It's a car one - with diagram!

[Sandydonut]

NC just in case and AIBU for traffic. This has already been swiftly sorted out, but I'm curious for opinions on what happened.

Winding, wooded, country A road, line of cars all doing about 40.

About 30 yards ahead van goes fully into oncoming lane and and pauses.

Road at this point curves around a bend to the right. Road markings are long dashes with arrows to stop overtaking from oncoming direction.

Van turns left, fully across, at right angles, left lane to go into private side road on left.

Car hits van in centre of its body.

1. The private road entrance and width all the way is enough for more than two cars.
2. The road was a bend at this point, so while in oncoming lane, cars could have hit van.
3. The corner was not that sharp. If the van had slowed almost to a stop in its own lane and turned left, it would have made it without even swinging out into the oncoming lane, let alone putting 100% of itself over there.

What do you think? Diagram attached. If you want to vote, say YABU for Van being in the right, YANBU for Van being in the wrong.

Of course it's the car's fault. Where did they think the van was going?

If there was enough time to stop when the van was in the left lane, there should've been enough time to stop if the van changed into the right. It does sound like car driver wasn't paying adequate attention - especially if the van driver reckons they were indicating and you claim that you didn't see it...

The cars should still have stopped in response though, the van being on the other side doesn't change that.

The first car in the line after the van should have slowed down to a stop when the van went over to the other side of the road and slowed to a stop. It’s a highly unusual manoeuvre and any decent driver should have recognised it as such and proceeded very very carefully.

The car that hit the van is the one at fault for the accident.

Sounds 50/50 to me. The van should not have turned until checking that it was safe to do so, and the car should not have attempted to undertake. Even without an indication it must have been obvious that the van might turn to the left, as it had moved into the other land oppose a lane on the left and stopped.

Was it you driving the car, @Sandydonut?

I was taught when learning to drive (and it's in the theory test) that I should consider that a car moving into the opposite lane coming up to a left hand turn could be/probably is, turning left. The multiple choice answer for said question is "slow right down and prepare to stop".

Our driveway is a v tight left turn and to do it in one move, you have to swing out into the opposite lane by a couple of feet or manoeuvre and reverse. Once in a blue moon, an inattentive driver will fail to recognise my indicator and make a silly mistake. I slow down, give warning, stop if it's unusually busy (unusually busy being more than 3 cars on our road) etc, but people zone out and drive too close and occasionally, get a bit of a shock once they realise what I'm doing. Thankfully, I live rurally and it's a v quiet road so I've never actually been hit.

OP, you were in the wrong.

The van was clearly turning. The car driver is completely at fault and was not keeping their distance.

Whole situation hinges on if the van was signalling to turn left in plenty of time and slowing down too.

When making a left or right turn swinging out into the opposite lane is an illegal move by any vehicle. If the van was indicting left then it may go 50/50 if not then the van was in the wrong, but either way will be hard to prove unless the people in the car behind saw the if the van was not indicating.

Happened to a friend of mine a few years ago and it went 50/50 by the insurance companies.

Car definitely at fault.

To get our van into our driveway we have to swing out wide and several times cars have tried to undertake even though we are signalling.

I would say the car is at fault. If I had been in the car I would have stepped on the brake to slow right down - and everyone else would have had to do the same. I don't think either of the drivers were on the ball, but legally, pretty sure the car will be the one that was at fault

At the end of the day, the van was in front and it was up to the cars behind it to anticipate there might be a problem

If the side road goes back on itself as per the diagram and it’s a long wheelbase it might be the only way to make the turn.

I agree - if it really was 3 seconds gap, then the car should have had time to stop.

I would say the car driver was not paying full attention to the van drivers movements/the road and needs to anticipate potential hazards better so they can react better and/or not drive as close.

No idea how insurers would see it.

Impossible - if the van had time to pull into another lane, stop and partially make the turn before being hit the second car must have had time to stop, unless it was driving unsafely.

The van is able to use the whole road to drive provided it is safe to do so. No vehicle should ever undertake another (not least if the van is on the wrong side of the road in what you imply is an unsafe bend as you should give them space to pull back in).

Car driver definitely at fault.

Car at fault. Maybe van driver swung out unnecessarily far or paused abnormally long but it should have been obvious that they were up to something so the car driver should have slowed down enough to stop and definitely shouldn’t have undertaken the van. Van could have taken the corner better but being a bit hesitant is not wrong in the same way as undertaking. You have to account for dodderiness, people driving unfamiliar vehicles, people being lost, people thinking “shit, this corner is tighter than I thought”, people seeing things in the road that op are out of your line of vision. That’s what patience and stopping distances are for.

Car at fault, it shouldn't have undertaken the van in that scenario and should have slowed.

Am i the only pne who has no idea what's happening? Where's the side road? Why's the van on the other side if it was going in the same direction as the cars? and the diagram isn't that bendy

Car in the wrong. Undertaking and should be driving able to stop with the distance

Surely car driving 101 is be able to stop in the space you can see and slow and stop if unsure. Vans do sometimes need to swing out to make turns especially if there are fence posts/those little rocks on the corner/ hedgerows etc as the long wheelbase needs the swing. Regardless of if the van was indicating or not, if the car was not 100% sure if the van action it should have stopped.

I'd say vans fault as he was over the line do needed to give way

I think Car was at fault. I suspect the van probably thought the turn was very sharp and it would need the extra space . This could be a sensible approach actually as its a larger vehicle. Car shouldn’t be undertaking unless really sure it’s safe and clear. Car should have been able to anticipate there was a risk even if they didn’t fully understand what the van was doing.

Car should have allowed van to complete manoeuvre. Van also arguably at fault for lack of caution in a manoeuvre that took it onto the wrong side of the road.

My driveway is at an even more acute angle than the entrance in the diagram. The road is single track so there are no lines to cross. To access my driveway I slow right down, indicate left, swing as far right as possible, keep a close eye in my mirror and then turn in. I recognise it could be a confusing manoeuvre as I am indicating left but initially moving to the right hand side of the lane so I am extra vigilant. Once and only once has someone undertaken me midway through the manoeuvre. It was a small car with foreign plates. He had been driving like a twat behind me and I was luckily keeping an extra close eye on him.

Definitely the car's fault. The van was obviously doing something "odd" even without indication and that should have prompted the cars to slow/stop before proceeding and be aware of the van's intentions.

You don't just carry on driving in that type of scenario.