Involved in an accident- Advice needed please

Originally Posted by Bibio

roundabouts are like traffic lights except that the red light is any traffic coming from your right unless there are contraflows marked out with solid white lines or hatched areas. when there is no vehicles on your right its a green light so you can go. no matter how many lanes there are on the roundabout

True but only true when you are joining.

Once you've joined a multi lane roundabout you must respect the lane just as you would on a straight dual carriageway.

Originally Posted by daktulos

Another thing I was told, which makes sense so is probably wrong, is that as soon as a roundabout has lights on it, it's no longer a roundabout - it's a one-way circulatory system

Yes that's correct.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[650]

Originally Posted by Fordward

If you are going round a two lane roundabout, on the outside lane and you cross the inside lane in order to exit, and you collide with another vehicle who is already in the inside lane, it is your fault. Unless the lane markings are absent or they flow into the exit instead of continuing round the roundabout.

But not many people know this peculiarity in motoring law and everyone on a forum thinks they are right, so I never expected to get agreement from people on this thread, and frankly 650, whether or not you agree, I don't care.

Whether or not people agree on a forum, it won't change the law.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Care to reference said law? I'm not trying to be arsey, I genuinely want to see it.

Originally Posted by 650

Care to reference said law? I'm not trying to be arsey, I genuinely want to see it.

Road Traffic Act - The law that says when you change lane and cross the white line it's your responsibility to do it safely and not hit the guy next to you.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[650]

Originally Posted by Fordward

Road Traffic Act - The law that says when you change lane and cross the white line it's your responsibility to do it safely and not hit the guy next to you.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

So in this case, absolutely irrelevant, regardless of his road position, he was approaching from the right. The person waiting at the junction has to wait until the vehicle has passed safely and not make assumptions, it's a basic duty to do that.

So not so much a 'peculiarity in road law', more 'made up as you go along'

Ergo, car at fault. No shared blame here.

Originally Posted by 650

So in this case, absolutely irrelevant, regardless of his road position, he was approaching from the right. The person waiting at the junction has to wait until the vehicle has passed safely and not make assumptions, it's a basic duty to do that.

So not so much a 'peculiarity in road law', more 'made up as you go along'

Ergo, car at fault. No shared blame here.

The lines drawn on his first diagram showed the two vehicles on the roundabout with parallel lines alongside each other, indicating he was in lane 2, the car had already joined and was alongside him in lane 1 and he crossed lane 1 to get to his exit.

He has now clarified his drawing showing that the two were not side by side.

If you can't understand the difference there's nothing further I can say that will help you to.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[650]

Would you join the road if you were unsure of the bikes direction?

Don't say yes just to play devils advocate, because we know you wouldn't.

You're being awfully semantic about something that is crystal clear, REGARDLESS of road position, you have to give way to your right until it's absolutely safe to join, he didn't do that, he did the typical cockwomble thing and made an assumption. Now we have a broken bike and a damaged bumper.

Maybe another pretty picture will help you understand, see attached. You'll note its exactly the lines that were drawn in the first diagram. You'll also note by looking at other vehicles in the picture the bike and car I've drawn are about 3 times the size they should be, so they'd have had to have traveled parallel about 4 car lengths AFTER the car joined the roundabout in order to get into this situation.

In this scenario the accident happens when the bike exits, not when the car joins, there is about 1.5 times the length of an HGV between those two points, and it is the bikes fault, regardless of how much of a muppet the car driver was to get alongside him in the first place.

[Teejayexc]

I don't really care one way or t'other.....

But keep posting 650 I love yer avatar.

Originally Posted by Fordward

Maybe another pretty picture will help you understand, see attached. You'll note its exactly the lines that were drawn in the first diagram. You'll also note by looking at other vehicles in the picture the bike and car I've drawn are about 3 times the size they should be, so they'd have had to have traveled parallel about 4 car lengths AFTER the car joined the roundabout in order to get into this situation.

In this scenario the accident happens when the bike exits, not when the car joins, there is about 1.5 times the length of an HGV between those two points, and it is the bikes fault, regardless of how much of a muppet the car driver was to get alongside him in the first place.

Are you saying that I should have been in the outside lane ? Or that I should have been going slow enough to be able to stop in less than 4 metres? Because when he came out travailng at about 20 miles per hour I barely saw him before he hit me. I am glad that he was a nice person and accepted liability at the spot and later was very helpful. From the damage to my bike you can clearly see who's at fault.

And I agree that on the first picture I would have been at fault, but as I said the second picture is much more accurate. Still waiting for insurance to get back to me