This happened to me over the weekend and I have been chewing over it since – I was at a Give Way in a motor home wanting to turn right (so not able to move quickly). The turn was on a blind corner so I couldn't see traffic approaching from the right. Unfortunately, just as I committed to the manoeuvre, a car came around the corner at quite a speed and had to brake quite hard to avoid an accident then proceeded to deliver the usual expletives you would expect in such circumstances.
However it was a narrow B road and there was signage on the approach advising drivers to slow down due to the hidden turn and approaching series of bends. I think his speed was not suitable for the conditions and he hadn't anticipated the potential for vehicles pulling out of the signposted junction.
Thinking on it, I don't know what else I could have done - it was simply really bad timing as I could have waited there all day and I would never have been in a better position to know if a car was about to suddenly round the bend.
Thankfully he managed to slow enough and there wasn't an accident but it was quite close to ramming the side of the motor home right where my two daughters were sat in the back – and I can't imagine there is much side crash protection in the side of those things!
Thoughts please...
The other driver would have been going too fast if he'd hit you.
Doesn't sound like you did anything wrong, and fortunately the other driver stopped in time. Placing blame will do no good, I'd recommend you stop dwelling on it and move on with your life.
This is probably one of those that isn't black and white...
You shouldn't pull out unless it's safe to do so. It's your responsibility to make it so.
The other driver should be driving in a manner that is suitable for conditions, visibility etc.
Had there been an accident, I suspect it would be your fault and the other driver would have contributed to the scale/extent of the outcome through his speed etc.
Not sure that's what you want to hear...
Thankfully he managed to slow enough and there wasn’t an accident
Clearly he was going exactly the right speed. No, I’m kidding. He was going too fast to allow sufficient margin. Similarly, he could have rounded the blind corner and found an old lady dawdling along on her bicycle, or a tractor doing similar. If he can’t see beyond the point he can safely stop his vehicle, he’s going too fast.
But perhaps his speed was just about ok. Real problem was his attitude to finding an obstacle the other side of a blind corner. Not your fault.
What could you have done differently? Not much, by the sounds of it. If you go ploughing around blind bends ignoring warning signs about junctions, you shouldn't act all aggrieved when you encounter someone pulling out.
Obviously please post a streetmaps view of the junction so the thread can 'make progress' to the normal driving god vs driving god bunfight.
You shouldn’t pull out unless it’s safe to do so. It’s your responsibility to make it so.
So he should have pulled over and written to his MP?
I’m sorry, you obviously haven’t driven on country roads much. And neither had the guy hurtling towards the OP.
Edit: apologies boblo I’ve reacted quite strongly to your response. You’re right it’s not black and white and I’m painting a picture in my head of the situation based on a brief description. I’m picturing the kind of narrow lanes near my house which are barely wide enough for two vehicles to pass, where I often encounter vehicles travelling too quickly round blind bends. So forgive me getting a bit spikey and don’t take it personally
Definitely your fault for driving a motorhome, you massive rolling road block pain in the arse that you are
Real problem was his attitude to finding an obstacle the other side of a blind corner
Since the other driver is presumably not on here to defend himself, it's possible his poor response was because he'd scared himself. I've occasionally scared myself by doing something stupid and my first instinct is sometimes aggression/anger (not expressed, just felt), even if I know I was to blame. Human innit.
The other drivers was driving to the conditions as they where able to stop in time to avoid an impact.
Driving country roads is just something you get used to over time and nothing to see here.
At least it's not a caravan !
Other driver going too quick TBH.
You might have been found at fault if things ended badly but it sounds like the other driver had no good reason to get shirty with you. Some junctions are just more dangerous than others
Obviously please post a streetmaps view of the junction so the thread can ‘make progress’ to the normal driving god vs driving god bunfight.
I have tried to find the turn on Google Maps but I can't find it - it's an access road to Maentwrog Gorge in Snowdonia.
You might have been found at fault if things ended badly but it sounds like the other driver had no good reason to get shirty with you.
Yeah - that's about how I see it TBF.
Definitely not your fault, there could've been anything around the bend from his perspective. You should obviously do what you can to avoid any situation arising, creeping out the junction and opening the windows to try and hear approaching vehicles perhaps. Just file it under 'dickhead who needs to take up no more of my thoughts' and move on.
What could you have done differently? Not much, by the sounds of it.
Perhaps turn left and then find a safer place to change direction - without seeing or knowing the location difficult to say how high risk it was or how viable an option that was. Another alternative would have been to ask another person to help guide you out by walking to the apex of the bend, but again that assumes you can safely stop to pick them up again, and that there is someone to do that.
Another option, which people seem to have forgotten, is that their motor vehicle is fitted with an audible device for alerting other motor users to their presence.
The other driver avoided an accident so difficult to lay blame for your fright there. Had he crashed perhaps he was going too fast.
No one it’s an accident.
No luck catching those swans then?
Perhaps turn left and then find a safer place to change direction
If I had done that then the accident would still have happened - he would have just rammed me from behind instead.
Another option, which people seem to have forgotten, is that their motor vehicle is fitted with an audible device for alerting other motor users to their presence.
But what if there had been a cyclist in the vicinity?
Anyway, no such thing as a RTA these days.
Another option, which people seem to have forgotten, is that their motor vehicle is fitted with an audible device for alerting other motor users to their presence.
Thats what donif I have to go somewhere with zero visibility. Theres one particular humpback bridge I do reasonably often that you can see nothing over and that even has signs at both sides telling you to do it. Pleased I don't live next to it mind.
Right - I have found the bit of road...
@52.937999,-4.0026924,3a,75y,225.54h,79.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjG8OFfst26fn-bQTgL7THg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656">This is what he would have seen just before he rounded the corner
(Note the signpost showing the junction on the corner)
@52.9370391,-4.0041532,3a,75y,20.87h,68.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjOQKYRef0aGqeSVQ1_xmsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656">And this is what I could see of the corner to my right
My personal opinion is, if there's no sign of another vehicle when I start the manoeuvre, then it's tough and same goes the other way round.
Legally I have no idea on the outcome if there was a collision but the other driver needs to wind his kneck in.
What @goldfish24 said:
If he can’t see beyond the point he can safely stop his vehicle, he’s going too fast.
I apply the same when MTBing but know not everyone - not even everyone I ride with - does that. Quite a useful excuse for how slow I am...
Right – I have found the bit of road…
Oof… that’s a really nasty junction. Much as I have protested above I could easily fall into the trap of travelling at a fair speed round that gentle bend on a wide enough stretch of road, not realising the subtle junction signage meant there was a give way right on the inside of the blind bend, and ended up in the same situation as the driver that nearly collided with you. Id be wrong but I could see myself making that mistake. I’d like to think I’d be apologetic, and slow enough to just stop, but I can understand the view above that the driver could just be stunned and react by arguing. Either way, still not your fault. With the benefit of hindsight (you had moments to consider this junction) I would consider turning left and accelerating quickly as poss in future and doubling back when safe to do so.
I don’t think a horn is mitigation for entering a blind section of road. It’s barely effective and it’s a nuisance.
If you pull out into a road from a junction and a car hits you in the side then it's pretty nailed on your fault just as someone going into the back of you is their fault.
There's not really much ambiguity, it is your responsibility to join the new carriageway safely.
Your difficulty is showing that he was not in view when you started your manoevure, or his excessive speed. If he genuinely was not in view, you pulled out as briskly as you could to minimise the danger, then there is nothing "at fault" about your driving. However, unless he locked up his brakes, and skidded leaving evidence of excess speed, how would you evidence his negligent driving, when the rpesumption is on you to emerge safely?
This is why I counsel people to get dashcams. Only today I have had to tell an insured he was at fault for a third party pulling off from a parked position by the side of the road into his path. The insured would not have been visible to the driver pulling off, and you see the insured turn into the road from a t junction at the same time the driver pulls off, so the insured has effectively turned, accellerated off from virtually stationary and then hit the other driver 40 yards down the road. If it wasnt for their CCTV, I'd have been defending it to the hilt on a "you pulled out". basis. Its surprising how effective cctv/dashcam footage can be.
There’s not really much ambiguity, it is your responsibility to join the new carriageway safely.
I can see your logic, but it is impossible to join that carriageway safely without a banksman.
This is why I counsel people to get dashcams.
However dashcams only pint forwards or backwards - the only footage one would have recorded in my situation was the beautiful scenery!
I can see your logic, but it is impossible to join that carriageway safely without a banksman.
Doesn't matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
There are plenty of dodgy junctions around but that doesn't change things reallyin this respect.
Not really sure what you want to hear...clearly had there been an accident it would have been your fault, but there wasn't, so forget about it
I have had a similar experience where I questioned what (if anything) I could have done differently. Good on you for thinking about it after the event rather than flipping the bird and driving on.
As to what you could have done differently... Did you have your Drivers window open to listen for oncoming cars? I thought I was a bit weird for doing this when turning right under similar circumstances, but my sons Driving instructor told him to do exactly that at one of the challenging junctions on the local driving centre route.
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
But as has been mentioned above - what would the the legal outcome had I been turning left and he drove into me? I am not trying to absolve myself of blame here, but in all my years of driving (over 35 years) I have never been in this situation and I am genuinely interested in hearing different opinions (of which there are already).
Did you have your Drivers window open to listen for oncoming cars?
I did and couldn't hear anything (above the noise of the engine and two 12 yr olds buzzing about the fact they were about to go canyoning).
Not really sure what you want to hear…
I don’t think the OP wants validating that they’re right or wrong, but discussing/thinking about a near miss is good to educate and avoid in future. We call it Lessons Learned in engineering/management.
If he can’t see beyond the point he can safely stop his vehicle, he’s going too fast.
This was the advice from the former police driving instructor our company employed to re-educate us.
On country roads assume there’s a stationary tractor* over ever blind summit and behind every blind bend - if you’re lucky the spiky bits are facing away from you.
Drive accordingly because some day you’ll be right.
*or turning motorhome
I don’t think the OP wants validating that they’re right or wrong,
Absolutely this - I don't feel I could have done much differently in the circumstances but for my kids hearing some random stranger calling me an effing anchor and for them to think I am a bad driver (as has been said since) probably bothers me more 😂
At least I didn't stoop to the level of the other driver and join in - that's a bonus.
We can ignore the fact that the OP was in a motorhome - might be a cylist , milkwagon, bin lorry, tractor, mobility vehicle or any other slow moving vehicle, and for some of those some of the solutions above aren't remotely practical (man with a white flag).
Given it's a blinf bend, and there is an onus on the driver on the main road to drive in a way that means he can stop in time I think it is far from certain you would be to blame otherwise some of those people could never get out safely (legally) as they can never see far enough to get a safe time window
The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
This is a very dangerous way to think.
Surely you shouldn't drive - or cycle - so fast that you can't stop in the distance that you can see is clear and safe?
I'm not claiming I'm this perfect by the way!
clearly had there been an accident it would have been your fault,
This isn't clear at all!
Highway code rule 126: "Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. "
If you round a bend and hit a stationary vehicle it's not 'clear' that it's their fault and not yours.
I once came round a bend on a big A-road at 60ish and had to break pretty firmly to avoid a recently fallen tree ( I was first on the scene). It was a good wake-up call...
doris5000
Free Member
clearly had there been an accident it would have been your fault,This isn’t clear at all!
Well it is really. The traffic on the main carriageway always has right of way over joiners unless signed otherwise. That's it. No conditions, if, buts or maybees.
It's true there are junction designs that are less than helpful but that doesn't trump the above simple fact.
If it did, we'd have all sorts of excuses being made up why it's not the joiners fault etc and there'd be (even more) chaos.
And a short answer to the OP's original question; probably both at fault.
The OP for pulling out when they don't have right of way and the 3rd party for not driving within conditions/ability.
Highway code rule 126: “Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. ”
Yeah you see that’s not definitive. I was travelling south down the A1 the other week, a car pulled out into my path to head south. I accelerated around them as it was impossible for me to stop, accelerating meant I was able to pass them before the on coming lorry hit me. The car occupants shit their pants as 2 tonne of SUV skimmed past them. They past me on the dual carriageway way, I smiled and waved giving a little laugh. They laughed back, waved and carried on to get a clean pair of pants. They pulled out just as I was approaching the junction, I’d have to be 20mph to stop in time.
I’ve been biting my tongue and trying not to argue, but
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
And
The traffic on the main carriageway always has right of way over joiners unless signed otherwise. That’s it. No conditions, if, buts or maybees.
Just no no no no no. Such a dangerous attitude. Confusing Rights with Risk.
The situation described by the OP is not about providing the oncoming vehicle on the main carriage way with a RIGHT of way. The driver departing the give way (the OP) has not removed anyone’s right of passage, because he cannot see anyone coming. He has not denied anyone anything for his own gain. So, let’s switch to the driver on the main carriage way. He is continuing along a road, within his rights. Were there a fallen tree round the bend, would a court find that the tree had consciously removed his right of way, or that he had ignored the risk of a stationary object round the bend? Would it be fair or reasonable for the driver on the main carriage way to tell the tree it was a farting banker in front of his little tree babies?
Can anyone think of any other recent issues where people misunderstand the interactions of risks and personal “rights”?
I’ve been drinking. I think I shall go to bed now.
But Drac - that's npt the same - that's a mistake on their part as they should have seen you coming, and assumed you had right of way.
A good argument to that is that if it was foggy and you could only see 50 metres would you drive the same speed, safe in the assumption that the driver on the main road always had priority
If there was an accident then you would be struggling to prove the other driver was speeding (he would deny speeding), I used to have to pull onto a fast road from a side street with limited vision ( once you started pulling out you were committed) and some fool on a motorbike used to hammer down the road (suspect nearly 100 mp/h) I reported it to the cops as I suspected the guy was on the same shift as me and all they could say was 'I have seen that bike it looks great' I only reported it in case someone else or myself pulled out in front of this fool.
At least it’s not a caravan !
Or a tractor with a 6 furrow reversible plough on the back. Or a artic tipper with 20 ton of stone.
Etc etc. At least with a caravan you stand more chance of going straight through & out the other side.
Every morning I'm in a similar position. I need to turn right at a T junction & there's a brow of a hill to the left. Many is the time I've pulled out when It's clear only to get some crank who's either late for work or can't wait to get there to come flying past at 60 (or more) straight after.
If there was an accident then you would be struggling to prove the other driver was speeding
Alternatively the other driver would struggle to explain why they didn’t stop when they should have been driving to the conditions. It really isn’t cut and dried which is why I keep replaying it in my head.
Alternatively the other driver would struggle to explain why they didn’t stop when they should have been driving to the conditions. It really isn’t cut and dried which is why I keep replaying it in my head.
No, I was doing 40 and this guy suddenly pulls out in a campervan I was sure he seen me (no witnesses you are struggling to prove otherwise, BTW I do not doubt you for a second)
It is not who is in the wrong it is how can you prove YOU weren't in the wrong.
The upshot is, had the bloke collided with you, you would be 50/50 in insurance terms at best, even though you had little alternative but to exit the junction as you did.
As it happened, he managed to stop in time, so he was driving to the conditions, but only just, and leaving so little margin of safety makes him a bit of a reckless arsewipe, as does his subsequent behaviour.
You could’ve turned left in which case he may well of rear ended you, which according to the righteous on here would’ve also been your fault. So you need to upgrade your motorhome to an Ariel Atom or helicopter to accommodate the fact that the speed limit is a minimum recommended speed to many of the **** wits awarded a drivers license.
If I had done that then the accident would still have happened – he would have just rammed me from behind instead.
I think if you turn left you are blocking the lane for less time, potentially provide an escape route for the other driver and perhaps more importantly mean if he does hit you it’s likely from behind where your crumple zone is probably better!
Insurance would say 50/50 at a guess.
The problem is that you should drive at a safe speed for the road conditions & you shouldn’t pull out unless you can see the road is clear. Ultimately, I don’t think they have provided enough warning on the main road of the hazard the side turning presents. If it is an A road, and it is impossible to pull out safely given the speed people are likely to be going on an A road, then in my book that is a hazardous junction. There is ‘fault’ on both sides, but the junction itself is fundamentally unsafe as it stands.
martinhutch sums it up pretty well I think.
As an aside, if I was riding my motorbike down that road I would always be in a position to stop based on my available view of the road ahead.
If I then suddenly come across a camper van making a turn I would slow. Priority in this situation is meaningless.
“Do not drive your vehicle so fast that you cannot stop in the distance in which you can see to be clear”.
Is pretty clear. In a serious accident, the investigators will be looking at closing speed. Glad you didn’t have one. Other driver was going too fast but not so fast as to have an accident.
I don’t think a horn is mitigation for entering a blind section of road. It’s barely effective and it’s a nuisance.
It’s not a mitigation, it’s to alert other drivers to your presence (a classic theory test question). Increasing the chances that someone else knows you are there can surely only be a good thing?
Barely effective is presumably better than crossing your fingers so I’ll settle for that. I’m not sure what nusiance it causes, it’s a rural area.
There’s a junction near me where about 1:10 drivers use their horn, maybe more in summer as the vegetation is worse. I presume >80% of the traffic is regular/local as it’s not a sensible route to anywhere populated. I’ve never seen an accident there but heard of many a near miss - none of whom have hooted before pulling out.
It’s enough just to grab your attention and may make the difference between being able to react in time. Perhaps people are more likely to use their horn as a few miles further along the road there is actually a sign where a golf course crosses asking people to hoot to warn golfers around a blind bend (erected by the course not the council).
I’d look at it in terms of Careless Driving, the legal test for which is
A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
And
In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above what would be expected of a careful and competent driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.
What would a careful and competent driver do in the OP’s position? Everything they reasonably could to make sure they didn’t pull out in to the path of an oncoming vehicle - stop at the junction, look as far as the layout allowed, and listen for any vehicle sounds. He’s done all that and when he started the pull out no oncoming vehicle could be seen or heard.
What would a careful and competent driver do in the other driver’s position? Since there’s a sign warning them of the upcoming junction (and/or if they know it’s there) then slow down for it is the obvious answer. Evidently on this occasion he stopped in time so he was going slow enough, but if the question is what if he hadn’t stopped in time, then he’d be the one who’d been driving without due care and attention.
When you say he had to brake quite hard, was it full-on smoking tyres and skidding? Or just controlled but rapid slowing? If the latter, then it would suggest he was "driving to the conditions"
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
Not true.
When you say he had to brake quite hard, was it full-on smoking tyres and skidding? Or just controlled but rapid slowing?
There was no skidding but it was a modern car so it would have ABS - but it was pretty full-on hard braking and pretty scary to watch first-hand – it all became a bit slow motion as I was stuck trying to move off quickly and move out of danger.
I was on the other side of this argument once (I was the car driver).
I was on my to Carron Valley down a fairly narrow B road. Its a road a knew well enough having driven it a few times. There are a few farms and the road is pretty popular with road cyclists so I always take it easy on blind bends, particularly left hand ones as you will see any potential hazard later.
I round one of these blind left hand bends to be met by a timber lorry attempting an overtake on a horse and rider. (I'm not really sure if it was a sensible move by the lorry driver to be honest) I brake hard and come to a stop - my lane is completely blocked by the lorry so I don't have much choice.
The guy on the horse goes absolutely tonto - at me! The thing is he wasn't even the hazard I was avoiding - he was on the other side of the road - and I still pulled up well short of him, probably a good 15 metres, and I was much further from the timber lorry. I was genuinely driving at a speed so that I could stop in the distance I could see.
I wait while the lorry pulls back into his lane, and get a tirade of abuse from the horse rider about going to fast.
I got the last laugh though. As I drove away I told him to get off his high horse.
Conclusion, there are dickheads everywhere so drive accordingly
There’s a junction near me where about 1:10 drivers use their horn, maybe more in summer as the vegetation is worse.
Round here the horn-tooters tend to be those who have no intention of slowing down for the blind corner ahead of them. Use of the horn immediately transfers all responsibility to the oncoming driver, obvs.
Richmtb, timber wagon clearly at fault, shouldn't have tried any sort of overtake on a blind bend. Horse rider also grade A dick, amazes me it's legal to ride on the road and even more so the sense of entitlement with which some do it. Hang over from a distant past, imagine someone suggesting riding ostriches on the road being a good idea.
Leaving the insurance blame to one side, why isn't there a legal speed limit reduction at approach to the blind bend in the OP's scenario https://www.google.com/maps/ @52.937999,-4.0026924,3a,75y,225.54h,79.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjG8OFfst26fn-bQTgL7THg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 to 40mph (if not lower), in order to reduce the risk of a life threatening crash at the junction?
richmtb
As I drove away I told him to get off his high horse.
Amazing
Leaving the insurance blame to one side, why isn’t there a legal speed limit reduction at approach to the blind bend in the OP’s scenario
Such things are (genuinely) usually data driven. If there were a high rate of incidents at the junction then a lowering of the speed limit may well be implemented.
The fact there isn't suggests there are not a significant number of crashes here.
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
Not true
How so?
The bend has a warning sign and the warning sign is to warn that a junction is on the bend ahead.
If I was warned about something would I just carry on at full speed or would I slow down because of, you know, the clear warning.
I'm surprised at the number of people calling this 50/50. I can see that the insurance might go 50/50 if there's no dash cam or witnesses to confirm that you didn't pull out in front of him when he was already visible, but otherwise it seem pretty clear cut to me, just as it would be if you were at the back of a queue of stationary traffic in the same position. Or a slow moving cyclist.
why isn’t there a legal speed limit reduction at approach to the blind bend in the OP’s scenario to 40mph (if not lower), in order to reduce the risk of a life threatening crash at the junction?
Because the required number of people haven't yet been killed or hideously mangled to make it necessary in the eyes of the highway authority.
TBH, this kind of road will be littered with similar blind junctions every couple of miles. It's obvious to most competent drivers that hammering around blind bends isn't a healthy thing to do, but a significant minority find actually slowing down for them just too inconvenient.
I can see that the insurance might go 50/50 if there’s no dash cam or witnesses to confirm that you didn’t pull out in front of him when he was already visible, but otherwise it seem pretty clear cut to me
Just from a pragmatic point of view, if OP has crossed a give way and been struck by a vehicle which, has right of way, the initial position of the other insurance company will be 100% liability for OP. The arguments about excessive speed/blind nature of junction may get it down to 50/50, but there's no way on earth I would realistically expect anything more. That doesn't mean that OP is at fault IRL, just that his insurance company is unlikely to make much effort to defend the claim unless there are vast sums involved.
Other driver's fault. Just as it would be if he'd crashed into the back of a queue of traffic in the same position.
The guy on the major road has RoW but has also have a responsibility to drive carefully and attentively. Those two warning signs as he approaches that corner ought to indicate to him that there's both a junction (that's hidden from him) and that there is a double bend. He ought to be driving accordingly. (i.e. expecting that some-one could be pulling out)
agree with pdw, blame rests on the driver on the major road
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
Right of way doesn't mean you don't have to stop. If person A and B have to share a resource and person A had priority the person B yields to person A. If person B already has the resource there is no no right of way. In this case the resource is that section of road. When person the OP took that resource there was no sign of person another person coming so they can not yield. OP may have been broken down in the same spot and could have run into them just the same.
Hmmmm. This is interesting.
So what a lot of people are saying is you can pull out with inpunity when you don't have any ROW so long as you feel the conditions merit other drivers taking avoiding action.
That's not how I was taught to drive and, if a lgenerally held belief, might explain the shitfest we have for road discipline nowadays...
Leaving the insurance blame to one side, why isn’t there a legal speed limit reduction at approach to the blind bend in the OP’s scenario
Because a speed limit don't mean its safe to go that speed on all part of the road. You don't try to go round all corners in a 30mph zone at 30 mph (or whatever the speed limit is) then complain you crashed because the car skidded out do you? You slow down to navigate the corner. Similarly if you are driving a road with blind humps or corners you slow down to navigate the road. I say this as someone who I admit drives fast on sections of rural roads but you regularly need to slow right down even though the speed limit maybe still national due to driveways, gates, humps and a million other reasons.
Doesn’t matter. The car already on the carriageway in question has absolute right of way unless there are signs to the contrary.
Not true
How so?
If the CAOTCIQ is going to fast then they would be at fault.
Happened to a mate of mine at Uni. He was turning right off a main road. As he pulled across the other lane, a guy coming the opposite way down the main road drove into the side of his car and wrote it off.
He was gutted as he assumed it was his fault and he only had 3rd party. Various witnesses said the other guy was going too fast and so he got all the blame. So my mate got a new car.
So what a lot of people are saying is you can pull out with inpunity when you don’t have any ROW so long as you feel the conditions merit other drivers taking avoiding action.
What if there is a straw man on the road?
So what a lot of people are saying is you can pull out with inpunity when you don’t have any ROW so long as you feel the conditions merit other drivers taking avoiding action.
No you're not understanding. If you can not see the road is clear can not assume it to be clear. The other person can only yield to what they can see, the person coming over a brow of a hill is a better position to control the potential situation than the person crossing the road given that neither know the existence of the other. Very simple. OR are you trolling?
Years ago I was doing a 3-point turn on my (then deserted) road. I was nearly finished with the manoeuvre when a motorcyclist came screaming round the corner and was forced to slam on the brakes to avoid my (stationary) car. Cue much shouting & window punching from him.
I mean, if you're on a mobile death trap, maybe don't ride at 50mph in a residential area *shrug*.
As for OP - if he genuinely started to pull out when no car was visible/audible, then it's not his fault at all. Of course, that might be difficult to defend.
So what a lot of people are saying is you can pull out with inpunity when you don’t have any ROW so long as you feel the conditions merit other drivers taking avoiding action.
Not at all, but approaching any blind bend on a major road with two prominent warning triangles what are your thoughts? Alternately, having made suitable checks that the road is clear (to the best of their ability), how else should a car joining the major road proceed?
The only problem I can deduce was the expletive exchange. If it had been 2 people on foot, someone, say stepped out of a shop doorway, in front of another pedestrian, who stopped and avoided contact, it would've been *smile* Oops, sorry mate, and on with the day, forgotten in seconds. But, because of the ****ing ****y attitude (I have it myself, but much less these days!) of people driving in this country, it's all anger and indignation and starting threads on forums.
People need to chill out and get over themselves. Ain't gonna happen while ****s like Clarkson are "cool" celebs.
^^^^ That reminds me of the Goofy cartoon from the 1950s - Motor Mania.
@convert Not sure there's any need to be rude, try and keep it civilised please.
Oh, and neither of your binary choices 👍