Who's at fault here in this car crash

[*_ash_*]

You are quite correct ash, your good at this

 

 

 

thanks

 

-

 

aside: I think experience is better than highway codes, online comments and that. I wouldn't comment on this if it was in a junction that I hadn't tackled myself multiple times and from all angles.

 

When driving same junctions over and over, one sees the same things.

 

If you look at original poll about the other one, I'd wager that even though it was 50/50, that pretty much the 50 that got the right answer have driven this, and 50 that got it wrong, never have driven it and just watched the film.

[Fogey]

Come back when you are actually prepared to debate like an adult.

 

What? like just repeating the same thing?

[Cyclone]

You mean like the white car was just further up the road....

 

You've just painted yourself into a trap you know.

 

The white car was never in the wrong lane, it was proceeding straight ahead in lane to Rhm, as the road markings indicate it can.

The black car tried to move left where there was no reason for it to do so, and without looking.

[nightrider]

Looking at the satellite view I see the left hand lane is "left or straight on" and the middle lane is "straight on" only. So in principle, as people suggest, the white car is entitled to go straight on.

 

However if I look at the lanes coming from the right on the roundabout the left hand lane which joins the left hand lane that the white car was in says "left only". The middle lane says left or straight on and this merges into the lane the black car is on.

 

Both these sets of instructions cannot be correct if they refer to the future lanes you will find yourself in where the collision between white and black occurs?

 

https://www.google.ch/maps/@53.4134034,-1.402787,90m/data=!3m1!1e3

 

hmm well ok since it has traffic lights the instructions are in place at different times, so perhaps there is no conflict in that case.

Edited February 15, 2018 by nightrider

[Obelix]

The white car was never in the wrong lane, it was proceeding straight ahead in lane to Rhm, as the road markings indicate it can.

 

Id respectfully suggest you go and look at what the lane markings there say. There is no indication the leftmost lane can do anything other than go up along the lower deck of the viaduct.

[nightrider]

Id respectfully suggest you go and look at what the lane markings there say. There is no indication the leftmost lane can do anything other than go up along the lower deck of the viaduct.

 

Before the traffic lights it says M1N OR Rotherham - does the white line override that instruction?

 

Isn't it perhaps a case the road markings indicate you can choose to go straight on, but that given that involves crossing the lane marking, that you mention, the white car should first verify there is no car in the next lane and only cross if safe to do so? In this case one could then contend it was not safe to do so, and that therefore the white car drove into the black car, and is at fault for changing lanes without checking it was safe to do so.

[Cyclone]

Id respectfully suggest you go and look at what the lane markings there say. There is no indication the leftmost lane can do anything other than go up along the lower deck of the viaduct.

 

The road markings quite clearly show a straight ahead arrow.

[Obelix]

The road markings quite clearly show a straight ahead arrow.

 

Where they collided? Theres no arrow. At the risk of rehashing it - the arrows are in teh past at that point - the lane markings are clear to see. Unless you have a lane for every exit you cannot follow arrows and not expect to cross lanes. The roundabout entry arrows show you the lanes that you should be in for your destination but they do not - cannot - mean that you wont have to change lanes simply because you have a disparity between number of lanes and number of exits.

 

---------- Post added 15-02-2018 at 15:34 ----------

 

Before the traffic lights it says M1N OR Rotherham - does the white line override that instruction?

 

 

 

Isn't it perhaps a case the road markings indicate you can choose to go straight on, but that given that involves crossing the lane marking, that you mention, the white car should first verify there is no car in the next lane and only cross if safe to do so? In this case one could then contend it was not safe to do so, and that therefore the white car drove into the black car, and is at fault for changing lanes without checking it was safe to do so.

 

Yes basically. You should keep to the marked lane - if you want to change then the onus is on you to do so with due care and consideration.

[nightrider]

Does anyone know which car in fact did get blamed by insurers and/or police?

[Cyclone]

The arrows being "in the past" doesn't somehow mean that they don't apply.

If you're in a lane that was a few metres ago marked as straight ahead for Rhm, then a few metres later it doesn't suddenly become, left only onto the m1...

 

---------- Post added 15-02-2018 at 15:53 ----------

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4137035,-1.4027873,3a,60y,62.39h,64.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXvKjIven5u08dY-sEKolvg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

See where the blue car is, he should go straight ahead into the 2nd lane. Leaving space for the white car in the video to end up where the AA van (in the google image).

 

---------- Post added 15-02-2018 at 15:54 ----------

 

In fact, the blue car in the google photos does that.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4138371,-1.4027504,3a,75y,64.1h,74.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soTuFvi4gjv8Xs602pyQ9vQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

You can see.

 

---------- Post added 15-02-2018 at 15:55 ----------

 

In fact, the AA van and this blue Passat have done exactly the same entry as the white and black car in the video. But somehow managed not to crash.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.4134402,-1.4031126,3a,75y,77.35h,88.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHrr8wv8uH0ufx9l_j8CKrA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656