Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Who is in the wrong here? Re two car drivers.

116 replies

Chocolatereindeerr · 02/12/2022 19:26

Please tell me who is in the wrong here.. I understand it’s probably both but what would happen if it went to insurance?

I was passenger in car A.

car A- fails to stop behind a parked vehicle and give way to oncoming vehicle but would of made it round in enough time if the oncoming car went appropriate speed.

car B- on coming. Notices car A has not given way and puts his foot down and aggressively speeds up towards car A.

the result of this was both cars clipping wing mirrors but could have been worse.

car A pulls over as wing mirror was pushed in and 30 seconds later Car B has turned round and parked behind car A.

Car B driver gets out his car and aggressively starts shouting that Car A driver has knocked his wing mirror off. car A driver apologies and mentions that car B driver was coming fast and that he should of slowed down. Car B driver agrees to putting his foot down but said that it’s his right of way, he wasn’t stopping.

who is in the wrong?

OP posts:
SkylightSkylight · 02/12/2022 23:18

MichelleScarn · 02/12/2022 19:36

This

Show quote history

incorrect.

Read the section on moving around parked cars.

LakieLady · 02/12/2022 23:42

A, but B was a bit of a twat.

startfresh · 03/12/2022 00:11

@RichardMarxisinnocent I salute her. I'm sick of cars taking the mick. It's why people don't want to let others through, because the whole row of cars will take the opportunity to jump in rather than just a couple then back to ROW.

startfresh · 03/12/2022 00:14

@CarPoor but in my case I was ONE car, they were multiple and still tried to make me wait.

When I've waited recently it's been 3 cars with ROW and like 10 cars (no exaggeration) or more making the unsafe manoeuvre even when the ROW side is trying to move forward, they're dangerously jumping through.

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 03/12/2022 00:28

And nobody is saying any driver can plough on at someone! Strawman Argument. Fact is, as the passenger in Car A the OP was not in a good position to see if road ahead was clear enough to proceed or to judge speed of oncoming Car B.

You raise some very valid points, but I still maintain that nobody would call it an acceptable standard of driving to speed up, knowing that there is any obstacle ahead that has nowhere to go to avoid your hitting it (unless it's something like a whole coffee cup or dropped packing air bubble - those are fun to drive over!) and thus 'facilitating' a likely collision.

If both drivers were going at an appropriate speed and paying attention (with the required eyesight standard), at worst, this should have ended in a temporary impasse, with both drivers coming to a stop - stopping almost always being preferable to an anticipable and avoidable collision.

TooHotToRamble · 03/12/2022 00:42

DownNative · 02/12/2022 19:40

Car A is more in the wrong as the driver blatantly ignored the fact they didn't have right of way.

If a vehicle is approaching, you CANNOT and SHOULDN'T attempt to overtake an obstruction on your side of the road. Possibly being able to clear the obstruction in time as long as Car B travels at an appropriate speed is a completely unreasonable "excuse"!

Driver of Car A needs to read the Highway Code again....

If I followed that rule I'd never get down my very long road between 7am and 9am and 4.30 and 6 pm at night. The only way you can get down is by weaving in and out of the parked cars and timing it in between the oncoming traffic.

CarPoor · 03/12/2022 07:23

startfresh · 03/12/2022 00:14

@CarPoor but in my case I was ONE car, they were multiple and still tried to make me wait.

When I've waited recently it's been 3 cars with ROW and like 10 cars (no exaggeration) or more making the unsafe manoeuvre even when the ROW side is trying to move forward, they're dangerously jumping through.

If the ROW is stopped it's not really dangerous. As I said just more cheeky. It's annoying when people push through like that but it's not because they don't know how to drive. And on the other foot in some situations the ROW does have to stop and allow the other cars to come otherwise you can end up with gridlock situations

londonrach · 03/12/2022 07:28

Car a but mistakes happen. Car b should have read the road. Car a wrong re insurance. Both wrong if different ways

DownNative · 03/12/2022 09:34

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 03/12/2022 00:28

And nobody is saying any driver can plough on at someone! Strawman Argument. Fact is, as the passenger in Car A the OP was not in a good position to see if road ahead was clear enough to proceed or to judge speed of oncoming Car B.

You raise some very valid points, but I still maintain that nobody would call it an acceptable standard of driving to speed up, knowing that there is any obstacle ahead that has nowhere to go to avoid your hitting it (unless it's something like a whole coffee cup or dropped packing air bubble - those are fun to drive over!) and thus 'facilitating' a likely collision.

If both drivers were going at an appropriate speed and paying attention (with the required eyesight standard), at worst, this should have ended in a temporary impasse, with both drivers coming to a stop - stopping almost always being preferable to an anticipable and avoidable collision.

Yet OP could not possibly have had the ability to see Car B speeding up. They claim B did on the basis of A saying so and I'd doubt B actually said anything like that too.

A was in the more dangerous position, manoeuvred into the direction of oncoming traffic and flouted every rule that they are required to follow BEFORE overtaking the obstruction. These are things we know for sure.

These situations is why I have a front and rear dash cam plus warning sign on rear too. This gives me a lot of space and drivers behave themselves. Someone will reverse too if I point to my camera at front when they're in the wrong as well.

Excellent investment!

Getoff · 03/12/2022 10:06

They claim B did on the basis of A saying so and I'd doubt B actually said anything like that too.

They say B admitted it. Not sure if you are missing a fact that OP has given, or choosing to disbelieve it. You can justify anything you want to say about anything if you are going to make up your own facts rather than work within the limits of the ones you've been given.

WeeOrcadian · 03/12/2022 10:13

Car B sounds like they feel as if they own the road (they don't) but from an insurance / legal stance, car A should have stopped, every single time. Speed is irrelevant when it comes to 'right of way' (a term I use loosely) so car A was definitely in the wrong.

dementedpixie · 03/12/2022 10:20

If CarA was already on their way past the cars then CarB should have waited and not started going past them too.

TheMadGardener · 03/12/2022 10:25

I was in a similar accident 3 years ago in which I was Car B, except that I didn't speed up but slowed down when I realised that Car A wasn't pulling in to the large space available but was going to try to squeeze between me and a parked car. He didn't make it and caused significant damage to my car (replacement panel needed). He then blamed me and my insurers ended up taking him and his insurers to court, where the judge said it was clearly my right of way, he should have pulled over. His insurance had to pay and I kept my no-claims bonus!

(Incidentally, shout out for LV who are my insurers and were absolutely top class with arranging quick repair, sorting me a courtesy car and chasing him through the courts. They were fab!)

littlepeas · 03/12/2022 10:38

B should have stopped and waited, regardless of whether it was his right of way or not. As soon as A pulled out they became a hazard and B should have anticipated it and stopped. Part of being a good driver is anticipating hazards and reacting appropriately - as a PP mentioned, you don't just plough on towards something in the road. If you deliberately drive into someone, regardless of the reason, you are at fault. This obviously assumes that he had time to stop, but it sounds like he did.

DownNative · 03/12/2022 10:38

Getoff · 03/12/2022 10:06

They claim B did on the basis of A saying so and I'd doubt B actually said anything like that too.

They say B admitted it. Not sure if you are missing a fact that OP has given, or choosing to disbelieve it. You can justify anything you want to say about anything if you are going to make up your own facts rather than work within the limits of the ones you've been given.

On the contrary, you're choosing to accept the views of a passenger who had a poor view of road ahead due to obstruction. And taking their word, to boot. That's the OP.

In cases where there's no video evidence, you fall back on Highway Code Rule 162 and 163. Car A clearly flouted each one they're required to follow BEFORE overtaking. This is all the evidence we have to hand.

You can ignore that if you wish....

NalaNana · 03/12/2022 10:57

@DownNative of course we're taking the OP's word for it. If driver B didn't speed up, there would be no point in this thread as obviously driver A would be at fault.

You can't just pick and choose which parts of the OP are true based on which parts support your view. Oh, I've just decided that the OP wasn't a passenger at all, they were the driver, so they had the best view in the house blah blah blah 🙄

bakebeans · 03/12/2022 11:07

Unfortunately it may be classed as Car A fault as he should have judged speed and Car B had right of way. Car B driver clearly an absolute knob but unless witnesses may be classed as no fault.
You could still try to proceed with a non fault claim by saying you had already proceeded to overtake the parked car prior to car B being in your vision but may not go in your favour

GimmeBiscuits · 03/12/2022 11:14

Both were in the wrong. A should not have overtaken if there was oncoming traffic.B should not have speeded up.

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 03/12/2022 11:31

Yet OP could not possibly have had the ability to see Car B speeding up. They claim B did on the basis of A saying so and I'd doubt B actually said anything like that too.

That depends on the degree to which B did (or didn't) speed up, I would say. If it was a gradual acceleration, A wouldn't have known; but if he'd floored it and the turbo kicked in, it would be obvious. Also, the change in speed may have been clearly audible, if they had their windows down and it was a noisy engine.

zingally · 03/12/2022 11:39

Car A was legally in the wrong any day of the week. Car B was morally in the wrong, and got his instant karma in the form of a busted wing mirror. Both as dumb as each other, but if it came to a court of law, Car A would take the rap.

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 03/12/2022 11:58

Car A was legally in the wrong any day of the week. Car B was morally in the wrong, and got his instant karma in the form of a busted wing mirror. Both as dumb as each other, but if it came to a court of law, Car A would take the rap.

I'm not so certain of that - I think it really depends on how far away B was in the first place - and if he did speed up significantly. If you think about when you use a roundabout, say, it doesn't have to be completely clear of all visible vehicles before you enter; with a lot of busy ones, you'd be waiting all week if that were the case.

As a driver, you have to judge whether you have enough time to complete a manoeuvre before a (maybe) distant car will arrive up your arse (actual Highway Code phrasing!), based on your perception of its speed.

Whether B did or did not actually do it in this case, there will always be the pathetic (poor) drivers with tiny willies who will slam their foot down and deliberately make a problem and foster aggressive confrontation where none would otherwise ever have been, apparently to punish you for wanting to share 'THEIR' road and not acknowledging them as undisputed king. Yes, dear, we all have cars that can go fast if we put our foot down - that's what a car does - but most of us understand how to regulate it appropriately for the conditions.

JudgeJ · 03/12/2022 12:06

woodhill · 02/12/2022 19:38

I mean car B if he aggressively speeded up

No need for it

It is clear that car A failed to wait, it can't be proved that car B speeded up, if he admitted it at the time he certainly wouldn't admit it to his insurance, so the insiurance would find against A.

woodhill · 03/12/2022 12:20

True

WeBuiltThisBuffetOnSausageRoll · 03/12/2022 12:21

It is clear that car A failed to wait, it can't be proved that car B speeded up, if he admitted it at the time he certainly wouldn't admit it to his insurance, so the insiurance would find against A.

I imagine, before long, cars will be fitted as standard with timed speed recorders which would be used as evidence in cases like this; but there's also no proof that B didn't hugely speed up.

Once A was on B's side of the road, and thus blocking it - whatever the rights or wrongs of A being there - it was clearly not good driving for B to deliberately proceed when the road ahead was obviously not clear. Around our way, the bin lorry will often block off a road with a line of cars parked on one side, and you just have to wait a minute or two; if you were stupid enough to just drive into it anyway, I'd expect any insurer to cast doubt on your eyesight or ability to drive safely plus you can't recycle wrecked cars that way anyway.

Yes, you can be annoyed, even angry, that somebody/something is impeding your way, but you can't just ignore them and plough on regardless - any more than you can pick up a very slow little elderly pedestrian holding you up on a narrow pavement and fling them over a hedge.

DinaofCloud9 · 03/12/2022 12:23

Car A but B is a bellend.