Minor RTC on lane merging to left

almillar

The car on the right was changing lanes to the lane on their left, as the right hand lane disappeared. The arrows in *their* lane indicate that *they* need to merge in with the traffic to their left, not crash into it.

BOTH lanes of traffic have a responsibility here, in a merge - the outside lane isn't a slip road, like on a motorway, and the outside lane does not have to 'give way' to the inside lane like a slip road either - notice there are no give way lines.

There is no such thing as a non merge lane. If you're on the left lane, you don't just get to drive along as you please. You have as much a responsibility to find a place in the new single lane, as the person in the outside lane.

Outside lane driver in this case, from the description, was an eejit and caused the accident. Inside lane driver could have avoided it though, by being more aware of where the other driver was and by changing speed (slowing down would be my advice on this description) and letting the bad merger get in in front of you.

Tok3d

prowla wrote: »

The OP says that they saw the lights were changing from red to amber and so accelerated.

But presumably the other car also saw the lights change(/ing) and if they put their foot down then they could easily be alongside the OP's car 100 yds up the road. What's 0-30 in a decent 2L car - 3 or 4 seconds?

So we can assume that the other car was not stationary at the point where the OP undertook them.

And then both cars raced towards the merge point, giving the ensuing result.

Ways this could have been avoided: (i) the OP giving way to the other car, (ii) the OP accelerating more to make sure that the other car knew they owned that piece of the road, (iii) the other car giving way to the OP.

Incidentally, on the right of way thing, it is not absolutely clear which lane is which, since the white line dividing the lanes just stops a short distance before the road narrows; thus the inside lane does not have right of way per-se, and it's down to the law of the wild vs. common sense.

Anyway, the OP seems to have accepted it's 50:50, so the rest is academic.

I didn't accept it was 50:50, I accepted everybody's opinions that it was 50;50.

Ended up costing me £200.

Seems to be some misinformation about, I didn't undertake as the other guy was merging. His lane merged later on, I passed him whilst he was stationary with a good 1-2 car gap.

I hope everyone had a good Christmas, let's consider this thread closed? :P

Altarf

almillar wrote: »

BOTH lanes of traffic have a responsibility here, in a merge - the outside lane isn't a slip road, like on a motorway, and the outside lane does not have to 'give way' to the inside lane like a slip road either - notice there are no give way lines.

There is no such thing as a non merge lane. If you're on the left lane, you don't just get to drive along as you please. You have as much a responsibility to find a place in the new single lane, as the person in the outside lane.

Nope.

In this case the 'merge' instructions (arrows on the road) are only in the right hand lane, and there are no arrows in the left hand lane.

Any driver in the right hand lane therefore has to merge with the traffic in the left hand lane; the driver in the left hand hand lane has to do nothing but carry on.

George_Michael

Tok3d wrote: »

Ended up costing me £200.

£200 verses swallowing your pride and being intimidated by another driver for a second or two. I somehow think you picked the wrong option.

I thought he was trying to intimidate me so I just continued on at roughly 30mph in my lane

AdrianC

Altarf wrote: »

Any driver in the right hand lane therefore has to merge with the traffic in the left hand lane; the driver in the left hand hand lane has to do nothing but carry on.

Not quite nothing. Remember the Highway Code?

147 - Be considerate. Be careful of and considerate towards all types of road users
* try to be understanding if other road users cause problems; they may be inexperienced or not know the area well.
* be patient; remember that anyone can make a mistake.
* do not allow yourself to become agitated or involved if someone is behaving badly on the road. This will only make the situation worse. Pull over, calm down and, when you feel relaxed, continue your journey.
* slow down and hold back if a road user pulls out into your path at a junction. Allow them to get clear.

Altarf

AdrianC wrote: »

Not quite nothing. Remember the Highway Code?

Yes, nothing.

Smith v Cribben determined that doing nothing was perfectly acceptable.

almillar

Any driver in the right hand lane therefore has to merge with the traffic in the left hand lane; the driver in the left hand hand lane has to do nothing but carry on.

No, the driver in the inside lane has to leave space for others to merge in. They should NOT be driving along with blinkers on.

Altarf

almillar wrote: »

No, the driver in the inside lane has to leave space for others to merge in. They should NOT be driving along with blinkers on.

No, the driver on the inside lane has to do nothing, other than not actively blocking the other car merging by speeding up/slowing down.

The responsibility for the merge is 100% down to the car in the right hand land, who needs to read and understand the arrows on the road, and therefore anticipate what *they* need to do.

And that might mean, horror of horrors, slowing down and merging behind.

shaun_from_Africa

Altarf wrote: »

No, the driver on the inside lane has to do nothing, other than not actively blocking the other car merging by speeding up/slowing down.

Fine in theory, not so good in reality.
This is exactly what the OP did and yet it still ended up costing him £200.

AdrianC

Altarf wrote: »

Yes, nothing.

Smith v Griven determined that doing nothing was perfectly acceptable.

Since Google doesn't appear to have heard of that case, perhaps you could point us to a reputable source?