Who would have been at fault?

[Newpuppyterror]

Mostly a theoretical question because the accident didn't happen (just!).

Country A-road, 60 mph limit. The driver in front of me has been doing 40 mph for 3 miles, with no safe place to overtake. Finally a safe overtaking place opens up, I indicate and start to pull out.

The car behind me has had the same idea, and plans to overtake both of us. He doesn't indicate and pulls out. I swerve back in just in time. No collision happens.

However - if I had pulled out at the same time as him and we had collided (he would have hit the back of me, but also probably the side), who would have been at fault?

Pretty sure he would have been at fault. He didn't indicate and went for a risky overtake.

I think it's pretty obvious that it would have been the other drivers fault?

I just wondered given that if he started overtaking "first" (by a split second) and we went into the side of each other (I know that a pure hit from behind is always the other driver's fault), and obviously it's hard to prove someone wasn't indicating.

It was definitely a riskier manoeuvre though as he was overtaking two cars.

A pure hit from behind isn't always the other driver's fault. Not when the vehicle in front is performing a manoeuvre.

If it was at the side you would be classed as pulling out into him so would be held liable.

Interesting, so sounds like liability would fall depending on whereabouts the cars made contact?

You should always check in your mirrors before overtaking so this doesn’t happen! I’ve been on both sides of this (though if I am the person at the back I always indicate!) - it’s one of those tricky situations but in my opinion the person in the middle needs to ensure there is no-one coming up behind them when they go to pull out

Yes, I was checking my mirrors throughout, that's how I saw them. But obviously was looking at the road ahead too.