Roundabout crash..

[Mobb]

So at around 10AM this morning I was on my way back from dropping a friend off.. I approach the roundabout shown below at around 5-10MPH (The red ring represents my car)

As I approach the roundabout I look right and then left and then right and then left again.. I dont see any cars at the first exit (to my left) and there is a car approaching on the right (representing the blue circled area).. At around the same speed.

So I pull out as the car approaching the right hand exit (circled in blue) is not indicating at all, thus leading me to believe that he/she was continuing their path "straight on" (Left.. So this car would be going where the yellow circle is shown)

The car then also pulls out but does not go where first assumed (remember this car did not indicate).... The car then proceeds to take me out and cave the side of my car in first hitting the very edge of the front wing, drivers door and continuing on to the rear wing and rear drivers side wheel..

The door is badly damaged, as is the side skirt and sill. The front wing and rear wing are repairable.
The car I was driving came off worst, suffering the above damage. The other drivers car sustained minor damage - A small crack to the front bumper and some scrapes.
The other driver is claiming they were indicating and therefore are not to blame.. Apparently I pulled out on them..
Thats wrong, the other driver was not indicating and therefore ran into me. The other driver actually pulled out on me.

The red square shows where my car was at the point of impact and the blue square shows where the other driver was at the point of impact.

My question and reason for posting this thread is to find out who in the insurers eyes is to blame..


Comments, opinions and advise are appreciated.

 

[developer]

I'm afraid that "give way to the right" may be your undoing, whether he/she was indicating or not. He was on the roundabout, confirmed by your damage being side on.

I should add that straight on to me looks like where the Fiesta is coming from - the yellow is clearly a left turn.

Sorry to hear about the car - I'd be mortified .

 

[markjay]

Most crashes are the fault of both drivers, to varying degrees, but in practical terms the driver whose fault is 'greater' is the one considered to be at fault.

In this case I would say the only question is who had the right of way - indicating (to the extent it can be proven anyway) is secondary.

Also, when I learnt how to drive, my driving instructor always told me it was my responsibility to confirm that the other driver is actually going where he/she are indicating before proceeding into a junction.

Sorry about the damage to your car, glad no one was hurt.

 

[The Polisher]

Afraid so. Irrelevant of indicators, they had priority in "give way to the right". So, you are at fault I'm afraid.

Actually, not indicating would be correct. They are actually going "straight on" from their perspective. A right hand indicate would presume the exit after the one they went for.

 

[Apial]

if you were already on the roundabout before the other car entered then you would have right of way. You can't just drive too fast onto a roudabout and ram someone who is already there. However you said that they were equidistant and travelling at an equal speed to yourself as you both approached. You might want to wonder how they managed to hit you if that were actually true? The other car somehow made ground on you. How?

 

[grober]

I think as above technically you are in the wrong. No indication would mean going straight on whereas I would expect someone turning left to be indicating with their left blinker going. It would not be necessary for someone going straight on to be indicating at all although they maintained they were. At the end of the day the "on a roundabout give way to traffic from your right " would take precedence I believe.. Think you are on a loser with this one unless the other driver approached the roundabout at excessive speed [ breaking the speed limit] which would mean you could not have reasonably seen them in time.

 

[Mobb]

Afraid so. Irrelevant of indicators, they had priority in "give way to the right". So, you are at fault I'm afraid.

Actually, not indicating would be correct. They are actually going "straight on" from their perspective. A right hand indicate would presume the exit after the one they went for.

Thank you for all the replies so far..

In reference to your comment, The Polisher - the angle from your position being the car that hit me would show that the right hand exit they ended up going for was actually a right hand exit that everyone indicates for and the left hand exit is infact "straight on".

 

[renault12ts]

Your fault.

The lack of indicator would say to me they were not turning to their left...but going past you. This is one of those roundabouts where care is needed because there is no obvious straight ahead. But in this case, because the other car was not going to their immediate left, then no indicator was necessary until after they'd passed the first exit.

 

[MicB]

Sadly you will, quite rightly, be held to blame.

However I believe that on a r'bout all vehicles should be indicating right until immediately after they have passed the last exit not to be taken.....then immediately indicating left.

Had the other car been doing this you would not have pulled out in front of them......there is no such thing as straight on on a r'bout.

You will still be held to blame.

Mic

 

[DITTRICH]

The point of impact appears closer to your starting point than the other driver's starting point.
The impact was to your driver side and his front.
The other driver was probably on the roundabout before you were, giving them priority over you.
It may well be that the other driver was travelling faster and just entered the roundabout without stopping but people normally look where their car is going to turn first and foremost. Anyway they will claim they were going slowly, were indicating, and were on the roundabout before you giving them priority. Their "explanation" fits the information given in a way which yours doesn't. You say you assumed he was going straight on. The word "assumed" is a bit of a killer word here. When you are at the entrance of a roundabout working out whether or not a car will do something, you shouldn't be assuming anything. Sorry but I think it will go against you.

 

[rascalmaster]

...even though he should have indicated if he was taking the last exit or going back the way he came... (he might even be cheeky and say he was indicating...and or that he didn't know his indicator wasn't seen by you... or that he didnt know the bulb had gone... etc etc)...
They'll consider it your fault mate :-(
A bit like rear ending someone is always one's own fault even if the other car jammed their brakes...
O well chin up and hopefully car's sorted and no one was hurt.

 

[Carrsey]

Sadly you will, quite rightly, be held to blame.

However I believe that on a r'bout all vehicles should be indicating right until immediately after they have passed the last exit not to be taken.....then immediately indicating left.

Mic

Correct, always indicate if it will benefit another road user.

If they did or did not though will never be proved unless there is a number of independant witnesses. That said it is irrelevant, as others have said he has right of way as he is already on the roundabout.. I would assume at the entrance for the rounabout there is a GIVEWAY line..

 

[renault12ts]

Sadly you will, quite rightly, be held to blame.

However I believe that on a r'bout all vehicles should be indicating right until immediately after they have passed the last exit not to be taken.....then immediately indicating left.

Had the other car been doing this you would not have pulled out in front of them......there is no such thing as straight on on a r'bout.

You will still be held to blame.

Mic

On approach to a roundabout you should be indicating left if taking the first exit. You should not be using an indicator if going straight ahead, until after the exit before the one you wish to take, then indicate left. If taking the right exit, on approach indicate right, until just past the previous exit, then indicate left.

It's very plainly and clearly stipulated in the highway code.

In the OP's case the car would have been indicating left if he intended taking the first exit. Since he wasn't going left, he was quite correct not to indicate on approach, and would only have indicated left at about the point he hit the OP's car.

 

[ShinyF1]

Problem here is a three limb junction - which combination is 'straight on'? Mini roundabouts are a real pain. You have to assume anyone to your right not yet on the roundabout will join it, because if it is clear to their right they will drive straight on.

I have had too many close shaves joining one particular mini roundabout when indicating right and coming across someone else joining from the next 'limb' - on the odd occasions when both cars stop, the reason given by the other driver [in the OP's position] was that they joined the roundabout before I did so they had right of way.

In the attached picture, it shows my normal approach, where I indicate right. Oncoming cars approach at speed and ignore the roundabout, driving straight across in front of me. I take care every time now, but in the event of a crash the same question as the OP's arises in reverse - would it be me or the oncoming vehicle at fault? Remember I am looking for traffic approaching from the right before I join. I have to agree with MIC that the OP is at fault, as I think an oncoming car would be at my local 'mini'.

 

[Dieselman]

If taking the right exit, on approach indicate right, until just past the previous exit, then indicate left.

It's very plainly and clearly stipulated in the highway code.

I don't think you have to indicate at all until approaching the junction you want to leave at, in fact by law, you don't have to indicate at all...it's only an indication, not a statement of fact.

To the O/p.
If you entered the roundabout after the other car, it's your fault irrespective of any indication given or not.

 

[Dieselman]

The car then proceeds to take me out and cave the side of my car in first hitting the very edge of the front wing, drivers door and continuing on to the rear wing and rear drivers side wheel..

That sounds like the other car stopped on impact and you continued forwards before being able to draw to a stop.

 

[DITTRICH]

If you entered the roundabout after the other car, it's your fault irrespective of any indication given or not.

This is absolutely the critical thing. Who got there first?

Based on the indicated location of the accident in the photograph, it would appear that, both vehicles travelling at roughly the same speed, that the other vehicle got onto the roundabout first. The mobile photographs taken at the scene (I assume that was done) would clearly allow a view to be reached. And in conjunction with the side impact on the OP's vehicle, are pretty conclusive (sadly).

Hopefully the OP won't take all the "criticisms" to heart. I bet everyone has had incidents or narrowly avoided them in the past.

 

[renault12ts]

I don't think you have to indicate at all until approaching the junction you want to leave at, in fact by law, you don't have to indicate at all...it's only an indication, not a statement of fact.

To the O/p.
If you entered the roundabout after the other car, it's your fault irrespective of any indication given or not.

Is that your opinion Will, or what you think the HC says, or something else? The HC is very clear...try arguing that one with the insurers. Sinced the other car was not turning left, nor right, no signal was required on approach. But if it had being going left or right the appropriate signal on approach would have been expected.

I agree though, OP is in the wrong.

 

[artyman]

I wouldn't have expected the other car to be indicating unless it was turning left, where you showed yellow, hence it was going past your position, so you should have given way I'm afraid.

 

[Dieselman]

Is that your opinion Will, or what you think the HC says, or something else? The HC is very clear...try arguing that one with the insurers. Sinced the other car was not turning left, nor right, no signal was required on approach. But if it had being going left or right the appropriate signal on approach would have been expected.

The highway code isn't Law.