"Use both lanes" - who is in the wrong/right??

[dave_s13]

Only have a few minutes to post this.

Picture scene.

Long stretch dual carriageway leading up to a roundabout.

On this long stretch is a "use both lanes" sign.

Then a little way down the sign used to indicate a lane is closed ahead.

directly after roundabout L1 of dual carriageway is closed due to subsidance issue; all coned off with large concrete blocks in place etc. Dead obvious.

Anyway.

Car and large truck enter roundabout with the truck in front and car a 1/3rd of the truck length behind.

- Truck in L1 (the lane about to close)
- Car in L2 (lane open)

They get to the lane closure and neither vehicle adjust their speed/position and the truck takes the front of the car off as they both try to enter L2 of dual carriageway...oops.

I was behind and saw it all.

Who is in the wrong?

I can't help thinking the car should have backed off given they were behind the large truck but not sure.

Thought??

Edited by dave_s13 on Tuesday 2nd August 11:51

[Lefty]

It's not clear, which vehicle was in the lane that was about to close?

[dave_s13]

Lefty said:

It's not clear, which vehicle was in the lane that was about to close?

The truck was in the lane about to close.

[danposs86]

Truck had to move into a different lane, therefore the truck should have waited for it to be clear IMO.

[Lefty]

danposs86 said:

Truck had to move into a different lane, therefore the truck should have waited for it to be clear IMO.

That's my opinion too.

[oldcynic]

Truck driver is in the wrong but car driver should have used some common sense.

[sinizter]

danposs86 said:

Truck had to move into a different lane, therefore the truck should have waited for it to be clear IMO.

This.

It would have been smarter on the part of the car driver to just back off a little after seeing the speed the truck was doing - He might feel he was in the right doing what he did, but now he is missing large chunks off the front of his car.

[carreauchompeur]

Quite. The truck driver is technically in the wrong, however this situation smells of wilful stubborn-ness on the part of the car driver- There's no point being "right" if it ends up in half your car missing.

[StressedDave]

Back in the dim and distant past, I dealt with a similar accident. The opinion of the CPS was that both drivers were to blame, working on the premise that if either had done something different, and yielding was a perfectly acceptable thing to do on either part. Too many drivers forget that priority can only ever be given not taken.

[Lefty]

carreauchompeur said:

Quite. The truck driver is technically in the wrong, however this situation smells of wilful stubborn-ness on the part of the car driver- There's no point being "right" if it ends up in half your car missing.

Indeed. maybe he'd scraped the bumper while parking and was hoping for an insurance claim to fix it...

True story, a young guy that worked for me a few years ago actually let somebody crash into him so that a body shop would repair some pre-existing damage to his car while they were repairing the accident damage! To be completely clear, he made no attempt to avoid an accident that he probably could have aviuded.

[R0G]

danposs86 said:

Truck had to move into a different lane, therefore the truck should have waited for it to be clear IMO.

Is the correct LEGAL answer

however, the insurers are likely to take a lack of action by the car into consideration and reduce the percentage of any payout by the trucks insurer

[dave_s13]

Thanks fot the replies.

I only ask as I offered to act as a witness if needed. The lass that got her car mangled has been in touch so I just wanted to be armed with a little more info before I replied.

I wasn't really sure as the truck was ahead of the car and I thought maybe that implied some kind of right of way.

Either way, she should have bloody well slowed down/stopped. 7.5ton wagon vs Pug 207.....errr HELLO!!!!

[R0G]

If it had been a merge in turn situation then the one with the nose in front would have priority

[roachcoach]

dave_s13 said:

Either way, she should have bloody well slowed down/stopped. 7.5ton wagon vs Pug 207.....errr HELLO!!!!

Not just that, what kind of speed was happening to not be able to brake hard enough to avoid it once the "move" was seen as inevitable?!

[snowdude2910]

100% the trucks fault although the car could have avoided it truck probably just thinks he can bully the car into braking but hasn't taken into account a driver in a company car/car he doesn't like with gap insurance (I'm the latter)

[dave_s13]

roachcoach said:

dave_s13 said:

Either way, she should have bloody well slowed down/stopped. 7.5ton wagon vs Pug 207.....errr HELLO!!!!

Not just that, what kind of speed was happening to not be able to brake hard enough to avoid it once the "move" was seen as inevitable?!

That's the daft thing.

It happened at walking pace.

I was behind on my motorbike, stationary, both feet on ground, watching it all happen.

[dave_s13]

Here's the spot

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=rothwell&hl=en...


The feckin lane has been closed for so long (it's years now!) that it's on google maps!!

[N Dentressangle]

The lorry driver drove through 5 sets of signs warning of the closure of the lane he was in, at 400 - 100 yards, then again on the roundabout. The cones are very clearly visible from the other side of the roundabout.

It sounds like the lorry driver's fault, either through deliberately failing to give way to the Peugeot already in lane 2 or perhaps not noticing a car in his blind spot. Also agree with those who suggest the Peugeot driver should have used some common sense though!

[R0G]

dave_s13 said:

Here's the spot

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=rothwell&hl=en...


The feckin lane has been closed for so long (it's years now!) that it's on google maps!!

I can see from the map that many of the two laned roads have the nearside closed off so that it makes one lane which then makes lane one or two of a further two laned road

The warning signs are very well marked in advance and that white paint stands out a mile !!

the 'throw' arrows clearly indicate that the nearside must move into the offside so therefore those on the inside must give way to those in the offside

[roachcoach]

dave_s13 said:

roachcoach said:

dave_s13 said:

Either way, she should have bloody well slowed down/stopped. 7.5ton wagon vs Pug 207.....errr HELLO!!!!

Not just that, what kind of speed was happening to not be able to brake hard enough to avoid it once the "move" was seen as inevitable?!

That's the daft thing.

It happened at walking pace.

I was behind on my motorbike, stationary, both feet on ground, watching it all happen.

I'd probably have been rolling around the floor laughing to be honest.

Sounds like a proper 'laws of physics' > 'laws of man moment'

"But I had right of way!"
"Yes, and you had a car too"