Apart from the lane hogging bus, who is more at fault here?

Dirty Nails

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

On a 3 laned stretch of motorway, there is a bus driving in the middle lane (double decker so driving at 65 km/h).

A car approaches from behind in the leftmost lane at the 80 km/h speed limit.

Coming up behind the car is a lorry.

The car carefully overtakes the bus at 80 km/h and no more, as to exceed this speed would be extremely dangerous and life threatening.

When the car is overtaking the bus, the lorry increases to an extremely dangers and reckless speed (90 km/h which is the max for the lorry and simply undertakes the bus as the car is overtaking it correctly).

When the car returns to the leftmost lane, it is smashed into by the lorry driving at a disgraceful speed.

Who is at fault?

The lorry imo.

Just to be clear-car & lorry in lane 1,bus in lane 2. The car crosses from lane 1 to lane 3 to overtake. That should be 2 manoeuvres. The car overtakes the bus & decides to go back to lane 1 in 1 manoeuvre. Surely the car driver should have been checking their mirrors before crossing each lane?

Jeremy Sproket

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

You also can't undertake on the left or speed. It's a crime.

At least it is in my country (Sweden). The driving is poor here. Some cars don't have nearside mirrors btw (some vintage cars).

Can't you though? Follow the logic. A car drives at half the limit in the right lane, is every single other car on the road obliged to form a long double lane queue behind?

For me, if you are within the limit and don't change lanes to pass the slow vehicle, it's fine.

Dirty Nails

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Can't you though? Follow the logic. A car drives at half the limit in the right lane, is every single other car on the road obliged to form a long double lane queue behind?

For me, if you are within the limit and don't change lanes to pass the slow vehicle, it's fine.

I have no idea if that's legal or not,but I'd agree with you.
You don't expect people in cars wobbling across lanes without looking.

.anon.

As an aside, it might be worth contacting the bus company (assuming that the bus was clearly branded), either by email or through their social media accounts, about their driver's poor road positioning. There are very few scenarios in which a vehicle limited to 65km/h should be in the middle lane.

_Kaiser_

.anon. wrote: »

As an aside, it might be worth contacting the bus company (assuming that the bus was clearly branded), either by email or through their social media accounts, about their driver's poor road positioning. There are very few scenarios in which a vehicle limited to 65km/h should be in the middle lane.

If it's the crowd I'm thinking of then they aren't limited to 65 km/h or possibly at all.

Dirty Nails

Dirty Nails wrote: »

I have no idea if that's legal or not,but I'd agree with you.
You don't expect people in cars wobbling across lanes without looking.

True. In the op I think the car is at fault for the actual collision.

Del2005

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I've no idea what you're on about. Your post makes no sense and your statutory reference doesn't support it either.

It's legal to pass traffic on a single lane road by crossing into the oncoming lane, it's legal to pass traffic on a multi lane road by changing to the outside lane, it's legal to pass traffic on the inside if they aren't making as much progress as you.


My statutory reference was that regardless of what the truck or bus driver were doing the person doing the passing has to ensure that they merge safely back to the right. You can't say that the HGV driver was in the wrong and ignore that the car driver appears to have crossed 2 lanes of traffic without checking that's it safe.

athlone573

Del2005 wrote: »

, it's legal to pass traffic on the inside if they aren't making as much progress as you.
.

Oh no it's not

Only in slow moving traffic

Midnight_EG

.anon. wrote: »

As an aside, it might be worth contacting the bus company (assuming that the bus was clearly branded), either by email or through their social media accounts, about their driver's poor road positioning. There are very few scenarios in which a vehicle limited to 65km/h should be in the middle lane.

Depends on the section of road the OP is referring to though. Having worked in the Harristown depot of DB, going special to Clongriffin or into CC using the tunnel meant having to use the middle lane of the M50 as if you stick to the left lane you end up going towards the M1 northbound and then have to try jostle for position with little road space at that stage.

Del2005

athlone573 wrote: »

Oh no it's not

Only in slow moving traffic

The bus was doing 65km/h that's slow moving.

A Law

Midnight_EG wrote: »

Depends on the section of road the OP is referring to though. Having worked in the Harristown depot of DB, going special to Clongriffin or into CC using the tunnel meant having to use the middle lane of the M50 as if you stick to the left lane you end up going towards the M1 northbound and then have to try jostle for position with little road space at that stage.

Yea, this isn't a three lane motorway If it's from Junction 1 to the Port Tunnell. If the bus was using the tunnel if had to be in the middle lane. The inside lane is for the CC/santry turn off. Lorry probably coming off the M50. I can't see how the bus or lorry are at fault.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

There's no argument here

The car is at fault for moving into a lane when unsafe to do so

Unless we know exactly where the incident happened, we can't speculate on the bus and truck

But the previous is correct, it is illegal for a truck to be in the overtaking lane of a motorway so they took the blue sensible option.


Also I don't know what the OP is going on about dangerously overtaking a bus on a motorway, you overtake it like any other vehicle, end of. There's no need to slow down for it.

knucklehead6

The car carefully overtakes the bus at 80 km/h and no more, as to exceed this speed would be extremely dangerous and life threatening.

When the car is overtaking the bus, the lorry increases to an extremely dangers and reckless speed (90 km/h which is the max for the lorry and simply undertakes the bus as the car is overtaking it correctly).

Look at the emotive language. “Carefully” “exceed speed...extremely dangerous and life threatening”

“Extremely dangerous (sic) .... reckless speed”

I think the op is on a windup.

_Kaiser_

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If it's the crowd I'm thinking of then they aren't limited to 65 km/h or possibly at all.

What "crowd" are you thinking of? Also there are different regulations regarding speed limits for double deckers. A typical Dublin Bus/Go Ahead bus is restricted to 65kph as they have no seat belts fitted and are allowed to carry standing passengers.Same bus with seat belts fitted and no standing passengers this does not apply and some of these deckers are used by private companies one I know of does a Bus Eireann run every evening Dublin to Navan. Also a Double Decker Coach as used by Dublin Coach on their route 726 can also legally travel at 100kph.

Henry Ford III

Del2005 wrote: »

The bus was doing 65km/h that's slow moving.

It's not. It's slower moving.

Read the link I provided earlier and you'll see that slow moving has been defined as stop/start.

While that's not a statutory definition it's a RSA publication on the Garda website.

Jim_Hodge

The wording in the OP makes it perfectly clear who they think/want to be at fault, so any advice to the contrary is not helpful to them.


But the car driver is still primarily responsible.

FishOnABike

MacDanger wrote: »

Are they not allowed out for overtaking? Didn't know that

HGVs not allowed in lane 3 of a 3 lane carriageway.

twin_beacon

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

On a 3 laned stretch of motorway, there is a bus driving in the middle lane driving at 65 km/h.

A car approaches from behind in the leftmost lane at the 80 km/h speed limit.

Coming up behind the car is a lorry.

The car overtakes the bus at 80 km/h

When the car is overtaking the bus, the lorry undertakes the bus

When the car returns to the leftmost lane, it is smashed into by the lorry

Who is at fault?

updating the original post to just give the facts.
Who is responsible for the crash? Clearly the car, nobody else. If the lorry was speeding (if we even know the exact speed it was doing?), they are still not responsible for the crash, as the car did not correctly check their mirrors and blind spot before entering the left lane, into the path of the lorry.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Nope.

Slow in the context that's intended refers to congested bumper to bumper traffic, not traffic moving at between 60-90 km/h

How this isn't understood is beyond me.

The law does not have any context, it just states if traffic is moving more "slowly". There is no mention of what defines "slow", or if the slowness is being caused by traffic congestion, or just a single slow moving vehicle.



From page 55 of the Rules of the Road

REMEMBER You must normally overtake on the right. However, you are allowed to overtake on the left in the situations listed below.

• 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 but traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the right-hand lane – for example, in slow moving stop/start traffic conditions.

Del2005

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It's not. It's slower moving.

Read the link I provided earlier and you'll see that slow moving has been defined as stop/start.

While that's not a statutory definition it's a RSA publication on the Garda website.

Until there is a case taken we can discuss this till the sun expands and destroys the planet.

Still doesn't change the fact that the car driver was responsible for the crash. Even if the HGV did an illegal pass of the bus the car driver failed to check the lanes they crossed were clear

Henry Ford III

Del2005 wrote: »

Until there is a case taken we can discuss this till the sun expands and destroys the planet.

I really don't think there's much to discuss tbh. I've reasoned the case with both statutory and non statutory references supporting that.

Darc19

What motorway has 3 lanes and a 80km limit?


Possibly it's a n road such as N7 near newlands cross.

Op doesn't state where it was as it may not suit their argument.

Eg, if it was approaching Newlands cross the bus would be correct to be in lane 2 if it was continuing to Dublin city, truck would be ok to undertake if taking M50.


But no matter what even if truck was not turning off, it is the car that moved lanes and it is the car driver that is at fault.

Also the car driver should have been aware of the truck before they overtook the bus.

As they say, expect the unexpected.

_Kaiser_

twin_beacon wrote: »

The law does not have any context, it just states if traffic is moving more "slowly". There is no mention of what defines "slow", or if the slowness is being caused by traffic congestion, or just a single slow moving vehicle.


From page 55 of the Rules of the Road

Er... your own link/quote gives precisely what "slow" is defined as:

for example, in slow moving stop/start traffic conditions.

As others have said, there is a huge difference between slowly, and slower. A car doing 110 on a motorway may be moving slower than the car that overtakes at 120, but you couldn't say it's moving slowly.

Again, it worries me that this isn't clear to some people - either that or they're trying to play what they percieve as a "grey area" (it isn't!) for their own advantage.

bop1977

FishOnABike wrote: »

HGVs not allowed in lane 3 of a 3 lane carriageway.

Speed limit dependant. 80k or less yes they are, more than 80k they aren’t.

twin_beacon

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Er... your own link/quote gives precisely what "slow" is defined as:

No, the rules of the road just gives an example of what "slow" is.

Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly but traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the right-hand lane – for example, in slow moving stop/start traffic conditions.

The law does not state that overtaking on the left is allowed only in slow moving stop/start traffic conditions.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

As others have said, there is a huge difference between slowly, and slower. A car doing 110 on a motorway may be moving slower than the car that overtakes at 120, but you couldn't say it's moving slowly.

Again, it worries me that this isn't clear to some people - either that or they're trying to play what they percieve as a "grey area" (it isn't!) for their own advantage.

There is no definition in the law that states what slow actually is, and thats the whole argument here. Is it a fixed speed? Is it a percentage of the speed limit that applies to a road? In the passage we are given an an example of what slow is, but not a definition. How is this not a grey area when a term (slow) used in a law, is not clearly defined?
I don't see how I'm trying to use this to my own advantage? If someone ended up in court for undertaking a slower moving vehicle (on a two lane road, and within the speed limit), and the defending solicitor asked the judge for the exact definition of "slow" in the law, and it couldn't be produced, then the case would be thrown out.

knucklehead6

We're getting sidetracked here.


All of us can agree that the car driver is the one at fault in the incident mentioned in the OP, super swedish driving skills notwithstanding

Henry Ford III

twin_beacon wrote: »

No, the rules of the road just gives an example of what "slow" is.



The law does not state that overtaking on the left is allowed only in slow moving stop/start traffic conditions.



There is no definition in the law that states what slow actually is, and thats the whole argument here. Is it a fixed speed? Is it a percentage of the speed limit that applies to a road? In the passage we are given an an example of what slow is, but not a definition. How is this not a grey area when a term (slow) used in a law, is not clearly defined?
I don't see how I'm trying to use this to my own advantage? If someone ended up in court for undertaking a slower moving vehicle (on a two lane road, and within the speed limit), and the defending solicitor asked the judge for the exact definition of "slow" in the law, and it couldn't be produced, then the case would be thrown out.

Nope. The judge would make an interpretation as to the intent of the legislation, and would certainly be aided by any clarifying evidence.

That's how case law works.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

100% agree with the swedish bloke above (I swear I'm not biased because I love Volvo and Saab) and even in North American rules the car is wrong too.

But we all agree the car driver is the cause to the accident, the thread has served it's purpose IMO

Think we should all leave before more arguing of judges and interpretation of the law flow in

knucklehead6

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

100% agree with the swedish bloke above (I swear I'm not biased because I love Volvo and Saab) and even in North American rules the car is wrong too.

But we all agree the car driver is the cause to the accident, the thread has served it's purpose IMO

Think we should all leave before more arguing of judges and interpretation of the law flow in

Errrmmm

Red hair and freckles here Koppaberg. I’m as paddy as they come!!

twin_beacon

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Nope. The judge would make an interpretation as to the intent of the legislation, and would certainly be aided by any clarifying evidence.

That's how case law works.

Lets say this is the wording of a law:

Vehicles must not exceed a speed of 40 kmph when they are following an agricultural vehicle - for example, a tractor.

Applying the same interpretation the law mentioned in the rules of the road above, the speed limit of 40 kmph would apply to vehicles that are following tractors only, and would not apply to anyone following a combine harvester.

In the above tractor example, a tractor is an example of a agricultural vehicle, but its not the only type of agricultural vehicles.

In the rules of the road, slow moving stop/start traffic conditions is an example of slow traffic, but its not the only type of slow traffic.

markmoto

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

Who is at fault

MacDanger wrote: »

The lorry driver breaks the rules

Bus should be pullover and giving 60 euro fine and 2 penalty points.
https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Licensed%20Drivers/Penalty%20Point%20offences%20as%20of%2026%20October%202018.pdf