Right of way in Virginia ----- accident (insurance, law)

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by HokieFan

I believe car A is at fault.

Car B was in motion and had nearly cleared the intersection. Car A should have yielded to Car B at that point.

Yes, you're right. A is making a U turn. i thought that was the same as turning a left.

[HokieFan]

Originally Posted by Timeback

Yes, you're right. A is making a U turn. i thought that was the same as turning a left.

When you said "waiting to turn left", I just assumed you were turning down a side street.

It likely doesn't make a difference in regards to this accident. However, a left turn and U-turn are two different maneuvers.

Out of curiosity, did you have your turn signal on?

And where on car B did you collide - the front? side? back?

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by HokieFan

I believe car A is at fault.

Car B was in motion and had nearly cleared the intersection. Car A should have yielded to Car B at that point.

Exactly!

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by HokieFan

Out of curiosity, did you have your turn signal on?
And where on car B did you collide - the front? side? back?

Car A had signals on.
Car B was hit on the Rear driver side.

Originally Posted by lunetunelover

Exactly!

But what about the fact that B is also at fault (slightly?) because it should have yielded to car A since it had gotten there first...

[ICS67]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but it is my understanding that a car making a left-hand turn (or a U-turn) at an intersection always has to yield to oncoming traffic -- unless, of course, there is a green left-turn arrow -- and has to wait until it is safe to make and complete the turn. I think the only time it matters "who got to the intersection first" is at an intersection with a four-way stop sign.

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by ICS67

I think the only time it matters "who got to the intersection first" is at an intersection with a four-way stop sign.

I agree with this.


In the situation posted (at least as I see it) there is enough room in the median for both cars to occupy and to maneuver. Car A did not yield to car B as it was making it's approach/turn. Car A had enough time (presumably) to see Car B and allow them to finish their movement before proceeding. I think it would be tough to get someone to agree that Car B had any fault.

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by lunetunelover

I agree with this.


In the situation posted (at least as I see it) there is enough room in the median for both cars to occupy and to maneuver. Car A did not yield to car B as it was making it's approach/turn. Car A had enough time (presumably) to see Car B and allow them to finish their movement before proceeding. I think it would be tough to get someone to agree that Car B had any fault.

I mean, the only case to made about Car B being at fault is that they didn't wait their turn to move.
Yes, they were going straight. Yes, they had already 'almost' made it to the median. Yes, Car A should have yielded once car B was already at its final destination, but Car B shouldn't have moved first in the first place.

Is that not fair to assume?

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by Timeback

I mean, the only case to made about Car B being at fault is that they didn't wait their turn to move.
Yes, they were going straight. Yes, they had already 'almost' made it to the median. Yes, Car A should have yielded once car B was already at its final destination, but Car B shouldn't have moved first in the first place.

Is that not fair to assume?

No...I don't think you can assign "fairness" to it.


The median is open enough to allow more than one vehicle in it. Car B doesn't have to yield to Car A because "it was there first". They were able to safely maneuver into the median until Car A decided to go and hit them.


I'm assuming, OP, that you were driving Car A and feel as though you shouldn't have to bear the brunt of the liability. I'm sorry, hopefully no one was injured and you can just chalk this up to a life lesson. It sucks, but I think it's unrealistic to think "fairness" plays into this.

[VAviaCA]

I see your point, but it really doesn't matter. Just because someone has the right of way, doesn't mean said person can just proceed forward, hit someone and then place blame on the other because "I was there first".

Car A didn't look to the left before they turned, plain and simple. Had Car A looked to the left, they would have seen Car B approaching. The fact that the damage to Car B was the rear driver's side implies that Car B was nearly all the way into the median and should have been clearly visible to the driver of Car A had they been looking to the left when making the turn. Car A shouldn't assume that they are clear to turn without looking. No matter if you think you have the right of way or not.

[car54]

Originally Posted by Timeback

ok, the red is where the accident occurred. A started moving after B had almost reached the accident site.

Your accident occurred in La Plata, Maryland. Crain Highway is Maryland Route 3 (or 301).

Virginia traffic laws do not apply in Maryland. I'd see what the folks in the MD forum think...