TTQ B4U Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 Saw it happen in front of me yesterday. Car was in front of me turning right out of Germain Ford on Sawmill. The curb lane he was turning into was clear up until the last moment when an ass-hat in a POS changed lanes without signalling and smashed the front of his car nearly spinning him into me. Again, his lane was clear and the other car didn't signal but rather just moved over without a damn fuck being given. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurkvinny Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 Doesn't that one come down to whether the POS hit the front or rear of the car exiting the lot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brrcats Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 It sucks, but I'm inclined to say that it was the fault of the person turning right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokin5s Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 With you testimony of failure to signal the turning guy might have a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99ta Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 With you testimony of failure to signal the turning guy might have a chance. true. but depends who had control of lane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 true. but depends who had control of lane. That's how I see it. The guy who changed lanes didn't allow for proper clearance of a vehicle who had already entered a clear lane. I know it's against the law the change lanes in an intersection but am not sure what the rules are in front of a drive where the vehicle is clear in mid turn. The guy turning didn't turn in front of anyone, his lane was clear. Yes, I'll be happy to sign an affidavit for the guy too. Sucks as it was pretty much a brand new car. The fucker who hit him didn't even ask if everyone is okay. I just snapped at them and said "not that you seem to give a shit about the guy you just hit, but he's not dead" I sometimes really hate people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sol740 Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 ^ yeah, dickhead move for sure. Hopefully your word helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 ^ yeah, dickhead move for sure. Hopefully your word helps. I hope so. The CPD Officer was cool about it but of course while I was curious, he wouldn't share any of the details or make any comments to me about it all thus why I am curious still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotarded1647545491 Posted September 26, 2012 Report Share Posted September 26, 2012 I will be it will be a 50-50 determination. I was driving north on rt 23 (15 years ago) in the center lane with no cars in my lane for at least 1/4 mile, when a guy in the left turn lane changes lanes in front of me, and he admitted it to CPD, yet because the damage showed I was behind the vehicle ever so slightly, it was decreed that we were each responsible for our own vehicle's damage! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin Miata Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 This is definitely a tricky one. I guarantee there will be some kind of shared responsibility, but it would depend on witness statements, police report, etc. If the driver turning right can somehow prove that he was more than halfway into the lane before being hit, then he may have a good chance but that is tough to prove. My guess is also 50/50 , or each company might deem the other driver totally at fault and the two insurance companies will fight it out amongst themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattKatz Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 Legally I'm gonna say guy pulling out is at fault as the other Car Traveling on the road have the right I way regardless of Signaling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spankis Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 I thought the it was illegal to change lanes in an intersection, to prevent shit like this from happening. I've often wondered though about a similar scenario on the freeway though - I've always heard that if I hit rearend another car, I'm always going to be at fault. But, for example, if I rearend a guy who enters the moving lane from a slow/stopped lane of traffic, how do I maintain "assured clear distance" with a car that's not actually in my lane until the last second? Would that be tricky or is there a clear designation there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyin Miata Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 I thought the it was illegal to change lanes in an intersection, to prevent shit like this from happening. I've often wondered though about a similar scenario on the freeway though - I've always heard that if I hit rearend another car, I'm always going to be at fault. But, for example, if I rearend a guy who enters the moving lane from a slow/stopped lane of traffic, how do I maintain "assured clear distance" with a car that's not actually in my lane until the last second? Would that be tricky or is there a clear designation there? In my opinion, you would be able to claim that you had possession of the lane in a case like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattKatz Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 This possession of lane shit is just that..where did you guys make this up at. Show me this in the books, not by using logic(which would make Sense...but we all know that would be too easy) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwashmycar Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 On paper and being that the front of the turning car is smashed it'll be their fault.... Might as well have been trying to dart across or turn left... still pulled out into the roadway.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 On paper and being that the front of the turning car is smashed it'll be their fault.... Might as well have been trying to dart across or turn left... still pulled out into the roadway.... I suppose but don't know. Based on the language used by others above, IMO the car turning had control of that lane as it was clear, there no threats in that lane heading towards him, he was clearly 1/2 way into his turn and the other car very clearly didn't pay attention that the lane they were looking to move into was not clear and had a vehicle in the path they were looking to move into. I've seen simliar accidents where someone was turning right and a car traveling in the same direction moved right and misjudged the car turning's speed and thus crushed their ass end. How's that any different other than the rear passenger quarter panel was hit vs the front drivers quarter panel? Either way there was a vehicle in control of a lane and in the midst of a turn in the path of the one changing lanes. I've not yet gotten a call from anyone on the matter so I don't know what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 This possession of lane shit is just that..where did you guys make this up at. Show me this in the books, not by using logic(which would makeSense...but we all know that would be too easy) I don't know either, but it does make sense to me. IMO the guy changing lanes didn't have control of the right lane and didn't insure proper clearance of the other vehicle who was clear and making a legal right turn? Awaiting one of CR's LEO' to chime in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furloaf Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 If I witnessed it, I would call fault on the car changing lanes without signaling. The car turning right assured the lane was safe and didn't have indication of intent of the other car to merge into that lane. However, not witnessing it I think it would need to be called on the car turning right, as damage is to the front half of the car. Claiming the merger didn't signal is equivalent to hearsay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brrcats Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 If I witnessed it, I would call fault on the car changing lanes without signaling. The car turning right assured the lane was safe and didn't have indication of intent of the other car to merge into that lane. However, not witnessing it I think it would need to be called on the car turning right, as damage is to the front half of the car. Claiming the merger didn't signal is equivalent to hearsay. but did he asure it was safe? he apparently didnt think of the possibility of someone from the other lane changing lanes. which always could and did happen in this case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodRed Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 I would say the car turning onto the road was at fault. The vehicles on the road, have the right of way since it was not a true intersection of at least 2 public roads. The driver turning from a private property out into the road, basically did not yeild the vehicles that had the right of way. It is the responsiblity of the driver, turning out into traffic, to insure they have enough room. They must take into account possible changes traffic may make to make a safe turn onto the main road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbracing81 Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 Really is a tough call because both cars were changing directions. The one car was turning onto the roadway and the other was changing lanes on the roadway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripleskate Posted September 27, 2012 Report Share Posted September 27, 2012 As shitty as it is, my guess is 50-50 or the person turning into traffic gets screwed over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Posted September 28, 2012 Report Share Posted September 28, 2012 Plain and simple. I dont know who made this " lane possesion" rule up. The car on sawmill has right of way, because the car in front of you was exiting a "private" lot, not a public street. Had it been a public street intersection, the "most likely" scenerio would be no citation/or each cited, as both drivers would be guilty of violating a traffic code. Lane change in intersection, and failure to yield. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.