Minor RTC on lane merging to left

AdrianC

Tok3d wrote: »

I put it down to that anyway as I don't believe he didn't see me

And you freely admitt hat you knew exactly what he was doing and where, yes?

and then changing his story last night to he had right of way.

No such thing. You might have had priority, but that doesn't give you "right of way", either.

which I don't accept as I believe I was driving legally.

Can you honestly say your driving wasn't careless? Legal definition is where your driving " falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case". Look at the overwhelming consensus of replies here, and think about what that implies about those general expectations.

Did you follow the Highway Code in every respect? Including...

146 - Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular:
* do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit
* take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution

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.

No, thought not. Because, if you had, he'd have pulled in front of you and you'd have shaken your head at his stupidity and got on with your evening.

topdaddy_2

Tok3d wrote: »

He was stationary at the lights, I was already doing 10-15mph as I was slowing down for the red light, which then turned amber as I got closer. I was ahead of the guy in the merger lane, he wasn't merging when he was hitting me. He was driving parallel to my drivers door still on his merger lane and as it got narrower he hit me.

I just put it down to him trying to intimidate me and I continued driving on as normal.

i.imgur.com/23smmdH.jpg - Approx locations.

Green - where it happened,
Orange - other driver
Blue - me, when the red & amber light came on.

A nice little phrase to remember when dealing with insurance " I did everything possible to avoid the collision". In this case "continued driving as normal" means you are partly liable. 50:50. You should have braked.

tripled

Tok3d wrote: »

I would believe that if I hadn't already passed him. I was a good 1-2 car lengths ahead of him before he even moved.

If that's the case, your point would surely be that the other driver (who you had passed earlier) tried to overtake you and ran out of road.

However if you passed him stationary at the lights while you were accelerating from 15 to 30 mph, he must have a very good car to not only get up to 30mph losing only two car lengths, but also catch up with you and come alongside you, then brake to your speed or slower before colliding, in that distance.

Ultimately though according to your story he was merging into your lane and you must have been ahead of him and I would say he was at fault (if you'd braked when you realised he wasn't giving way, you would presumably just have hit him in the side). However, I would imagine his story would be that you tried to undertake him as he merged in - which sounds more plausible and would tie up with him moving more slowly that you .

Strider590

Well, it all depends on the details. You see, if he was moving when you passed him, then effectively the insurance will see that you overtook on the inside with the intention of blocking his merge and the highway code does state "merge in turn" (basically the zipper method).

This whole thing will depend entirely on how well each driver describes what happened........

It's entirely possible it happened either way, he could well have hit you whilst trying avoid an oncoming car because it was dark and he didn't see that the road was merging.

Tok3d

fivetide wrote: »

Just not possible though.


Looking at the image bod posted that would put you were the read car is in the streetview and almost across the junction.


The merge arrow is clearly on the road already and you said it happened before the merge bit.


Either:


1. He was already moving and you tried to pass him on the inside


2. You crawled over the line as he set off


3. He's driving Hamilton's Merc


Remember, if you were doing 30mph and he was several car lengths behind you, you had a fair head start.


30mph is 44ft per second. He's got to do much more than that to catch you back up, unless 2 is true and you were actually going a lot slower than you think you were.


Mathematically, I can't make this work I'm afraid.


I have no doubt he took exception to you going past him but it literally doesn't seem to add up right. Sorry.

I never said several car lengths, I said 1-2 when I passed him. I also may not have been doing 30mph as I passed him but I was at 30 when he collided into me. He may well have already been in gear whilst stationary, that's speculation though as I can't prove that.

If you look at the maps it happened after the last white lane marker. I was ahead of him for the entire thing, when he caught up his bonnet was parallel to the middle of my drivers door, I just put it down to intimidation as before.

Car_54

Strider590 wrote: »

Well, it all depends on the details. You see, if he was moving when you passed him, then effectively the insurance will see that you overtook on the inside with the intention of blocking his merge and the highway code does state "merge in turn" (basically the zipper method).

What the HC actually states is "Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed."

forgotmyname

Either way i would stick it through the insurance because his version will vary from yours and the insurers wont know for sure which one was right.

A 1.4 diesel thats already moving even slowly could beat a 2L car away from the lights. Some 2L cars have a 0-60 over 10 seconds as they have a lot of weight to shift.
My old petrol mondeo was like that, Try accelerating rapidly and it would spin its wheels and go nowhere.

Inform your insurance and let then fight it out. The other driver may have already done the same. Then your insurance will want to know why you failed to notify them.

Tok3d

AdrianC wrote: »

And you freely admitt hat you knew exactly what he was doing and where, yes?



No such thing. You might have had priority, but that doesn't give you "right of way", either.



Can you honestly say your driving wasn't careless? Legal definition is where your driving " falls below the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case". Look at the overwhelming consensus of replies here, and think about what that implies about those general expectations.

Did you follow the Highway Code in every respect? Including...


No, thought not. Because, if you had, he'd have pulled in front of you and you'd have shaken your head at his stupidity and got on with your evening.

I'm not admitting anything, after thinking about the whole situation I put it down to that due to him changing his story on why he went into me. I didn't say I had right of way either, but I know I have priority in that lane and it's upto the other driver to merge when clear. He wasn't in any position to overtake me safely as it happened at the end of his lane merging into mine (the end white road marking on google maps) so I just put it down to intimidation at the time and continued on as normal. Yeah thinking back now perhaps I should of just slowed down and let the other guy carry on driving dangerously but there was flowing traffic behind me in my lane.

I'm aware of the general consensus of the 50/50 and I thank everybody for taking the time to reply to me.

AdrianC

Tok3d wrote: »

I'm not admitting anything

From the very first post laying out the situation...

near the end of the merge he had sped up and was parallel with my car, myself and my girlfriend said what the hell is he doing, I thought he was trying to intimidate me so I just continued on at 30mph in my lane.

Yeah thinking back now perhaps I should of just slowed down and let the other guy carry on driving dangerously but there was flowing traffic behind me in my lane.

That'd be the traffic that was behind you a moment earlier slowing to stop whilst approaching red lights, before you accelerated to 30 when they started to change, yes?

You're a newish driver, right? Passing the test is the bare minimum standard acceptable. You spend your entire life learning beyond that, but there's no way you'll learn from a situation without admitting to yourself what you did wrong. Denial is so much more than an Egyptian river.

Tok3d

tripled wrote: »

Ultimately though according to your story he was merging into your lane and you must have been ahead of him and I would say he was at fault (if you'd braked when you realised he wasn't giving way, you would presumably just have hit him in the side). However, I would imagine his story would be that you tried to undertake him as he merged in - which sounds more plausible and would tie up with him moving more slowly that you .

Everybody has their opinions I guess, but that's not the case. I was ahead of him for the entire thing, and when he did manage to catch up from being stationary he wasn't fully parallel to my car. There are two sides to each story. I am kicking myself for not using my dashcam.