ChatterBank0 min ago
who would be a at fault if we had collided?
a coule of weeks ago, i was parked at the side of the road in designated bays that do not block the road at all...just behind me was a bus stop, which is not a bay sort, so the bus blocks the traffic for a moment...
as the bus had only just stopped, the way was clear for me to pull out...i checked my mirrors and there was no car beside the bus....so i pulled out...but as i did a car overtook the bus and flew round into my lane.
we didnt collide but they beeped me...
to my mind, i have right of way here and i cant be expected to know that they are going to overtake the bus...i know they might do, but i cant sit and wait on the offchance ... you could not see a car overtaking from where i was, until its out the other side so itd have made no difference anyway...
surely they should have been aware that there may have been a vehicle in front of the bus and been ready to pause...
they are the ones performing a manouvre and moving into the wrong lane.
but if theyd hit me...who would have been blamed?
i think them...but am i wrong?
cheers
as the bus had only just stopped, the way was clear for me to pull out...i checked my mirrors and there was no car beside the bus....so i pulled out...but as i did a car overtook the bus and flew round into my lane.
we didnt collide but they beeped me...
to my mind, i have right of way here and i cant be expected to know that they are going to overtake the bus...i know they might do, but i cant sit and wait on the offchance ... you could not see a car overtaking from where i was, until its out the other side so itd have made no difference anyway...
surely they should have been aware that there may have been a vehicle in front of the bus and been ready to pause...
they are the ones performing a manouvre and moving into the wrong lane.
but if theyd hit me...who would have been blamed?
i think them...but am i wrong?
cheers
Answers
JOKO YOU ARE STILL AT FAULT I HAVE TO CAPITALIZE THIS AS YOU ARE NOT TAKING HEED.
you are wrong you are wrong you are wrong!! is that enough to shut you up?
you are wrong you are wrong you are wrong!! is that enough to shut you up?
11:10 Wed 31st Aug 2011
As to your derogatory comments on the other thread, I would point out that I actually gave you a balanced opinion in that both of you were at fault, especially of due care and consideration.
Arrogantly, you chose to ignore this view, a view supported by the large majority here and also those who have been professionally involved - i.e. an ex policeman.......
Thenyou seem to be thin-skinned as well as you dig yourself an even bigger hole by resorting to derogatory comments about not only me.
All I say, joko, is that I hope that you are not driving on the roads around here as I would fer for the safety of the road users and pedestrians of this part of the country. I do not think that I have ever heard somebody dig in on evidence as you have presented and not say, "mmmm perhaps both of us could have done things better and at least we will learn from our driving mistake this time."
We all make serious gaffes from time to time butake the learning/coaching point and move on.
Arrogantly, you chose to ignore this view, a view supported by the large majority here and also those who have been professionally involved - i.e. an ex policeman.......
Thenyou seem to be thin-skinned as well as you dig yourself an even bigger hole by resorting to derogatory comments about not only me.
All I say, joko, is that I hope that you are not driving on the roads around here as I would fer for the safety of the road users and pedestrians of this part of the country. I do not think that I have ever heard somebody dig in on evidence as you have presented and not say, "mmmm perhaps both of us could have done things better and at least we will learn from our driving mistake this time."
We all make serious gaffes from time to time butake the learning/coaching point and move on.
-- answer removed --
DT...i am not the one who started a whole new thread just to take the p1ss...
for what feels like the millionth time - i wanted someone to tell me why i am wrong so i can understand - not tell me i am right...instead all i got was snotty little accusations an snide remarks ... if that translates to you as arrogance then thats on you
still no-one has truly explained why this other person was in the right...if someone does then i will absolutely take it...but so far people have just blamed me...and defended this person (i know you said both dt)
it seems to me that my manouvre was only wrong because another car was trying to overtake...had they not been my manouvre would not have raised an eyebrow...i believe they simply shouldnt have even attempted it
for what feels like the millionth time - i wanted someone to tell me why i am wrong so i can understand - not tell me i am right...instead all i got was snotty little accusations an snide remarks ... if that translates to you as arrogance then thats on you
still no-one has truly explained why this other person was in the right...if someone does then i will absolutely take it...but so far people have just blamed me...and defended this person (i know you said both dt)
it seems to me that my manouvre was only wrong because another car was trying to overtake...had they not been my manouvre would not have raised an eyebrow...i believe they simply shouldnt have even attempted it
joko, you're getting different answers because you're asking different questions. There's a difference between what actually happened and your 'what-if' question.
The rules say you should only move off when it is safe to do so.
As it happened, it was. The other driver avoided you.
But your question was what if he'd hit you. If that had been the case, it would obviously not have been safe and you'd have been in the wrong.
The rules say you should only move off when it is safe to do so.
As it happened, it was. The other driver avoided you.
But your question was what if he'd hit you. If that had been the case, it would obviously not have been safe and you'd have been in the wrong.
look technically, technically I say, ignore the passing car....a police car watching you may (italics) have pulled you over if they witnessed you pulling out as you did as you did not know if there was a car/van/even a truck on the driver side of the bus - they could have becoming up slow or fast and could (no would) have been also an offence as passengers could have been blind to the driver. But with the risk of them coming up on you, you were potentially exacerbating the situation.
You infringed, albeit a minor one but worthy of a due care and consideration......
If our policepal is still around, perhaps he could pass comment on this as he is an ex cop, even though you went off him.
You infringed, albeit a minor one but worthy of a due care and consideration......
If our policepal is still around, perhaps he could pass comment on this as he is an ex cop, even though you went off him.
dt, of course i do see how obviously this was a problem, because they beeped and needed me to move - hence me asking the question in the first place...because although i think the other person was most at fault and should not have overtaken in a blind spot, obviously they did, and so will other people...therefore of course i need to bear that in mind in future...
if i believed there was no problem i would not have asked ...
the fatc that they beeped makes me think that they believe they were totally innocent...which i cant accept...
i can see that in their position to find themselves mid manouvre, but unable to immediately get back in lane to be a touch scary (as there were cars coming toward them on their side) perhaps they will think twice in future too...
if i believed there was no problem i would not have asked ...
the fatc that they beeped makes me think that they believe they were totally innocent...which i cant accept...
i can see that in their position to find themselves mid manouvre, but unable to immediately get back in lane to be a touch scary (as there were cars coming toward them on their side) perhaps they will think twice in future too...
well they did have enough space but only just really...
i remember there were cars coming because when i heard the beep i initially thought it was the approaching cars for a second, and looked for potential problems ahead...then i realised it was behind me...as i say it took a few mins to realise why theyd beeped...
i remember there were cars coming because when i heard the beep i initially thought it was the approaching cars for a second, and looked for potential problems ahead...then i realised it was behind me...as i say it took a few mins to realise why theyd beeped...
well, that's the thing, joko - he did have enough space, in the real world, because nothing happened so there was nothing for anyone to be at fault over.
Then you asked the hypothetical question who'd have been at fault if he hit you. But that raises the issue of why he *did* hit you (which in real life he didn't). Because he was going too fast in the face of oncoming traffic? Because you pulled out into a lane with someone else in it? Obviously you've gone for the former, which naturally makes him guilty. If he asked a similar hypothetical question he'd have gone for the second option, which makes you guilty. As it never happened, we can never know.
Then you asked the hypothetical question who'd have been at fault if he hit you. But that raises the issue of why he *did* hit you (which in real life he didn't). Because he was going too fast in the face of oncoming traffic? Because you pulled out into a lane with someone else in it? Obviously you've gone for the former, which naturally makes him guilty. If he asked a similar hypothetical question he'd have gone for the second option, which makes you guilty. As it never happened, we can never know.
Hi Joko
Firstly I'd have to agree with MichaelZZ 'John O'Day...', the reason being that you should always drive defensively and not just because you think you're right or even that you are right. You have to anticipate that someone else might drive dangerously or the unexpected can happen. So I suppose that could be applied to the other driver as well!
However -and don't take this the wrong way!- you say that it was a traffic lane, therefore traffic is moving and if there is an obstruction/stationary vehicle and you are permitted to overtake than a car moving in front of the bus will have moved even further ahead by the time you pass the bus. The problem was that you 'pulled out'.
I'm presuming the driver could see somewhat ahead of the bus otherwise they could have pulled into a traffic jam!
In my mind it would be like if you were overtaking a car on a main road you see you can perform the manoeuvre and then suddenly a car pulls out of a lay-by.
I see your point of view because it seems you were in front of the bus and why not just proceed? However you were stationary -as the bus was- and like the bus should only have pulled out or proceeded when you knew no one was overtaking. You didn't have visibility to do so...so unfortunately you should have waited!...but fortunately you're here to tell the tale :)
Firstly I'd have to agree with MichaelZZ 'John O'Day...', the reason being that you should always drive defensively and not just because you think you're right or even that you are right. You have to anticipate that someone else might drive dangerously or the unexpected can happen. So I suppose that could be applied to the other driver as well!
However -and don't take this the wrong way!- you say that it was a traffic lane, therefore traffic is moving and if there is an obstruction/stationary vehicle and you are permitted to overtake than a car moving in front of the bus will have moved even further ahead by the time you pass the bus. The problem was that you 'pulled out'.
I'm presuming the driver could see somewhat ahead of the bus otherwise they could have pulled into a traffic jam!
In my mind it would be like if you were overtaking a car on a main road you see you can perform the manoeuvre and then suddenly a car pulls out of a lay-by.
I see your point of view because it seems you were in front of the bus and why not just proceed? However you were stationary -as the bus was- and like the bus should only have pulled out or proceeded when you knew no one was overtaking. You didn't have visibility to do so...so unfortunately you should have waited!...but fortunately you're here to tell the tale :)
Well this seems like fun!
For what it's worth joko I'd say you are definitely at fault. I think it's likely that the person overtaking is also at fault. As someone said earlier, there's no law that all the blame should go 100% to one person. I suspect this is one of those 50/50 things. Both vehicles are completing a maneouvre which it turns out was unsafe to do although they thought it was at the time.
If you were coming out of a narrow side street and the vehicle coming towards you wanted to turn in and flashed its lights to let you move out first but a car behind that one, seeing the one ahead indicating to go left pulled out and overtook then you'd be at fault there too. It's pretty much the same example.
For what it's worth joko I'd say you are definitely at fault. I think it's likely that the person overtaking is also at fault. As someone said earlier, there's no law that all the blame should go 100% to one person. I suspect this is one of those 50/50 things. Both vehicles are completing a maneouvre which it turns out was unsafe to do although they thought it was at the time.
If you were coming out of a narrow side street and the vehicle coming towards you wanted to turn in and flashed its lights to let you move out first but a car behind that one, seeing the one ahead indicating to go left pulled out and overtook then you'd be at fault there too. It's pretty much the same example.
Latest Posts
How it Works2 mins ago
You Mightn't Be Able To Help Here
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Sunday Express Skeleton 23Rd June
Crosswords68 mins ago