Car accident - was it my fault?

neilmcl

almillar wrote: »

The lady has disobeyed the general rules of a roundabout, and the specific ones for the roundabout in question, via the road markings. She was supposed to go straight on or left, and she has continued on to right, and possibly tried to go beyond, and hit/was hit by OP, who did everything correctly lane wise

Ah, but did she do everything "correctly" to avoid the accident, I think not.

NBLondon

laurencecockayne wrote: »

As for signalling, i was indicating right and had just started indicating left when the accident happened.

This could scupper you Laurence - it's mirror, signal, manoeuvre so you knew the car was there but it sounds like you signalled and moved simultaneously.

I cant remember if she was indicating, i dont remember seeing any indications.

If she was taking the left lane of the exit, she should have been indicating left and that wouldn't be visible to you. If she was indicating right to continue round - that could have warned you.


I think you're morally right - I've seen idiots do it to me and done a go-around to avoid them. But as others have said - you assumed her intentions (not that unreasonably) when you already knew she was doing something wrong and could perhaps have avoided the impact. So if it's disputed - you will have to take some blame.

almillar

He didn't.

You're talking about observation - I meant he was in the correct lane the entire time, until he tried to leave the roundabout. You're saying he should have been looking, but I get the impression he was aware of this other car the whole time, knew that she was there, in the wrong lane, but continued to stick right beside her to see what happens, and they crashed. I made the point that he should have got away from her.

Ah, but did she do everything "correctly" to avoid the accident, I think not.

No she certainly didn't. She's 'more wrong' in my opinion, but OP could have driven better, more defensively, to keep himself away from danger. And if the lady was indeed slightly in front, he's crossed lanes and driven into her. Maybe.

I bet OP thought he had 'right of way' because he had done everything correctly - well thinking you have right of way and just carrying on is a dangerous thing!

neilmcl

almillar wrote: »

You're talking about observation - I meant he was in the correct lane the entire time, until he tried to leave the roundabout. You're saying he should have been looking, but I get the impression he was aware of this other car the whole time, knew that she was there, in the wrong lane, but continued to stick right beside her to see what happens, and they crashed. I made the point that he should have got away from her.
No she certainly didn't. She's 'more wrong' in my opinion, but OP could have driven better, more defensively, to keep himself away from danger. And if the lady was indeed slightly in front, he's crossed lanes and driven into her. Maybe.

I bet OP thought he had 'right of way' because he had done everything correctly - well thinking you have right of way and just carrying on is a dangerous thing!

Sorry, when I said "she", I meant the OP.

CM66

I don't think the OP is at fault at all -

The other person was in the left hand lane to go left or straight on but decided to carry on around the roundabout crossing in front of the OP who was correctly trying to exit?

Car_54

CM66 wrote: »

I don't think the OP is at fault at all -

The other person was in the left hand lane to go left or straight on but decided to carry on around the roundabout crossing in front of the OP who was correctly trying to exit?

But if the red car had entered at 12 o'clock to exit at 6 o'clock, he would have been in the correct lane, and the blue car would still have hit him ...

CM66

Car_54 wrote: »

But if the red car had entered at 12 o'clock to exit at 6 o'clock, he would have been in the correct lane, and the blue car would still have hit him ...

You have to give way to oncoming traffic so if they entered at 12 o clock whilst the other car was on the roundabout it would still have been their fault?

glentoran99

CM66 wrote: »

I don't think the OP is at fault at all -

The other person was in the left hand lane to go left or straight on but decided to carry on around the roundabout crossing in front of the OP who was correctly trying to exit?

When the other car didn't take the first two exits they would haven been expected to why did the opening poster assume they would be taking same onw has him?




The other car was at fault, but so was the opening poster for not making sure the way is clear, that's wher 50/50 comes in

almillar

Good diagram. The red line is, of course, wrong - an invalid manouvre. The blue line is perfectly fine, UNTIL the point where it 'changes lane' and exits - it crosses a 'lane' that's not empty. When a car's on a roundabout it can go round all day long in it's own lane, and won't have to give way to anyone. When you want to LEAVE you're required to do checks. Red line car SHOULDN'T have been there, but it WAS, and blue line is expected to check.

Nasqueron

glentoran99 wrote: »

When the other car didn't take the first two exits they would haven been expected to why did the opening poster assume they would be taking same onw has him?




The other car was at fault, but so was the opening poster for not making sure the way is clear, that's wher 50/50 comes in

If you re-read the OP's post (unless he changed his story) that's not 100% correct

OP states the exit he wanted is 2 lanes - he was exiting into the outside lane as per the blue line. The other car went all the way around essentially to do a u-turn, ignoring the left/straight ahead only sign, and hit the OP. Now if you think about it, even if we ignore the fact she ignored the lane markings, she was trying to go all the way around the roundabout in the outer lane and caught the OP who was leaving the roundabout correctly having never left his lane until he was turning. You cannot in any way argue the other driver is not at fault for trying to go all the way around in the left hand lane