Had a RTA in my truck today...whos at fault

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
So why put a line down the middle then :dk: Its not there for fun is it :wallbash:

It's there as a guide.

Unless it is a solid single or double, you can cross it should you need to so that if say a removal lorry is parked there blocking the carriageway you are on for 4 hours, you can cross the white line to pass it rather than wait 4 hours and 30 seconds before you can be on your way again.
 
It's there as a guide.

Unless it is a solid single or double, you can cross it should you need to so that if say a removal lorry is parked there blocking the carriageway you are on for 4 hours, you can cross the white line to pass it rather than wait 4 hours and 30 seconds before you can be on your way again.

Totally agree it's a guide, cross that guide line and you increase your liability (ask any accident investigator). Broken white lines of any type can be crossed but you must do so with due care and consideration, thats all I am saying. If something hits you the wrong side of that line IMHO you did not give it full care and consideration and did not anticipate an emerging or probable hazard.
 
You can pass a stationery vehicle on a solid white line.

A vehicle pulling out of a side turning onto a more major road is always deemed at fault due to crossing the Give Way line. They didn't give way.
 
Totally agree it's a guide, cross that guide line and you increase your liability (ask any accident investigator). Broken white lines of any type can be crossed but you must do so with due care and consideration, thats all I am saying. If something hits you the wrong side of that line IMHO you did not give it full care and consideration and did not anticipate an emerging or probable hazard.

Would you consider passing a stopped vehicle over the white line at 18mph not paying due care and attention?
 
Would you consider passing a stopped vehicle over the white line at 18mph not paying due care and attention?

You're right. Crossing a white line to overtake a stationary, or slowly moving vehicle, does not in itself amount to lack of due care and attention, nor increase the degree of liability, whether the line is broken or continuous.

Rules 127 - 129 of the Highway Code apply.

Some people sometimes seem to forget the existence of the Highway Code when discussing these issues, so evidently it is not a factor which influences their driving.
 
flango said:
Totally agree it's a guide, cross that guide line and you increase your liability (ask any accident investigator). Broken white lines of any type can be crossed but you must do so with due care and consideration, thats all I am saying. If something hits you the wrong side of that line IMHO you did not give it full care and consideration and did not anticipate an emerging or probable hazard.

You can consider traffic approaching the junction, but unless it's actually visible you can't do a lot more. Traffic jointing a roadway look both ways. Granny crossing a good example of why.
 
Would you consider passing a stopped vehicle over the white line at 18mph not paying due care and attention?

You can consider traffic approaching the junction, but unless it's actually visible you can't do a lot more. Traffic jointing a roadway look both ways. Granny crossing a good example of why.

I said due care and consideration not attention. I would consider passing a stationary bus in an HGV a high risk activity even at 18 mph and one which carries a higher risk of incident. I don't know the OP vehicle in question but if it was a low loader type its even more risky.

I agree you can't deal with a hazard you can't see but that then takes you into the what if scenario, what if a car comes up that road, what if it fails to stop at the give way, what if it turns into my path?

I'm not questioning the OP actions as I would have done the same, my comments are directed to liability and as I keep saying once you cross that line you have to accept some of the liability you can't be blame free.

I also hold an HGV license and have driven race transporters all over Europe so am well aware of the problems faced by the OP.
 
Some people sometimes seem to forget the existence of the Highway Code when discussing these issues, so evidently it is not a factor which influences their driving.

The Highway code is exactly that a code, you cannot be prosecuted for not abiding by the highway code. The Road Traffic Act 1988 is the document you have to abide by. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/contents
 
You're right. Crossing a white line to overtake a stationary, or slowly moving vehicle, does not in itself amount to lack of due care and attention, nor increase the degree of liability, whether the line is broken or continuous.

Rules 127 - 129 of the Highway Code apply.

Some people sometimes seem to forget the existence of the Highway Code when discussing these issues, so evidently it is not a factor which influences their driving.

What is a 'stationary vehicle'?

I think we agree that a parked vehicle is stationary.

And I think we agree that a vehicle that momentarily stopped due to heavy traffic is not.

How about someone stopping to drop off a passenger ? A Taxi? Or a bus at a bus stop?

Are these 'stationery', or momentarily stopped?

I think it not a simple question of whether the other vehicle's wheels were rolling or not, but instead that the duration of and the reason for stopping are relevant.
 
What is a 'stationary vehicle'?

I think we agree that a parked vehicle is stationary.

And I think we agree that a vehicle that momentarily stopped due to heavy traffic is not. Do not agree

How about someone stopping to drop off a passenger ? A Taxi? Or a bus at a bus stop?

Are these 'stationery', or momentarily stopped?

I think it not a simple question of whether the other vehicle's wheels were rolling or not, but instead that the duration of and the reason for stopping are relevant.

No, cannot agree, Mark. 'Stationary' is 'stopped', wheels not turning, vehicle not moving. What you are describing is the difference between 'stationary' and 'parked'.

For example:-

The Driver and the Environment


123

You MUST NOT leave a parked vehicle unattended with the engine running or leave a vehicle engine running unnecessarily while that vehicle is stationary on a public road. Generally, if the vehicle is stationary and is likely to remain so for more than a couple of minutes, you should apply the parking brake and switch off the engine to reduce emissions and noise pollution. However it is permissible to leave the engine running if the vehicle is stationary in traffic or for diagnosing faults.
Law CUR regs 98 & 107
 
No, cannot agree, Mark. 'Stationary' is 'stopped', wheels not turning, vehicle not moving. What you are describing is the difference between 'stationary' and 'parked'....


So are you suggesting that it is permissible to overtake vehicles queueing in traffic over a solid white line because the cars in front of you are all 'stationary'...?

Or, for example, if the car in front of you at a traffic light did not start moving fast enough when the light turns green thus leaving a gap between itself and the vehicle in front of it - you can overtake it breaking a solid white line because it is not moving hence 'stationary'?

I don't think you can say that it is permissible to overtake a stationary vehicles while breaking a white line, and then insist that a stationary vehicle is any car whose wheels are not rolling - or our streets would pale in comparison to GTA V....
 
So are you suggesting that it is permissible to overtake vehicles queueing in traffic over a solid white line because the cars in front of you are all 'stationary'...?

Or, for example, if the car in front of you at a traffic light did not start moving fast enough when the light turns green thus leaving a gap between itself and the vehicle in front of it - you can overtake it breaking a solid white line because it is not moving hence 'stationary'?

I don't think you can say that it is permissible to overtake a stationary vehicles while breaking a white line, and then insist that a stationary vehicle is any car whose wheels are not rolling - or our streets would pale in comparison to GTA V....

Sorry Mark your hypothesizing is in danger of straying into the realms of fantasy, but your query is answered in Rule 129 of the Highway Code. Apply it with common sense.
 
What is a 'stationary vehicle'?

I think we agree that a parked vehicle is stationary.

And I think we agree that a vehicle that momentarily stopped due to heavy traffic is not.

How about someone stopping to drop off a passenger ? A Taxi? Or a bus at a bus stop?

Are these 'stationery', or momentarily stopped?

I think it not a simple question of whether the other vehicle's wheels were rolling or not, but instead that the duration of and the reason for stopping are relevant.

No, cannot agree, Mark. 'Stationary' is 'stopped', wheels not turning, vehicle not moving. What you are describing is the difference between 'stationary' and 'parked'.

For example:-

The Driver and the Environment
I don't understand why "we" have to psychoanalyse every post on here, now??

What could stationery mean, other than stopped?
 
I would consider passing a stationary bus in an HGV a high risk activity even at 18 mph and one which carries a higher risk of incident.

I'm inclined to disagree.

High risk compared with what in this situation? Somebody in a car not paying attention pulling out past a bus in a car at speed at 30mph or possibly a bit higher? Somebody in a fast car accelerating hard round the bus? I think that's higher.
 
I don't understand why "we" have to psychoanalyse every post on here, now??

What could stationery mean, other than stopped?

Well you can be at traffic lights and stationary. Does that mean a vehicle behind can overtake in spite of a solid line?

What does parked mean?

In fact what exactly is an overtake or undertake?

Trying to define this sort of stuff rigoroously and pragmatically isn't easy.
 
Sorry Mark your hypothesizing is in danger of straying into the realms of fantasy, but your query is answered in Rule 129 of the Highway Code. Apply it with common sense.

My common sense says that a car stopped at a traffic light or in a traffic queue is not 'stationary' in the sense that I can overtake it on a solid white line. Instead I should wait patiently behind it until it is ready to start moving again.

However, similarly my common sense also tells me that a bus stopped at a bus stop is not 'stationary' in the sense that I can overtake it on a solid white line. Instead I should wait patiently behind it until it is ready to start moving again.


So my common sense tells me that the OP should not have overtaken.

Said that... even if it is established that one party to an RTA committed a traffic offence, this does not automatically imply that it is at fault. The other party has likely committed an offence as well by not checking that the road in front of him was clear before joining the main road.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom