Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Crash! Boom! Bang! - Car accident, who's at fault?

491 replies

NothingOnButTheRadio · 26/10/2020 16:36

Had a car accident earlier. Wondering what your thoughts are.

Car A had slowed down to turn into the first road on the right and was indicating.

Car B was turning left .

Not unusual to have a steady stream of traffic (lights further up the road.

Car A began turning. Car B ploughed into the side of Car A. Both drivers accusing the other. Both vehicles I'd think are write-offs.

Obligatory drawing - yes, I'm shit at drawing!

Car A

Crash! Boom! Bang! - Car accident, who's at fault?
OP posts:
CitizenClem · 27/10/2020 15:09

To be honest, it would be a lot clearer if we were to see the junction

NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:10

No. Rule 172 refers to traffic established on the major road, so going with the flow of traffic, not crossing it to turn.

Bargebill19 · 27/10/2020 15:13

@VinylDetective
But car a is turning AWAY from car b - Car b would be waiting an eternity.

Bargebill19 · 27/10/2020 15:14

@CitizenClem
The first picture the op drew is pretty clear.

VinylDetective · 27/10/2020 15:16

@NoWordForFluffy

No. Rule 172 refers to traffic established on the major road, so going with the flow of traffic, not crossing it to turn.
It doesn’t say that. It just says traffic, no ifs or buts.
NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:17

It says 'traffic established on the major road'. That means driving along it.

NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:18

Sorry, that was my interpretation. It still bans don't pull out on somebody driving along it.

NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:19

Means. Not bans. This is going well! 😂

bibs124 · 27/10/2020 15:19

Car B would be at fault as moving from minor to major road. Although could easily end up 50/50 split which basically holds you both at fault.

NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:20

Also, B may have been established on the main road before she pulled across him. We still don't know that he wasn't.

Justforphoto · 27/10/2020 15:22

@VinylDetective

According to the Highway Code B is to blame.

^Rule 172
The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road^

Yes you must give way to traffic on the main road which is passing the junction however car A wasn't passing the junction so car B did not have to give way at the broken white line. The accident didn't happen there.
CitizenClem · 27/10/2020 15:23

The first picture the op drew is pretty clear.

I disagree somewhat - I mean in real life.

OP said the distance is 3m. If that were the case, Cars A and B would be almost nose to nose when making the turn and could (should) have made eye contact. (For reference, a Ford Transit is about 4m long).

We don't know what signage was around (was Car B behind a stop line)

VinylDetective · 27/10/2020 15:27

@NoWordForFluffy

It says 'traffic established on the major road'. That means driving along it.
No, it means actually on it. It doesn’t mention movement.
NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 15:37

It means don't pull out on passing traffic.

howaboutchocolate · 27/10/2020 15:38

No, it means actually on it. It doesn’t mention movement.

It definitely means the flow of traffic in the lanes you'll be turning into/across. If you're not turning into the right lane, then you don't have to give way to cars in that lane.

If you're turning left into a main road do you really look to see if anyone is waiting to turn off into a different junction further down the road before you pull out? They wouldn't be in your lane while waiting, your lane is clear. Why wouldn't you pull out? You might see them waiting and flash them as you pull out to let them know you're letting them go, but you don't have to.

Moanranger · 27/10/2020 15:38

Well established that traffic n a major road has priority. No ifs, ands or buts. If you are turning on to a major road from a minor road, you should only do so when it is safe. It wasn’t safe. Van driver at fault.

CitizenClem · 27/10/2020 15:43

Well established that traffic n a major road has priority. No ifs, ands or buts.

What is not clear is whether we would consider the van as being on the major road at the time of the accident. It's unclear.

howaboutchocolate · 27/10/2020 15:55

If you're car b in this diagram, and the lane is clear in both directions, you can turn left. Car a is not in your lane and not your responsibility, you don't have to give way to them whether the junction is 3m away or 10m away or whatever.

If car a has started to cross before you turn then your road isn't clear, but I don't think that happened because it would be tricky to smash into the side of them at speed if they had.

It's more like car b has seen it's clear and turned, car a has looked and assumed car b wouldn't turn so crossed the lane without looking again.

Crash! Boom! Bang! - Car accident, who's at fault?
vanillandhoney · 27/10/2020 16:07

@Moanranger

Well established that traffic n a major road has priority. No ifs, ands or buts. If you are turning on to a major road from a minor road, you should only do so when it is safe. It wasn’t safe. Van driver at fault.
How do you know it wasn't safe? OP hasn't come back to clarify anything.

Van driver could have already turned onto the carriageway when OP started making her manoeuvre.

LakieLady · 27/10/2020 16:09

@Shmithecat2

This doesn't make sense at all. Transit Vans are nearly 6 metres long.... if the OP comes back, it would be interesting to have another diagram of the actual position and point of impact ie where in the road, where the car was hit. But going on what's been divulged so far, I think A is at fault here.
Only the long wheelbase Transits are 6m long, the short ones are 5m and the medium somewhere between the two (this is a remarkably frequent topic of conversation in this house, as we are looking for a new motorhome and DP wants a short wheelbase van and I want a bigger one!).

I'm clearly overinvested in this and hope that the OP's ok.

TabbyStar · 27/10/2020 16:10

Lovely diagram, but the roads are closer together than they appear in it according to the OP, 3m, which is pretty much a car's length, so they were very close, enough to make eye contact. The theory about the van driver only looking right then pulling out seems plausible, although if I were the OP I don't think I would have turned without being sure of the van's intention.

Nottherealslimshady · 27/10/2020 16:14

If Car B wasnt indicating then it is his fault. Otherwise I think it would end up knock for knock. It's hard to prove who was in the right hand lane first. If B was already turning into the main road then A should have given way, I'd A was already turning across the lane then B should have checked the road ahead was clear before turning into it. This is why everyone should have dashcams. It would show he wasnt indicating and that you started turning first.

NoWordForFluffy · 27/10/2020 16:32

It would show he wasnt indicating and that you started turning first.

Well, it might, or it might not!

damnthatanxiety · 27/10/2020 16:36

Depends on the distance between the two side roads. You have drawn them very close. If they were further apart then Car B would be on the main road and Car A has effectively turned right in front of them.

Bargebill19 · 27/10/2020 16:57

@damnthatanxiety

That’s they way I’ve interpreted the situation.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.