A mini roundabout driving question ...

[GeorgeSpeaks]

I was honked at the other day for dithering/giving way on a mini roundabout. Was I wrong?

I was approaching the roundabout and signalling right, opposite me another car was not signalling, so going straight on. I slowed down to let him go because I would have to cross his path to get to my exit and therefore he has right of way. Obviously if he were on my right he'd also have right of way. Anyway, car behind me honked because I hesitated to let opposite car across before I turned right. Who is correct, me or honker?

I'd say they have priority though because I would have to cross in front of them

That's literally how roundabouts work. What 'you'd say' is wrong. Making up your own highway code is dangerous because others don't know what's in your head, just follow the rules of the road.

In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to

• traffic crossing in front of you on the roundabout, especially vehicles intending to leave by the next exit

but why did I have the right of way?

Because as soon as you are on the roundabout you are coming from his/her right and have right of way. You only stop if there is traffic coming from the right- on the roundabout or from the road to your right.

No. I mean the idiots who think they can approach a roundabout at whatever speed they want and that the car on their left who is going slowly will give way to them without having any comprehension of who enters the roundabout first.

”Give way to the right” only applies when you are both on the roundabout. This is th wait most seem to fail to understand

With ADI hat on.

You had priority OP - for exactly the reasons most have said. Once on the roundabout you are coming from their right.

Given it was a crossroads in effect with a roundabout in the middle, the only time there is a question mark is if you are both approaching to turn right. Then it's a case of whoever establishes on the roundabout first controls the priority.

Of course what if they are turning right, but not signalling. Very common at roundabouts (especially mini-roundabouts)?

With any priority situation where you have (or at least appear to, bearing in mind missing or misleading signals). Approach with a speed and road position that states your intention to take that priority, but slowly enough that you can change your mind if their speed and position doesn't confirm their acceptance of your priority. After all, it's very easy to give your priority to another, but hard to take it from someone determined to go against established procedure.

EDIT:

And to address your thinking that they had priority because you were turning across them. That's the whole point of mini-roundabouts. They are often not really about improving traffic flow, much more often they are about traffic calming precisely because they change the normal priorities.

You seem to have not read my post, that you objected to, and just made up what I said.

Also, give way to the right does not only apply to cars on the roundabout, it applies to cars coming from the right hand entrance. I've linked the relevant section of the highway code for you above.

But I wasn't on the roundabout! We both arrived at the lines at the same time, hence the hesitation! It's only a little one too, so I didn't want to crash into anyone.

Anyway, I'll get over the honking eventually.

Give way to the right applies to joining the roundabout. You don't give way once actually on the roundabout, you keep going.

Yes, we all understand that. It was your right of way. I've linked the highway code for you above and an ADL has written a very detailed description of what to do a few posts ago.

If you proceed slowly and carefully you wont crash by following the rules of the road but you might (or someone might crash into you) if you don't know them.

This exact question was posed (as a hypothetical) a couple of weeks ago, and virtually everyone agreed with you that the fact you were turning right gave the other driver priority. I think they were wrong, and that when two drivers arrive at a roundabout at the same time, directly opposite each other, then neither car has priority, and turning right vs going straight on is irrelevant. Both cars should be able to go at the same time without getting in the way of the other, though in practice this might not be possible if space is limited, in which case one or other car would give way, and it is wise to proceed with caution.... so in this case, I don't think you were wrong to hesitate, but you are wrong that the other car had right of way.
Haven't read the whole thread, but interesting that it seems to be getting the opposite response to the previous one.

Sounds like you were in the wrong lane tbh certainly if he was going straight forward

If you are talking about the post by weigglydoncat it completely contradicts the pint you are trying to make?

It's very unusual to have more than one lane at a mini roundabout.

YANBU. Here's the proof:

The Highway Code (page 117, rule 185), give priority to traffic approaching from your right. In the North South and South North example, you're both on the right (and indeed the left) of each other. So that doesn't resolve who has priority. There is no "right of way" - the Highway Code (page 70) states explicitly that nothing in the Highway Code gives you right of way.

The intended direction of each car coming out of the mini-roundabout is irrelevant in terms of priority, though could be used, if clearly indicated, to determine how to proceed. For example, if you were both turning left then you wouldn't have needed to stop. But you'd need to trust that they were indicating properly.

If either of you arrived a bit before the other you would be correct to (with caution) enter the roundabout, at which point you would have priority. But you stated you both arrived at the same time. Assuming there are no road markings (page 23), which do sometimes indicate that one approach should give way, then it's true, technically it's a stalemate and the rules don't dictate who should go first. At this point you must NOT drive without reasonable consideration for other road users as per the Highway Code page 91, rule 144. In practice, this means both drivers should driver with consideration for the other. This might mean waiting to see if the other person goes or doesn't.

A barrister describes it on , and uses the phrase "body language" to determine what the other driver is likely to do and how you could consider that. He specifically shows (at 11:07) an example of three cars arriving at the same time and how one driver "takes the initiative" to move onto the roundabout, which unlocks everyone else.

In light of all that, I would say that you were right to pause - neither had priority and you were showing consideration, as was the other driver. The driver behind you who honked was an arsehole (can't provide a reference for that one), and were not driving with reasonable consideration for other road users to boot.

No it doesn't - it completely agrees with @donquixotedelamancha .

OP had priority. You ask to take your priority by approaching at a speed that is appropriate to say that you intend to go, but leaving enough wriggle room to stop if the third party keeps coming.

Stopping when you have priority is how you end up with the person behind performing an especially close inspection of your exhaust - a very common accident at roundabouts (and anyone who has been an ADI for more than a few years will have had a few of these, a hazard of the job - in fact last time it happened to me there was already another driving school car stopped at the edge of the roundabout after the same thing had happened to them).

Certainly it is the fault of the car behind for insurance purposes, but you still have the posterior pain of sorting out a bent car. Totally avoidable by knowing what you are supposed to know and doing what you are supposed to do.

Not especially unusual - especially if there are four roads into the mini (which isn't that common to be fair, but far from rocking horse manure territory). I teach across two different towns/cities. One has no multilane minis, but the other has lots.

But in the case in question it sounds like it is a single lane mini.

I've stopped engaging with that poster. Pretty sure they are on a deliberate wind up.

"Certainly it is the fault of the car behind for insurance purposes, but you still have the posterior pain of sorting out a bent car."

Certainly it is nothing of the sort.

Mini roundabouts are mainly allocated 50:50 fault regardless but if you mean the person honking? They are the only ones who wouldn't be at fault for insurance purposes.

They are however a dick

You are only meant to sound your horn to warn others of you are there NOT to point out their mistakes.

You had the right of way, you don't give way to the car opposite you on a roundabout in this situation.

No need to honk though.

@WomanInTheWall23 said: "If either of you arrived a bit before the other you would be correct to (with caution) enter the roundabout, at which point you would have priority. But you stated you both arrived at the same time. Assuming there are no road markings(page 23), which do sometimes indicate that one approach should give way, then it's true, technically it's a stalemate and the rules don't dictate who should go first. At this point you must NOT drive without reasonable consideration for other road users as per the Highway Code page 91, rule 144. In practice, this means both drivers should driver with consideration for the other. This might mean waiting to see if the other person goes or doesn't."

No - it isn't a stalemate.

It is really simple. In the situation the OP describes, they had priority as they would be coming from the third party's right. This means that if by entering the roundabout as they arrive the third party would cause the OP to slow, change direction (or worse...) they should give way.

If the TP is far enough ahead of the OP not to cause this, they should enter. Of course priority doesn't trump due care, hence why the appropriate entry speed is critical, but due care also means making sure you drive as others would expect (i.e. following normal rules of priority).

A genuine stalemate at a mini roundabout occurs when people arrive from all available roads at more or less the same time with each trying to give way. In the case here, there was nothing to the OPs right so they had priority. They created serious risk by stopping in this situation and I can absolutely promise they would have failed a driving test for this (because of the car behind - if there hadn't been a car behind it would have only been a driving fault).

Now - who do I charge my professional time to? 😀

It really is the fault of the car behind if they run into you in this situation. No possible excuse.

EDIT: But a collision between the OP and the TP opposite would be far more nuanced especially without dashcam evidence

I don’t understand why mini roundabouts melt so many peoples brains. I have to drive on them daily and the amount of people who don’t understand how to use them is staggering.

OP, you could have gone. It would only be a problem if the other car went (against their right of way) when you’d already entered the roundabout. They were not in the roundabout so they don’t have priority. Plus they were exiting at your junction so you wouldn’t have to go near them either way!

Having said that you do have to drive slowly to anticipate the idiots who will inevitably cut in front of you. Happens to me at least weekly. Our nearest mini roundabout has 3 exits but two are directly opposite. So I’ll be turning right from the S to the E, but people in the N just don’t seem to comprehend that the S cars in the roundabout have priority over them when they’re already in the roundabout!

And don’t get me started on the double mini roundabout further along my journey…

@WrigglyDonCat "It is really simple. In the situation the OP describes, they had priority as they would be coming from the third party's right."

One of us has a misunderstanding about what the OP describes. My understanding, is that it was the third party from the North and the OP the South, and both arriving at the same moment (because that's what the OP said). That would make it look like the attached sketch.

Could you explain how they (the OP) are coming from "the third party's right" when the same can't be said of the third party? Any extent to which the OP is coming from the third party's right, the third party is coming from the OP's right. Try rotating the diagram if you're not convinced.

"If the TP is far enough ahead of the OP not to cause this". The OP said they arrived at the same time.

"A genuine stalemate at a mini roundabout occurs when people arrive from all available roads at more or less the same time with each trying to give way."

It doesn't need a car on all available roads for it to be a stalemate. Other than that, I agree, and that's what happened to the OP.

" In the case here, there was nothing to the OPs right so they had priority."

There was nothing to the 3P's right either.

Hence, stalemate and the need for extra caution and "consideration for other road users", which is what the OP did.

Exactly @WomanInTheWall23 , they're equally to each other's right (and left) and have equal right of way.

@WomanInTheWall23

No we both have exactly the same situation in our minds. Just you haven't quite understood how mini-roundabouts work I'm afraid.

It really isn't a stalemate - that exists when all cars have someone who can approach from their right that in principle they should give way to, which isn't the case here.

There is no-one for the OP to give way to because no-one will approach from their right (excluding a failure to signal from the TP) as you can see from the path for the TP marked on the diagram. But once on the roundabout the OP is coming from the TPs right as their crossing paths show.

Therefore the priority obligation is on the TP to make sure they can either get past the position shown before the OP needs to cross their path or they should give way to the OP. It's exactly the same as a larger roundabout. If you enter a roundabout and cause a person who will approach from your right to slow down or change direction etc., you should stop.

The OPs obligation is to make sure that they aren't entering so fast that they can't slow/stop if the TP enters unwisely. But they absolutely should enter with their speed at a suitable level.

This sort of thing is happening more and more. As roads have got busier, older drivers haven't been able to keep up with the pace of change, especially as lots of them stopped driving during lockdown. Now we're always getting stuck behind people who don't seem to have a clue what's going on around them. The sooner they bring in more driving tests for elderly drivers the better.