Roundabout collision - who is at fault? With diagram

[Notcheekyvimto]

Involved in a collision today at a roundabout.

Both lanes go straight on. The left lane leads to a left turn only shortly afterwards hence lots of people use the right lane to go straight, road markings are clear both lanes permit going straight.

Left hand exit is a car park for a local park marked in green ‘park’.

Red car travels in the right lane to go straight on, indicates left and starts to pull off.

Blue car comes from the park and intends to turn straight or right, into the path of red car.

Red car brakes but cannot stop in time and blue car is damaged on the drivers side, red car on the passengers corner side.

Who is at fault?

She said she was.

The blue car entered the roundabout in a clear lane and the red car then moved into this lane. The red car didn’t check it was clear before moving and should have gone round the roundabout again.
It would be different if the blue car had just entered the roundabout but they hadn’t, they were at the next exit. The red car crashed into the blue car.

Why on earth is red's signal confusing?

Blue car 100% at fault, didn't give priority to the right on roundabout. Not sure why it would be 50/50

When I learned to drive, I was taught that you should indicate left prior to leaving a roundabout. That was nearly 50 years ago though, so thinking may have changed on that point (people generally seem to indicate a lot less these days, imo).

But agree about not relying on indicators, and waiting till you can see that they driver is making the turn as indicated.

The street view image has made it a lot clearer, and I now think that the blue car was entirely at fault for joining a roundabout when there wasn't a big enough gap to do so safely. I suspect the insurers will find it 50/50 though, I've known that happen in cases that were much more clear than this one. I think they do it because they can't be arsed to dispute it.

@Crazydoglady1980

Please tell us you don't drive.

Blue car was clearly in wrong - they have to give way to traffic already on the roundabout and clearly weren't looking either when crossing lanes from OP description.

However DH was injured when he had right of way over a blind hill and car at bottom got fed up waiting to turn right into main road so blocked the road at bottom of hill - insurance did go DH way took 12 months and we still had upfront costs to cover - but police just shrugged said bad junction. Th other driver was screaming abuse at DH claiming it was his faulted as DH was loaded into back of an ambulance.

There is a off set cross read junction outside our house - the people turning onto road up and down hill clearly have to give way to existing traffic on road - there are many accidents and have seen a number of people arguing they were innocent party having pull out onto oncoming cars with right of way having it explained to them by police they were in wrong - they deflate and look sheepish.

People don't like to admit fault.

Many thanks

to many of the ignorant type fail to indicate. To indicate is very helpful and this is why its in the rules.

not necessarily if it was a spiral roundabout though- although it doesn't look like it from the drawing- but if it was a spiral roundabout, like my local one, then red didn't have to cross lanes and so blue very clearly in the wrong.

I know people who work in car insurance and I'm sure it would go as 50/50

The problem is although people want to argue about the micro detail of navigating roundabouts, the reality is there is an overarching responsibility on all drivers to avoid collisions.

Just because someone does something crazy or against the rules in front of you does not then immediately give you licence to smack into them free of any blame. Not unless you have some sort of clear evidence to back up why a collision was completely unavoidable.

That's why IMO this will end up as a 50:50. It will be interesting to get a report back on what the outcome is.

Actually I've just read the full thread and saw the photos- to me blue is very clearly in the wrong, just like any junction roundabout or not they have pulled out in front of you and cut you off. Even if you'd been in the right lane they'd still have cut you off if they were planning on going straight through.

@Notcheekyvimto I had this actual roundabout in my mind when I was thinking through your scenario! Then I saw the pic and realised it was the same. I had this or pugneys in my head. Also knowing this round about v.v well you are 100% in the right OP. I also always stay in that lane to go straight on. Hope you and baby are ok.

Blue. Looks like they were trying to go around the roundabout in the outside lane- a common sight!

You think a heavily pregnant woman would freely crash into another car because she believed she was in the right?

Have you read the Highway Code links?

No.

Try reading what I wrote again.

GasPanic · Today 12:36

It normally takes two people to make an accident. That's why recent rule changes taking responsibility away from one party are the height of idiocy.

It hasn't taken responsibility of pedestrians away, despite what some of the press are saying. It's put extra onus on car drivers to give way to people who are about to cross, which I've always done.

I'd rather be rear ended than run a person over.

You’re clearly in the right. Did you get any witness details? Is the other driver denying fault?

ffsgiveitarest · Today 14:55

photo of car park where blue car was coming out of

That makes it clear that blue was entirely in the wrong, they drove into the side of OP on the roundabout.

Blue at fault. You give way to traffic on the right. Red car had priority on the roundabout

You are and should be allowed to move left to exit because you should give way to anything on the roundabout regardless of what lane.
A lot of people would benefit from being forced to retake there driving test and theory tests it seems

If you’ve breaked and still hit them on the drivers door they were in front of you, they had already passed the first exit. Either you were going quite fast or were slow to react. They must surely have turned onto the roundabout in front of you rather than at the side because you’d have collided nearer the front of their car if that was the case? I think the area of damage is goi g to point to 50:50 or possibly your fault

I didn’t try to smack into them on purpose? I really wished my day had started differently if it helps. If your post is true then why are there ever any car accidents?

Unfortunately I expect the reality is I’ll end up out of pocket regardless. I started to thread to consider how likely fault will be found by the insurer with the other driver so whether I should bother claiming for damage or just pay for it to be fixed when I can afford it. The car is still roadworthy. And that doesn’t btw mean I won’t inform my insurer of the accident, I know you can do so without putting in a claim yourself.

Tell me you don't know how roundabouts work. Without telling me you don't know how roundabouts work.

Exactly