no contact is made between the cars?

Anan1

The problem for you in that scenario is that they're most likely gone.

brightkane

Agreed, its proving it happened as you said, ie prob your word against his if no viable witness or cctv and u get his reg.

cormie

But if you can prove it, is it definitely his responsibility?

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

But if you can prove it, is it definitely his responsibility?

Every situation is different. So, only definite if it goes to court and the judge agrees with you.

And you're starting at a disadvantage, as the onus is first on you to prove you were driving with due care. Pretty much, you'd have to prove your innocence.

Steve

I would think that the 'yield to traffic on your right' rule would carry some weight. In any event, the law requires the driver who is changing lanes to yield to traffic already in the lane they're moving to so you would be 100% in the right.
As was said though, they'd be gone like shit off a hot shovel so identifying them could be a problem.

Random

The other person could argue you accelerated as they moved into the lane etc etc. So many ways it could go, tough without proof.

VanhireBoys

Sorry lads but the last time I swerved to avoid some "Dozy Cow" I went off and damaged my bumper. She just drove on and I was left...! The Garda dont want to know etc etc etc.....!

My bro had the same situation at a roundabout where he was on the roundabout and a person pulled out in front of him. Lets just say he didnt even try to avoid the accident, just braced himself and duly T-boned the Clio that pulled out.

The roads are a jungle and common courtesy is out the window. Agressive behaviour is now an everyday scenario unfortunately.:(

nogoodnamesleft

Few years ago some silly b*tch pulled out in front of me (failed to yield) from a minor road. Needless to say I hadnt much time braked as hard as i could and pulled the handbrake...spun out travelled parallel to someones drive way wall and struck a glancing blow to the drive way pillar just in front of the front drivers side wheel and i literally slid into his driveway entrance. Car was no where to be seen... Took me 4-5 mins to check the car out and get it started and drove very slowly up the road. Travelled 1/3 of a mile and spotted the parked outside a house (engine and lights off) which sells countless cars all lined up on the road side. I recon she was using this as cover as she tried to figure out what to do (I wouldnt hold my breath that she would have come back)!! Anyway confronted the stilly c*nt, she admitted all libiality and I said she could pay for the damages which she accepted. I reported it to the gardai and to my insurance. The following days she didnt accept my phone calls so rang her insurance (she didnt report the accident) so I reported it for her. Plagued the gardai in question to get her to provide her insurance details at the station (I had forgotten to get them at the road side) 3 months later her insurance payed up for the material damages (I wasnt injured luckily) the day before the court case. So it can be done.

Oh was chatting the the guy whose pillar I hit it (the following day) wasnt damaged just few chips on it. The pointed out that the pillar cap wasnt cemented in place could have quiet easliy came in the window....

Jeapy

Wondered the same thing after my incident...
Driving to Dublin on the M4 about 4-5 weeks ago, I was a passenger in a car driving at 120km/hr in the driving lane. We came across a girl mid twenties in a silver polo in the overtaking lane. She was at about 100km/hr, so we stayed in our own lane (does that count as undertaking seeing as she was well under the limit, with no traffic on the road in the wrong lane? ROTR can be unclear!). The car behind us, for some reason, moved into the overtaking lane and as we were directly alongside her, she started to move out of his way, into our lane! We swerved and almost ended up in the barrier. Thick cow. Driving in Ireland :mad:

copacetic

Jeapy wrote: »

Wondered the same thing after my incident...
Driving to Dublin on the M4 about 4-5 weeks ago, I was a passenger in a car driving at 120km/hr in the driving lane. We came across a girl mid twenties in a silver polo in the overtaking lane. She was at about 100km/hr, so we stayed in our own lane (does that count as undertaking seeing as she was well under the limit, with no traffic on the road in the wrong lane? ROTR can be unclear!). The car behind us, for some reason, moved into the overtaking lane and as we were directly alongside her, she started to move out of his way, into our lane! We swerved and almost ended up in the barrier. Thick cow. Driving in Ireland :mad:

poor driving by her, worse driving by your thick mate.

cormie

Jeapy wrote: »

Wondered the same thing after my incident...
Driving to Dublin on the M4 about 4-5 weeks ago, I was a passenger in a car driving at 120km/hr in the driving lane. We came across a girl mid twenties in a silver polo in the overtaking lane. She was at about 100km/hr, so we stayed in our own lane (does that count as undertaking seeing as she was well under the limit, with no traffic on the road in the wrong lane? ROTR can be unclear!). The car behind us, for some reason, moved into the overtaking lane and as we were directly alongside her, she started to move out of his way, into our lane! We swerved and almost ended up in the barrier. Thick cow. Driving in Ireland :mad:

This situation isn't outlined in the ROTR (undertaking a car when they are in the overtaking lane) but your friend should have made his way into the overtaking lane, given a flash/beep if necessary and if no reaction, legally should have stayed in the driving lane going her speed, but we all know in this situation undertaking at higher speed and caution is another option

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

This situation isn't outlined in the ROTR (undertaking a car when they are in the overtaking lane)

It's very clearly covered in the section on overtaking.

cormie

Not exactly, it doesn't mention what to do in the case where the other driver isn't following the rules of the road just like it doesn't define what "slow moving traffic is".

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

Not exactly, it doesn't mention what to do in the case where the other driver isn't following the rules of the road just like it doesn't define what "slow moving traffic is".

In that situation, you keep your distance and wait until it's possible to pass legally and safely. Also stay out of other driver's blind spots.

Slow moving is 'stop/start' queueing traffic. Not 100kph.

cormie

Yes one would assume it's stop start, but it's still not defined as stop start.

Waiting until it's possible to pass legally isn't always the best option. What if the driver in the overtaking lane (incorrect lane to be in in their situation) was going the legal minimum of 50kmph on a motorway with a legal limit of 120kmph. Do you think somebody tight on time will happily wait until they can legally overtake and trod along at 50kmph behind them? This will only build frustration and have a much worse knock on effect for any other cyclist/pedestrian/motorist that this driver will encounter further on.

As I said, attempt to make them aware of your presence, 4/5 they'll move to the driving lane, for the other times, just make sure it's safe to do whatever you decide to do

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

Yes one would assume it's stop start, but it's still not defined as stop start.

The RoTR does refer to 'queuing', which implies 'stop/start', that being the well-understood nature of a queue.

cormie wrote: »

Waiting until it's possible to pass legally isn't always the best option. What if the driver in the overtaking lane (incorrect lane to be in in their situation) was going the legal minimum of 50kmph on a motorway

It's impossible to make rules for every situation In this case, the driver in question was not doing 50mph, she was doing 100kph. In any case where you have to use your discretion relating to a safety law, the outcome speaks for itself.

cormie

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

The RoTR does refer to 'queuing', which implies 'stop/start', that being the well-understood nature of a queue.

This is a direct paste from the ROTR:
You may overtake on the left when
You want to go straight ahead when the driver in front of you has moved
out and signalled that they intend to turn right.
You have signalled that you intend to turn left.
Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is
moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane.

But then it mentions:
Overtake only on the right, unless traffic is travelling in slow moving queues and
the traffic queue on your right is travelling more slowly than you are. If you
intend to move from a slower lane to a faster lane, adjust your speed first.

So the first is what I was talking about, the 2nd what you're talking about

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

It's impossible to make rules for every situation In this case, the driver in question was not doing 50mph, she was doing 100kph. In any case where you have to use your discretion relating to a safety law, the outcome speaks for itself.

Indeed

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

So the first is what I was talking about, the 2nd what you're talking about :)Indeed

To get the picture, the whole section has to be read as one and I was referring to both. The first part is an accurate quote of the regulations, the second, advice based on an understanding of the intention of the law.

It's quite clear that overtaking on the inside of a vehicle which is travelling at 100kph is neither intended by the law nor permitted.

cormie

It could be a lot clearer It's just unfortunate people have to find themselves in these positions because somebody else is breaking the rules of the road.

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

It could be a lot clearer

I understand where you're coming from. Many people have difficulty understanding road traffic rules.

cormie

So let's hope they amend it and define what slow means. Because 100kmph is slow if you're doing on the driving lane of the Autobahn in a Veyron for example

cyclopath2001

cormie wrote: »

So let's hope they amend it and define what slow means. Because 100kmph is slow if you're doing on the driving lane of the Autobahn in a Veyron for example

Do you think that if they put a number on it, people would comply?

cormie

Some would, some wouldn't but it's all relevant to the situation at hand. It is possible to undertake safely.