Who's right of way is it?

[olilew 11]

"No matter what"?

 

You think a pedestrians has a "right of way" over a car travelling down a normal street? No crossings, no turnings, just a street, a car, and a pedestrian wanting to cross, what should they do?

 

Not talking about pedestrians "wanting to cross". Talking about pedestrians already in the road.

[Cyclone 10]

Ah, well, clarity is necessary when writing.

 

Pedestrians already in the road have priority. Is different to "Pedestrians always have the right of way".

[olilew 11]

He did say "The vehicle driver should be aware of anything in the road at all times and be prepared to stop."

[Cyclone 10]

True.

Of course being prepared to stop doesn't overcome the laws of physics. So a pedestrian stepping out unexpectedly may suddenly have priority, but well, momentum says otherwise.

[lauren84 11]

She is at fault...no argument. Send a pic of the layout and she is screwed

 

---------- Post added 09-01-2018 at 21:19 ----------

 

He did say "The vehicle driver should be aware of anything in the road at all times and be prepared to stop."

 

I did have a work colleague who applied that theory to crossing the road. She just walked out on zebras as if they were pavements. It really irritated me!

[jgharston 11]

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3897963,-1.3712761,126a,35y,269.36h,45t/data=!3m1!1e3

Here?

Normal rules apply,.

Yes, normal rules apply. Whoever doesn't have to "trespass" across somebody else's path has right of way over somebody who does have to "trespass" across somebody else's path.

 

First, traffic going along the mainline has priority over traffic attempting to join or leave the mainline.

Traffic joining the mainline by turning left (ie, not crossing the centre line) has priority over traffic joining the mainline by turning right (ie "trespassing" by crossing the centre line).

[Bonzo77 13]

Can't you just pass it onto your insurance with a comment that you won't accept shared fault as she clearly pulled out and hit you from a side junction when you were on the main carriageway.

 

Yes, already done it. I was pretty sure that I was not to blame, she seemed to think she was in the wrong at the time too.

 

We caught her outside my house the day after too? I've mentioned that in my letter to the insurance company.

[Cyclone 10]

Yes, normal rules apply. Whoever doesn't have to "trespass" across somebody else's path has right of way over somebody who does have to "trespass" across somebody else's path.

 

First, traffic going along the mainline has priority over traffic attempting to join or leave the mainline.

Traffic joining the mainline by turning left (ie, not crossing the centre line) has priority over traffic joining the mainline by turning right (ie "trespassing" by crossing the centre line).

 

Except that it's "priority" and not "right of way".

[onlineo 10]

Thanks everyone. Someone ran into me coming from the car park last year and she's trying to claim it was a 50/50 incident. One part of her claim states that I failed to give way, which baffled me, so just wanted some clarification.

 

50:50 incident doesn't help anyone. You both lose ncb and you both get increased premiums. Surely she may as well take the full hit... Anyhow as to who's fault it is I would suggest the driver coming out of the petrol station has priority but whether that is enough to state that they are 100% at fault I'm not sure. If she pulled out of the junction first and you went into the side of her car then I would actually suggest you are at fault as she had already committed to a manouver and you could have avoided it. Incidents like this are often difficult to sort without a dash cam.

 

I once had a claim against me that I rolled backwards into a car when it drove into the back of me. I lost. I was in queing traffic and had the hand brake on but... It was an alfa so I can't guarantee the handbrake actually worked lol.

[Bonzo77 13]

50:50 incident doesn't help anyone. You both lose ncb and you both get increased premiums. Surely she may as well take the full hit... Anyhow as to who's fault it is I would suggest the driver coming out of the petrol station has priority but whether that is enough to state that they are 100% at fault I'm not sure. If she pulled out of the junction first and you went into the side of her car then I would actually suggest you are at fault as she had already committed to a manouver and you could have avoided it. Incidents like this are often difficult to sort without a dash cam.

 

I once had a claim against me that I rolled backwards into a car when it drove into the back of me. I lost. I was in queing traffic and had the hand brake on but... It was an alfa so I can't guarantee the handbrake actually worked lol.

 

The impact was on the drivers side, front wing. Damage went back almost as far as the drivers side door. That kind of impact couldn't have taken place if I had driven into them.

[Geo-atkinson 10]

True.

Of course being prepared to stop doesn't overcome the laws of physics. So a pedestrian stepping out unexpectedly may suddenly have priority, but well, momentum says otherwise.

 

You can say what you like. But as a driver, if there are pedestrians on the pavement you must be aware and prepared for the pedestrian to suddenly step in to the road. If you remember your emergency stop during your driving test "As if a child had run in to the road". In the eyes of the law, the pedestrian is seldom in the wrong.

[Phili Buster 10]

You can say what you like. But as a driver, if there are pedestrians on the pavement you must be aware and prepared for the pedestrian to suddenly step in to the road. If you remember your emergency stop during your driving test "As if a child had run in to the road". In the eyes of the law, the pedestrian is seldom in the wrong.

 

And especially with so many with either headphones on or texting or both it is so easy for (grown up) pedestrians to be distracted never mind the young with little appreciation of the dangers around them.