Right of way in Virginia ----- accident (move, car)

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by Timeback

so, are you saying that based on that logic, Car B had a stop sign and Car A didn't? therefore Car A has the right of way?

No. You already said there wasn't a stop sign. There is no stop sign. A white line is NOT a stop sign. Car A had a obligation (as has been explained here multiple times) to stop and yield to car B.

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by lunetunelover

No. You already said there wasn't a stop sign. There is no stop sign. A white line is NOT a stop sign. Car A had a obligation (as has been explained here multiple times) to stop and yield to car B.

Thanks.

[z28lt1]

Originally Posted by lunetunelover

No. You already said there wasn't a stop sign. There is no stop sign. A white line is NOT a stop sign. Car A had a obligation (as has been explained here multiple times) to stop and yield to car B.

One exception here would be if Car B was entering from a private road or driveway. I know the picture we have been looking at is not the real intersection, but it shows an entrance from what looks like a parking lot, in which case VA code dictates stopping and yielding right of way. The line at that point would be a marking for where to stop.

If this was the case, then both vehicles are actually required to yield. Vehicle B is subject to VA code:

"The driver of a vehicle entering a public highway or sidewalk from a private road, driveway, alley, or building shall stop immediately before entering such highway or sidewalk and yield the right-of-way to vehicles approaching on such public highway and to pedestrians or vehicles approaching on such public sidewalk."

That said, even with this consideration, due to the other circumstances, vehicle B at the time of the incident was no longer on the private road or at the stop line.

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by z28lt1

One exception here would be if Car B was entering from a private road or driveway. I know the picture we have been looking at is not the real intersection, but it shows an entrance from what looks like a parking lot, in which case VA code dictates stopping and yielding right of way. The line at that point would be a marking for where to stop.

If this was the case, then both vehicles are actually required to yield. Vehicle B is subject to VA code:

"The driver of a vehicle entering a public highway or sidewalk from a private road, driveway, alley, or building shall stop immediately before entering such highway or sidewalk and yield the right-of-way to vehicles approaching on such public highway and to pedestrians or vehicles approaching on such public sidewalk."

That said, even with this consideration, due to the other circumstances, vehicle B at the time of the incident was no longer on the private road or at the stop line.

Good point. But as you stated, Car B was on a normal side street, with a street name, street divider lines, and a stop sign.

[Timeback]

What about this thing in Virginia called "contributory Negligence" where if Car B is even 1% at fault (for leaving out of turn), Car B can not claim to be not at fault?

[spencgr]

Originally Posted by Timeback

hmmm....interesting.
i was looking at it as: since there's no 'real' stop sign for Car A, and that the white line was merely a 'suggestion of where to stop', that would indicated that only Car B had a stop sign and therefore had to even stop.
i wish there was language in the code that made this crystal clear....

I think there is....you were making a U-turn....the code states that those making U-turns must yield to oncoming traffic.

[z28lt1]

Originally Posted by Timeback

What about this thing in Virginia called "contributory Negligence" where if Car B is even 1% at fault (for leaving out of turn), Car B can not claim to be not at fault?

I know you keep wanting to find fault, but for what purposes? There is the legal code, which has a bunch of rules that are not totally complete, there is the officer's judgement, which should align with the legal code, but may not (and if it doesn't won't usually hold up in court), then there is the Judge's judgement, which would be his or her interpretation applying the facts as heard to the code, and then there is insurance, which (for the most part) doesn't depend on any of the above, and will assign full or partial blame as they see fit, separate from laws.

Virginia Code says Car A has to yield, but doesn't assign percentages of blame. The officer only ticketed one car, but again, isn't there to find portions of 'fault'. If the officer cited both drivers, that doesn't mean fault is 50/50, or if the officer cited no drivers, that doesn't mean there is full fault or partial fault.

If it's just for good internet discussion, it seems the majority here don't want to give Car B even 1% of fault, but that doesn't get you anywhere.

[Timeback]

Originally Posted by z28lt1

I know you keep wanting to find fault, but for what purposes? There is the legal code, which has a bunch of rules that are not totally complete, there is the officer's judgement, which should align with the legal code, but may not (and if it doesn't won't usually hold up in court), then there is the Judge's judgement, which would be his or her interpretation applying the facts as heard to the code, and then there is insurance, which (for the most part) doesn't depend on any of the above, and will assign full or partial blame as they see fit, separate from laws.

Virginia Code says Car A has to yield, but doesn't assign percentages of blame. The officer only ticketed one car, but again, isn't there to find portions of 'fault'. If the officer cited both drivers, that doesn't mean fault is 50/50, or if the officer cited no drivers, that doesn't mean there is full fault or partial fault.

If it's just for good internet discussion, it seems the majority here don't want to give Car B even 1% of fault, but that doesn't get you anywhere.

Thanks. One thing that puzzles me about what you said is how the insurance company find fault on its own, separate from the law....

[airjay75]

Originally Posted by Timeback

Thanks. One thing that puzzles me about what you said is how the insurance company find fault on its own, separate from the law....

Insurance companies make their own determination of fault. They use that to determine whether they're willing to pay a claim. If the insurance companies can't come to a conclusion acceptable to both companies or if one of the drivers disagrees with the determination, then they are welcome to take it to court and have a judge adjudicate the disagreement. Of course, given the relatively small amounts of damage in minor accidents, it is rarely worth the time and expense to go to court for any of the parties involved. You're more likely to see that sort of outcome when it is a significant accident involving serious bodily injury with significant medical bills and/or serious negligence on the part of one party.

[z28lt1]

Originally Posted by Timeback

Thanks. One thing that puzzles me about what you said is how the insurance company find fault on its own, separate from the law....

I don't mean to indicate that state law isn't considered when an insurance company determines fault of an accident, that will be the basis of it, but they do it independently of police and with other considerations that are usually not spelled out in the vehicle code (Virginia's vehicle code is actually pretty sparse). Insurance companies do their own investigation, and consider the police report, but don't automatically assign fault based upon that. The legal code does not provide for shared or split fault, you either violated the code or didn't and your violation may or may not have led to the fault of the accident.

I read an article a few years back with a good example -- DUI. In an accident, the police will just about always cite a driver for DUI if they fail sobriety tests and list that on reports as the primary factor to the accident. That person clearly broke the law. But many crash investigators will point out that DUI is never a cause for an accident. Speeding, unsafe lane changes, leaving the roadway (all things probably done because of the DUI) is the real cause for the accident. So, the investigators will use different aspects of the law and things outside of the actual legal code to assign full or partial responsibility.

In your case, there actually isn't much law to go on. Despite what has been posted here there law is slim. Virginia's only code around U-turns is that they aren't permitted in certain places. The Virginia driver's manual states that (for purposes of following a no left turn sign) a U-turn is considered two left turns. Yet, that doesn't seem to be in the code anywhere, and the driver's manual isn't a legal document. There seems to be no code around 'who goes first' other than if two get there at about the same time, the driver on the right has the right-of-way, which also doesn't apply in your case since you were in opposite directions. Thus, insurance is going to have to figure most of this out outside of the actual law.