Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is an intersection in SE Huntsville that has me asking a traffic question. Two drivers, one green one blue. Here is an overhead view of their paths:
Both drivers should drive defensively, but if the green driver is unaware that the blue driver is traveling at 40MPH in the turn, that advice can be hard to follow.
Who would be cited if an accident were to occur, and for what? Assume that the green driver prepares to turn into the right lane immediately following the intersection and signals appropriately. He then moves into the right lane upon exiting the overpass intersection. The blue driver has a yield sign and line on his ramp; however, his lane divided by a concrete triangle joins the existing lane out of the intersection without merging. Assume the green driver accelerates from the light at the overpass at a normal speed and is halfway in the right lane when the blue driver, who does not slow from 40 MPH at the yield sign, runs into him from behind after a failed attempt at braking. Who is at fault?
If the green driver is at fault, why is there not a solid white line preventing a lane change and, more importantly, for what purpose does the blue driver's yield sign/line exist?
The green driver has the right of way. The blue driver must yield to the green driver.
But why would the green driver change lanes and move to the right? Is that a right-turn-only lane out of sight of the photo? It not, and if both lanes simply proceed forward, I don't see what the conflict is.
When changing lanes, you are supposed to give warning by using your blinker and then changing when safe after other drivers have seen your signal. You cannot beeline to the right in a situation like that safely. Therefor green driver is at fault for improper lane change, accident resulting. A dashed line ALLOWS lane change but doesn't require an immediate sudden move to the right.
If the blue driver was above the posted speed, then that driver is also at fault. Yield does not mean stop, but it does mean to be aware of traffic and be prepared to yield to it. IIRC, according to Alabama law, if there is culpability on the part of both drivers no suit of one against the other will prevail, and only damages are required to be covered. (I agree the dashed line is inappropriate.)
If the driver with the blue line could demonstrate that he or she was at or below the speed limit and the roadway appeared to be clear, then the green driver would be 100% at fault. Dashcams cost less than $50. I never leave home without mine on. One of the CLASSIC moves of an insurance scammer is to irritate the driver in back and then use an opportunity to slam on brakes, causing the target driver to run into the rear end of the scammer. Cops generally assume the person in back to be at fault. The green line car could be attempting to pull a variation of the stunt.
I'd say it's 50/50. It would be hard to blame the accident entirely on one driver based on what was described. IMO anyway.
As for the dash cam, that's a good idea. If you look on youtube there are tons of videos (mostly Russian for some reason) where some insurance scam was prevented by the cam.
If the driver with the blue line could demonstrate that he or she was at or below the speed limit and the roadway appeared to be clear, then the green driver would be 100% at fault. Dashcams cost less than $50. I never leave home without mine on. One of the CLASSIC moves of an insurance scammer is to irritate the driver in back and then use an opportunity to slam on brakes, causing the target driver to run into the rear end of the scammer. Cops generally assume the person in back to be at fault. The green line car could be attempting to pull a variation of the stunt.
What kind of dash cam do you use? Do you leave it on the dash at all times?
When changing lanes, you are supposed to give warning by using your blinker and then changing when safe after other drivers have seen your signal. You cannot beeline to the right in a situation like that safely. Therefor green driver is at fault for improper lane change, accident resulting. A dashed line ALLOWS lane change but doesn't require an immediate sudden move to the right.
If the blue driver was above the posted speed, then that driver is also at fault. Yield does not mean stop, but it does mean to be aware of traffic and be prepared to yield to it. IIRC, according to Alabama law, if there is culpability on the part of both drivers no suit of one against the other will prevail, and only damages are required to be covered. (I agree the dashed line is inappropriate.)
If the driver with the blue line could demonstrate that he or she wasting at or below the speed limit and the roadway appeared to be clear, then the green driver would be 100% at fault. Dashcams cost less than $50. I never leave home without mine on. One of the CLASSIC moves of an insurance scammer is to irritate the driver in back and then use an opportunity to slam on brakes, causing the target driver to run into the rear end of the scammer. Cops generally assume the person in back to be at fault. The green line car could be attempting to pull a variation of the stunt.
Thank you for the response! You seem to have a strong understanding of traffic law, so I would like to dig a little deeper. If this is the case, and the turn lane and through street are basically to be treated as a separate intersection, what purpose does the yield sign serve in this particular example? Should the city be contacted about this configuration?
(Full disclosure, I was the green driver. I always yield to any traffic in the larger intersection when I am the one making the right. The blue driver was far enough behind the turn that I didn't judge him as a hazard when I looked, but was surprised to hear his tires moments later. He was moving quite fast apparently. He then followes me through a neighborhood, recklessly harassed me with his vehicle, attempted to cause an accident, and followed me all the way downtown. I was heading for the police department. He finally turned off when I turned right on Clinton from the Parkway and he realized where I was going.)
A dashcam sounds like a wise investment! How is yours for capturing license plates? What model is it?
The green driver has the right of way. The blue driver must yield to the green driver.
But why would the green driver change lanes and move to the right? Is that a right-turn-only lane out of sight of the photo? It not, and if both lanes simply proceed forward, I don't see what the conflict is.
That was my confident understanding until this afternoon. And you are exactly right, there is a right turn just past the railroad crossing which prompted the lane change (Out of view in the picture.)
I'd say it's 50/50. It would be hard to blame the accident entirely on one driver based on what was described. IMO anyway.
As for the dash cam, that's a good idea. If you look on youtube there are tons of videos (mostly Russian for some reason) where some insurance scam was prevented by the cam.
In this situation, if I am the blue driver I feel it is incumbent upon me to be completely aware of what is coming form my left and to anticipate the possibility of a driver wanting to merge to the right at some point. Based on the practice and sometimes of the laws concerning passing on the right I would NOT be attempting to outrun the driver coming from the left to move into the left lane.
If I am the green driver I would feel it incumbent upon me to be aware of a traffic lane that is merging into the roadway from the right and be weary of the fact that many people do not pay ANY attention to yield signs. (as if they are suggestions of optional courtesy. I call this practice 'entitleism' . My special 'word')
I don't know this intersection but from this vantage I feel I can safely point out that most drivers are given a false sense of proceed because that lane with the YIELD SIGN is not literally merging into someone else's lane. A prudent driver would still yield right of way because when did we come to the conclusion that we could know what others are going to do.
In this same vein I would suggest that it is not prudent to make a lane change at the first break in the lines in the road especially when that break is at the point of a traffic island separating two lanes merging together. Again how do we know what the car to the right might or might not do.
I think this situation could be improved upon greatly by extending the thick painted line that is suppose to SUGGEST to drivers not to change lanes at that point from either lane. Then the yield lane should have a yield sign on both sides of the yield lane because most drivers are going to be looking to the left rather than to the right where the yield sign would usually be placed. Also, at a confluence such as this your scenario proves how easily many drivers would have a sense of proceeding.
It appears to me that, from what you say, the yielding driver was highly 'entitled' to do as he pleased and unfortunately, you felt somehow compelled to make your maneuvers without the correct amount of caution and over confidence in your fellow driver.
Also, it sounds as if the other driver , from what you say, did not learn anything at all from the experience and you most definitely not only did but have posted here to learn more.
Too much of what we do as drivers seems OBJECTIVE, and it would serve us all better if we were more SUBJECTIVE when we drive.
Now I will tell you that I totaled a brand new car in a much smaller intersection that had one thing in common with this. The yield lane was treated almost like a continuous right turn lane in spite of the fact that there was a left arrow that the people in the yield lane could never know was on or not. I learned a lot from that accident. Most of all that people do not respect what yield really means .
In your case , if the blue driver's yield lane was merging into one lane, he would most definitely be at fault. But since there are two separated lanes, your premature lane change right at the end of the traffic island was casually reckless. Or not prudent.
Certainly you both could be better DEFENSIVE DRIVERS. I think he was wrong but I don't know for sure how really carefully you were trying to move over. He could have felt you were trying to edge him out because you both clearly had lanes of your own and it was not his responsibility to facilitate your coming right turn as he most likely could not see your turn signal from the side of your car. You could have just as easily paced yourself to let him go by if he was going as fast as you say.
One troubling thing you said. You suddenly heard his squealing brakes and/or tires. I do think by that statement that you were making a panic lane change to not miss your turn and you pulled in front of him out of the blue and he did not expect it. I would have been angry at you for doing that to me too. But I would not have followed you and escalated.
Perhaps he's a jerk and you are an inconsiderate person who feels entitled to always do as you please. I can't know. And you may both be great folks who should learn to share the road.
My whole LONG TAKE on the deal. I hope all goes well for you and be careful.
Raj
PS Transpose the pronouns where necessary.
PPS I would have cited you both for the above reasons. Reasonable caution is always expected by law; but I suspect you were most at fault or you would not have heard his squealing tires BEHIND you. His speed could not be known, but if someone suddenly pulls INTO YOUR LANE, speed is relative.
Last edited by raj kapoor; 05-03-2014 at 11:24 PM..
Thanks, Raj. It is always hard to know what is in another person's mind.
FYI, I did look into the legal weight of a yield sign in Alabama. It does grant preferential right of way to oncoming traffic. It also states that "the driver shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another roadway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time such driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of roadways. Provided, however, that if such a driver is involved in a collision with a vehicle in the intersection or junction of roadways after driving past a yield sign without stopping, such collision shall be deemed prima facie evidence of his failure to yield." I will continue to stop at a yield sign when I am the blue driver, and I sincerely hope that others will do the same. In any case, I have learned a lot today, and I will make some noise to the city for a solid white line between those lanes. Thanks again!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
