Please imagine the following scene. The M602, travelling away from Manchester City Centre. Evening rush hour, you have easily a mile-long queue to leave the motorway to get onto the M60. Anyone who has to endure this will tell you that it is a really horrible bit of road.
ANYWAY - you have this mega-queue and two clear lanes of traffic. BUT - too many people realise that they have either missed a place at the back of the queue, or know how long it is and don't fancy waiting in turn. Either way, they cruise down the middle lane looking for a gap or just heading for the front to barge in.
These are the most annoying people on the planet because rather than use the next exit, they STOP in the middle lane, indicating left. This can happen anywhere along the queue, not just at the junction. It is truly horrible to see articulated lorries panic-swerving out into the third lane with no warning, or to see a bottleneck suddenly form with all horns blaring.
I must confess I regularly turn the air blue when I pass these selfish fools, who never look in any way apologetic. Needless to say one never sees plod around at this time.
OK folks here's the question. If I strike one of these cars in the middle lane from behind, whose fault is it? I know normally it would be mine, the blame lies with the guy who doesn't stop in time. BUT what about a car that stops in the middle lane of a motorway for no reason? Sometimes you just don't see them in time because someone swerves at the last second, and you certainly don't expect to see a stopped car when the lane in front is clear. Surely some fault lies with that driver?
Gentlemen, I know there are some fine legal brains amongst you.
GRATITUDE.
{ Subject header changed to reflect question posed - PU }
|
someone stopping in a middle lane to try to filter left into a blocked lane would be 'Driving Without Due Care'......they should carry on until there's a gap or go to another junction
if you hit someone up the rear, you can often be committing WDC*.....but in the circs listed i'd say you'd be hard done by, because you shouldn't be expecting a stationary vehicle there really.. albeit you've stated you ARE aware of the problem and are half expecting it!
*{Without Due Care S3 RTA Offence - PU}
|
but in the circs listed i'd say you'd be hard done by
Indeed Westpig. I have at least twice over the years run into other cars that have stopped suddenly in bizarre places for no good reason. 'I thought I saw someone about to cross the road,' one of these wallies said. Nevertheless as the runner-into rather than the runnee, I have had to take the blame.
|
|
|
|
If I strike one of these cars in the middle lane from behind whose fault is it? I know normally it would be mine the blame lies with the guy who doesn't stop in time. BUT what about a car that stops in the middle lane of a motorway for no reason?
It still is your fault.
|
|
|
Sometimes you just don't see them in time......
Possibly because you're not paying enough attention? If this happens frequently, you ought to be anticipating it.
You must always drive such that you can stop comfortably within the distance you can see to be clear. Not that hard, honestly.
|
devil's advocate hat on
those drivers who can't get onto the exit slip shouldn't they continue on to the next clear junction? Surely they are blocking the motorway with THEIR selfish desire to use that exit.
devil's advocate hat off
|
|
|
|
Gentlemen, to the ones who said it would be my fault - yes I think you're right. I was HOPING you wouldn't be.
To be honest they make me so angry I get the urge to ram them up the backside on purpose. That'll learn 'em!!!
|
|
That's what bull bars are for spencer. Get some fitted.
|
|
The person hitting the stationary object is at fault.
|
The person hitting the stationary object is at fault.
True, but there are two offences being commited here, the guy that hits the stationary car, and the stationary car which has stopped on the motorway for no good reason causing a hazard. If it just isnt possible to get off the motorway, but the road ahead is clear, I think the highway code would stipulate that you shouldn't have stopped.
|
|
|
|
Needless to say one never sees plod around at this time.
Similar thing happens on the M3/M27 junction on a Friday afternoon as everyone tries to get towards Bournemouth, relatively few people seem to want to go to Portsmouth... :)
I've seen one of these people sitting in lane 2 trying to get into the queue with Hampshire Constabulary's finest behind doing his best impression of a man trying to get someone's attention. Eventually the 'offending' driver moved on with the law behind, I don't know if he was promptly pulled over or not.
L
|
Doesn't anyone remember the episode of Traffic Cops (or whatever it was called) where 2 women stopped in Lane 1 of the M62 next to a Police Range Rover to ask directions?
Turned out the driver was drunk (this was in the middle of the morning!) but the first thing the Bobby said to her was that it was an offence to stop in a moving lane of a motorway.
Of course, in the circumstances the OP mentions, there's really no excuse for hitting someone if you know there's likely to be traffic in the way, and anywhere I come across queuing traffic in lane 1 then I always drive in lane 3 in such circumstances, and even then I'm aware someone might swerve from 2 to 3.
It easy if you're driving about all over the country though (as I do) to get caught out by such queues in unfamiliar places - you can have gone past the back of it before you realise.
|
...the first thing the Bobby said to her was that it was an offence to stop in a moving lane of a motorway.
But whether they are allowed to stop or not doesn't have any bearing on whether you can run into the back them blamlessly or not.
----------------------------------------------
Aim low, expect nothing & dont be disappointed
|
But whether they are allowed to stop or not doesn't have any bearing on whether you can run into the back them blamlessly or not.
I would say it has a lot of bearing - if their action in stopping is illegal then they have to bear the consequences of any resulting accident.
It has been held that if someone stops in front of you un-necessarily and you run into the back of them, then it's their fault. Proving it is difficult though, but that wouldn't be a problem with someone who was clearly trying to cut in on a motorway.
|
|
There's a stated case on it somewhere. I'll look later.
|
|
|
I would say it has a lot of bearing - if their action in stopping is illegal then they have to bear the consequences of any resulting accident. It has been held that if someone stops in front of you un-necessarily and you run into the back of them then it's their fault. Proving it is difficult though but that wouldn't be a problem with someone who was clearly trying to cut in on a motorway.
If you run into the back of someone, whether slamming their brakes on or already stationary, either you've been following too close or you've not been paying attention.
It is different if someone suddenly changes lanes, and I'm not even close to being the law, but if you hit something that is in front of you, you're doing something wrong.
----------------------------------------------
Aim low, expect nothing & dont be disappointed
|
I'm not even close to being the law but if you hit something that is in front of you you're doing something wrong.
meant to say - I'm not even close to being the law, so legally things might be different, but that's my opinion.
----------------------------------------------
Aim low, expect nothing & dont be disappointed
|
meant to say - I'm not even close to being the law so legally things might be different but that's my opinion.
...and everyone is entitled to an opinion. However *nothing* in law is black and white - that's why there are so many lawyers and most of 'em get very rich.
|
...*nothing* in law is black and white - that's why there are so many lawyers and most of 'em get very rich.
That, Mr Payer, is a very good point, at which I will shut up.
----------------------------------------------
Aim low, expect nothing & dont be disappointed
|
|
|
|
|
|
As has been said, if any one hits a stationary vehicle, under almost any circumstances, they are automatically at fault and to blame.
The guys who has stopped on a motrway to barge in is also comitting an offence.
Its a real case of two wrongs not making a right.
Now what you do, when queing, is leave a small tempting gap for someone to barge into, then accelerate and spear them in the door, and wipe them over the car in front. That way you have three low speed but expensive damages, all can be blamed on the guy who barged in.
Tempting huh?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
anyone know where I can get a bull bar for a Previa? :)
|
|
I think the stretch of road the OP is talking about is a double s bend that rises at the beginning of the s and falls away towards the second, there's very little vision when approaching in the centre lane uphill and then turning to the left. Occasionally you'll see a Police Range Rover sat on the hard shoulder trying to shame people into driving properly.
|
I'm not a lawyer, but you might quote this in your putative defence, since it doesn't specifically mention parked or unattended cars:
".. it is an offence under section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 consisting in the causing of an unnecessary obstruction of a road in breach of regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.."
..and it apparently wouldn't be a necessary obstruction, as the 'obstructer' had the alternative of using the next exit & it would definitely be obstructing the non-exiting traffic on the outer lane(s) - if that's not the case, one would have to deduce that stopping anywhere it was convenient for oneself to execute a manoeuvre was lawful - which does seem rather unintended & faintly ridiculous (not to say dangerous!)
|
".. it is an offence under section 42 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 consisting in the causing of an unnecessary obstruction of a road in breach of regulation 103 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986.."
There is a specific offence that makes it illegal to stop on a motorway.
It's a bit of a grey area about traffic even queuing on a motorway to use an exit, where there isn't a separate lane - the Police will sometimes move people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
two wrongs don't make a right! motorways are actually very dangerous & people don't realise how quickly something can go wrong!. motorways are not a playground they are dangerous and should be treated with respect. Keep calm is the best answer,& I have spent 7 years commuting 250 miles each day on the m23-m25-m3 & m4 so have spent a little time on motorways.
I would like to see a yeelow box juction of some type near all exits wich would prevent lane changing or queing within a specified area with a camera mounted above for those that blatently flout the law at everyone else's peril.
I sit back & listen to classic FM & relax
|
IIRC the French or the Spanish sometimes put non-crossable lines at such junctions to prevent this sort of behaviour.
Box? Camera? They'd never do it: it wouldn't raise enough money!
--
Stevie
Lakland 44-02 Sunburst
Yamaha YTS-23
Mexican Telecaster
Alesis Micron
|
>>IIRC the French or the Spanish sometimes put non-crossable lines at such junctionsto prevent this sort of behaviour
>>
IIRC they have this in South Africa too.
|
|
|
|
Most accidents are a case of six of one and half a dozen of the other.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
Ya wrong! L'escargot there caused by the nut behind the steering wheel ! I have been in a massive head on ! where the driver went to sleep!, I have been rear-ended due to the other drivers lack of attention & I had no where to go & I have been T boned by an ederly person comming out of a driveway with a high powered automatic! thats my three in thirty + years & want no more
|
I have exactly the same situation as the OP. on the M6 at Junction 2 eastbound. I tend to stay in lane three because a., someone might suddenly stop to exit or b., someone wants to queue-jump by lurching from lane 1 into lane 2 for 50 yards.
Coning sections of the motorway off to try and prevent this will simply move the entire situation further back. These shenanigans will always happen. You have to guard against it by minimizing the risk to yourself.
|
I used to work in Salford so travelled down the M602 every night to take my route on to the M62 then M6 then M58......
This bit of road is truely, truely horrible. The amount of idiots that do exactly what the OP describes is beyond comprehension.
DB
|
|
|
|
I have been T boned by an ederly person comming out of a driveway
Perhaps if you'd been watching for cars coming out of drives this one might have been avoided. Six of one etc.
--
L\'escargot.
|
Perhaps if you'd been watching for cars coming out of drives this one might have been avoided. Six of one etc.
He said he was T boned by a "high powered" automatic. The fact he mentions high powered to me suggests that the car shot forward from stationary very quickly - otherwise, why mention it was high powered? It could have only taken a second for the car to go from stationary to hitting him in the side leaving him insufficient time to react. I think that is what he was implying.
I think your replies are very patronising sometimes. You don't know that he wasn't looking for cars coming out of driveways. Not all cars shooting forward unexpectedly out of driveways in a high powered car accelerating flat-out are going to be avoidable.
|
|
thank you pendulum, you are correct in every way, the speed the merc came out the driveway took me across a main road ( bearing in mind I was travalling forward at 40mph at the time ) through a garden wall!,across a garden & demolished the front of a house & the Merc's rear tyres where still smoking but sinking in the garden as the Guy had frozen with fright!, caused by him having both feet on both pedals with the throttle having more effect than the brakes!.
|
|
|
|
|
|
