car crash update and advice needed please!!

lloydsproblems

New to this site and been following this thread for a few days.
The google maps you are using are out of date. The markings were changed when they widenend the roundabout. The photos of the incident show how the markings are now the google map is showing the old ones.
Totally agree that Highways have made an absolute mess with the markings and can cause a great deal of confusion !.

Doozergirl

lloydsproblems wrote: »

New to this site and been following this thread for a few days.
The google maps you are using are out of date. The markings were changed when they widenend the roundabout. The photos of the incident show how the markings are now the google map is showing the old ones.

Bless you. Much appreciated but if you're reading properly, then you'd know that everyone so far knows that too.

lloydsproblems

My apologies.
Could this also be taken up with the highways due to their negligence with the markings ? Surely they are a fault too !
Simular situation at sideslow roundabout exit to Redditch. Eventually changed to one lane only at exit instead of dual.

flyingscotno1

lloydsproblems wrote: »

My apologies.
Could this also be taken up with the highways due to their negligence with the markings ? Surely they are a fault too !
Simular situation at sideslow roundabout exit to Redditch. Eventually changed to one lane only at exit instead of dual.

How, the markings are correct to guidance and will (or should) have passed a safety audit.

pwllbwdr

backfoot wrote: »

I was talking about the middle lane, which has a straight ahead and a right arrow.

As I have just said, and said all along,I think the other driver was in the wrong lane. I also think the OP was.

Yes, and you're interpreting the straight arrow as meaning going around the roundabout to a later exit. So on your reading the 2nd lane can go round the roundabout to a later exit or round the roundabout to an even later exit whereas the 1st lane can only go around the roundabout to a later exit. Nobody can ever turn to A38.

The meaning and reasoning behind the straight arrows has been very clearly stated by others.

lloydsproblems

Flyingscott They might have passed a safety audit but do they ever have to drive round it to see if the markings work in practice instead of just on paper ?

flyingscotno1

lloydsproblems wrote: »

Flyingscott They might have passed a safety audit but do they ever have to drive round it to see if the markings work in practice instead of just on paper ?

Yes, a safety audit should involve visiting the location.

backfoot

pwllbwdr wrote: »

Yes, and you're interpreting the straight arrow as meaning going around the roundabout to a later exit. So on your reading the 2nd lane can go round the roundabout to a later exit or round the roundabout to an even later exit whereas the 1st lane can only go around the roundabout to a later exit. Nobody can ever turn to A38.

The meaning and reasoning behind the straight arrows has been very clearly stated by others.

The problem with forums and what is written, is that posters can deliberately misinterpret,wordsmith or take out of context another view. The above is a good example, as are the funny diagrams.

Both of you know,that I have never meant to imply you can't leave a left junction off a roundabout,yet you have gone out of your way to say I have. I don't mind at all really but I will say it's obviously not true.

Leaving a roundabout from the middle lane to go the left without checking what is on your inside is the potential problem. You only have to look at the google maps to see the tyre wear along the middle lane continues around that same lane.

I have only been trying to highlight certain aspects of the case which may cause the OP problems if this goes to court.i.e. present the potential downside risk, which I genuinely believe is present.

Counter the arguments by all means but please do it sensibly by looking at the true intention rather than attributing something that was not intended.

The case will hinge on the duty of care owed by each driver probably from the point after the traffic lights.The OP's evidence is full of descriptions of the other driver's erratic driving before that point. At the point when he chooses to pass him, he is no longer aware of him at all, and vice versa.

If he is completely happy with his case,why does he continue to put it up for scrutiny here? I think the majority of posters think he is 100% safe and have said so lots of times. There are a lesser number who can see some alternative outcomes, maybe 50/50, 75/25.

If he knows the downside risk, he can at least cover it off when presenting his evidence. I suggested getting a photo from the position of the other driver at the lights. I think that will form a big part of the other sides evidence.

pwllbwdr

backfoot wrote: »

The problem with forums and what is written, is that posters can deliberately misinterpret,wordsmith or take out of context another view. The above is a good example, as are the funny diagrams.

I'm out of here.

almillar

This case is so clear cut it is unbelievable. OP stayed in his own lane and carried on correctly. The other guy was in the left most lane, the markings lead him off the roundabout, he drove into the side of OP, who had the choice of the dual carriageway or the 'roundabout' (I think we should actually be calling it a dual carriageway that looks a lot like a roundabout.