This didn't happen to me. I only came across it in another forum and wanted to see what do you guys think. Who's at fault in this collision?
http://files.ozbargain.com.au/upload/12716/34349/20151017_74…
My first instinct told me that Car B was wrong, as we always need to giveway to cars from the right. However, people did argue that he didn't make any mistake for staying in the left lane before and after the turn.
What're your thoughts, OzBargainers?
"Car approaching roundabout must give way"
Car B was not approaching, but was already inside the roundabout for that collision to occur.
Thus CarA failed to give way to Bs' lane on the round-about.
How can you be so sure from a static picture? We are all speculating. For example. A may have been driving at 60km/hour and was already near the exit, just as B enters in at 20km/hour.
In any case, if A was oncoming already, B should not have entered the round about. If they entered at almost the same time however, then its just one word vs. another.
Since I'm no expert like most people here, I questioned a 5th year law student to be sure and that's what he said. He believes that "car approaching roundabout must give way" is a blanket statement. Just like how a car that is reversing is always wrong is a blanket statement.
I know it sounds wrong and if it was up to me, I would personally think A should owe all damages, but thats not what the rule about roundabouts should be interpreted as.
Pretending I'm an insurance company, I would say both parties broke road rules and refuse payout to either. =D
I remember my driving instructor recommending me not to go if I was in car B's position, just because you can't predict how people will drive!
this is similar to the scenario where you are turning left into a multi-lane road. some people (myself included) would or are taught to wait for two lanes to be free before entering.
there is an intersection near home that if you did that you'd still be there the next morning. There is nothing wrong with turning left into a vacant left lane while the right is occupied. Apply some common sense and it keeps traffic moving.
if a car on the right lane decided to crash into you (they want to cash out from the insurance claim for example),
you would be deem at fault in this situation. the law is not always fair, that's common sense.
the cars behind have their rights to press their horns, but the driver themselves also have their rights to decide when to enter when they see it is deemed safe to do so, and that's very subjective.
I would think they are both at fault and each have to pay 50% of damages. A should have given way no matter what and B should not have changed lanes during a round about
This was on either the QLD or NSW government website.
I think you mixed up Car A and Car B, right?
Yep :)
depends on which part of the car, A, made contact with B or vice versa.
if the impact was in the front or side panels of car B then it is car Bs fault.
if the impact was in the back of car B, then it can be argued that car A is at fault.
but even if it were car-A's fault for either, 1) going too fast through or 2) assuming B wont enter the roundabout; B is an idiot for trying to sneak around the corner.
being a good driver is not simply about being right and following rules but also about being able to avoid the idiots not following the rules.
Definitely car A.
Scenario 1: Car B reaches collision point before Car A. Car A can choose to take the other lane but he cuts into the left lane. Car A is at fault for changing lanes without looking left. This scenario is unlikely though because Car A would have seen Car B in front and can easily avoid collision.
Scenario 2: Car A reaches collision point before or at the same time as Car B. Car B has no road to go and is not to be expected to stop in the roundabout. Therefore Car A is at fault for blocking Car B's only path. This would be the same as someone just overtaking you when you are too close - the overtaker is at fault.
What do you do one someone is doing laps of a roundabout
You honk at them :) Also unless there are multiple cars doing laps, there will be enough time to get in behind them and make your turn/etc, as almost every roundabout is big enough that there's no way they are doing laps fast enough to block you from entering.
There was this guy in a ferrari…
You place Maltesers on the dash and wait for it to roll to the passenger's side.
You should only use physics for good, not evil…
I think car B was safe to enter the roundabout since car A was in the inner lane. It looks like car A changed lanes after car B was also in the roundabout, and changed lanes into car B. Unless this diagram is not to exact scale/etc, in which maybe car B entered directly in front of a lane-changing car A.
Based on the diagram, and the amount of time it looks like car B was already in the roundabout (safely) before collision, I'd suggest car A is at fault for an unsafe lane change.
this photo seems to easily explain it.
Left entry = left exit
Right entry = right exit
So no confusion necessary. Yes, you can change lanes, but ONLY when safe.
Therefore car "A" is at fault - as he/she crossed over + when it wasn't safe.
This is exactly how I drive. The right lane can turn right. The left lane can only go straight. That way cars never change lanes.
This happened to me about 12 years ago. I was car B. Insurance ruled in my favour
The first and last rule of roundabout is that "You must give way to all vehicles already on the roundabout."
It might seem unfair, wrong or illogical at times. If you put a a bicycle or semi-trailer in Car A position and it is first on the roundabout, the rules make a lot of sense.
Car A for sure.
If crash happened during entry of roundabout, then car B would be at fault, but once within the roundabout, normal lane-changing rules apply.
As others have said, it depends on a whole lot of factors this image doesn't show.
If you look at the image in the translated page linked to above (http://n2.hk/d/attachments/day_151017/20151017_150d1886e700d…) it would appear the roundabout is not a huge one, and the exit to the roundabout is reasonably close to the entry point for car B.
If this image is a true representation of the collision zone, there is NO WAY car B could have given way to car A, and still be close enough to have been hit by car A unless he accelerated extremely fast.
Car B has seen car A approaching in the right lane and figured it was safe to merge into the left lane, rather than giving way as they should have.
Car A was already on the roundabout. If it wasn't, car A would have to have been speeding to catch car B overtake it, and collide with it. If car B was in front of car A when the collision occurred, then normal lane changing rules would say car A must give way to car B.
To truly answer the question, we need to know where the damage is, as others have said, but if the collision occurred on the roundabout, and if the above image is an accurate representation, the roundabout is simply too small for car B to not have given way to car A.
I wouldn't think so.
Not a 2 lane roundabout, and a strait T-Bone accident.
Fault is absolutely clear in that video.
I think it's best if we leave it to the experts at A Current Affair to solve this one - could be a case of road rage and Tracey is the best in the business here.
My mate had the exact same situation in NSW and he was Car B. Police justified that he was in the wrong because Car B must give way to all motorists inside the roundabout.
He told me that the police used a representation similar exiting an 3 lane intersection, where imagine the round about was removed and Car A was going straight ahead and wishes to change lanes when exiting the intersection. If Car B turned in, he is in the wrong.
I have even seen a situation where an old lady indicated left in a double round about, and then made a split decision to go straight. Police justified that she was innocent of the accident and the other car that he had collided with was suppose to give way to all traffic.
Maki: I personally blame you for this accident.
Car B should not have entered the roundabout as both lanes were not clear. Car A is a complete tit for changing lanes while in the roundabout, you must exit the roundabout in the same lane which you entered. Both cars failed to give way but ultimately car B is at fault.
If you're at a T-junction, you do not have to wait for both lanes to be clear before turning.
Car B is at fault. The collision took place within the roundabout, which means that Car B entered the roundabout while Car A was still passing, Car B should have given way. So while Car A also broke a rule, it was the rule broken by Car B that was responsible for the crash.
Car B did give way. Looking at the lines, they were both safely in the roundabout at the same time . Car A just changed lanes without ensuring that it was safe to do so.
Yeah actually I'm going to side with car B now, although some people do interpret the roundabout rules as car B shouldn't have entered until car A had passed by, which is probably why some people drive like car A thinking it won't result in a crash. The roundabout rules aren't exactly explicit on this, but the more logical interpretation of the rule is in favor of car B.
A is an idiot
I actually had a few near miss when driving in Car B's situation and became quite concerned about this. I actually asked a patrol officer when i met one the other day. This was at the Goldcoast. He told me that in this scenario, Car B should give way to any car in the roundabout and it is legal for Car A to change lanes if he wish so.
If car A is in the roundabout first (meaning Car A is in the roundabout before Car B), Car B should give way to all right coming traffic. If the accident does happen, I think the fault will be with Car B, doesn't matter whether the car switched lane and exited. if they have indicated to exit, they can take either left or right lane (i believe)? but usually should flow on the right lane based on their lanes, some cars switch to the left before they exit as there are cars behind that car turn to the right, but not everyone drives that way apparently, might have different rules in different states or might have a really heavy traffic behind and Car A needs to turn on the next left so that might be why they had to exit left? Or that Car A might not have seen Car B when exiting.
if you place it in a one lane roundabout, it is definitely car B that is wrong.
I would also ask if a car came out of a petrol kiosk on a two lane highway, and there was a car on the right lane oncoming, overtook in front of you to the left lane before you exit the kiosk and an accident occured, i think it will still be the car coming out at fault for not letting the car overtake or exiting when it is not safe to do so?
Certainly not true that you can change lanes on a roundabout in some states (don't know about the others)
B is at fault
You have to always allow anyone on your right hand go first irrespective of a lane being free to enter or not. Its how we teach our L platers and its hiw it should carry through till the end. You can kegally change lanes on a round about especially if you wish to choose to exit soon after the round about. The rule for giving way is if someone is coming from the same direction as you so if car b was also going straight only then would car A have been at fault. But for this situation car b is the one who should be fined
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B90aBBkpJZ8tdnJ1NHE2U184Zms…
Car B did give way, that is how both cars are safely in the roundabout at the same time. More than one car is allowed in the roundabout. Car A should have checked if it was safe to change lanes.
Therefore, Car A is at fault.
Incorrect, car b should have waited till the right was clear before even entering. a car nearly had an accident with me because the car didnt allow me to go when i was on his right.
It was clear, which is why Car B was able to enter the roundabout. Car A should have made sure it was clear before changing lanes.
Definitely Car B cos you should always give way to your right and the fact that Car A decided to change lanes at the last minute shouldnt factor in because Car B is just sitting there giving way
Damn it I cant delete my comment. So in my defence the above was written late last night. So yeah its 2 lanes, Car A was going straight ahead on the inside lane, leaving a free lane for Car B to turn into. Car A decides "Holy Shit" Im in the wrong lane and turns into Car B's lane and kills them both instantly. Ahh STUPID Car A :(
Glad OP posted this question - even with still photos and hundreds of brains, there is no absolute decision, let upon the driver in split seconds.
Thus, I now tend to give way, knowing what that give way unnecessarily can cope a fine as well.
Though it isn't unanimous, I'm glad the majority voted for the correct answer.
For me Car B is at fault.
You always have to give way to or be mindful of the car coming from the right at a roundabout
One vote to B XD
regardless A changes lanes or not, B should give way to incoming traffic from the right, especially car A is already in the roundabout. certainly car A shouldn't changes lanes immediately on exist, however some people do that, and I believe it's more like a bad driving habit rather than breaking the road rules.
When the collision occurred, both car were safely in the roundabout.
Your assertion of "safely" seems entirely presumptuous. If I merge into the freeway in front of another car at 10km/h, I have not "safely" entered the lane. I have just caused a crash.
Safely as in not causing a collision when entering the roundabout, which the image shows, there is no collision when Car B entered.
There was a collision when Car A changed lanes.
It's a very straight forward "Car A is at fault" in the NT. MVR road rules handbook regarding roundabouts: "Going straight ahead: do not signal when approaching
the roundabout. You can approach the roundabout from either left or right lanes (unless there are road markings with other instructions), drive in the same lane through the roundabout and exit in the same lane.
And just to make it clear, regardless of whether you are going straight ahead, turning left or right on a roundabout the handbooks says you must stay in the same lane. I.e don't ever change lanes on a roundabout. For every roundabout in the NT this is absolutely appropriate and strangely sensible (strange when you consider it is the NT)
I don't know about roundabouts in other states, perhaps there are some that do require a lane change from the correct entry lane to reach the exit you require and the laws are thus different. Still, surely if you are going straight ahead (and there is no requirement for you to change lanes to exit) it should be illegal to to do so. Seems like common sense, but I can't vouch if that actually is the law outside of the NT.
In reality many people out there are extremely confused as to how 2 lane roundabouts work, even in the NT where stay in the one lane laws apply. So be careful.
i think ther would be mixed answers varying from state to state.
the below is for Victoria.
car b is wrong, got to give way to right regardless whether car A is doing right or wrong. in this scenario it was safe for car A to change lanes as theres no other cars entering the double lane with them.
somewhat the same as when people do u turns on a double lane round about and changes lanes within the double lanes towards the exit. friend Experienced this couple weeks ago XD came out his fault with insurance.
I wonder if answers would change if you kept the same scenario but changed car A to semi trailer A. pretty sure most would give way to the truck first.
I don't think so from what I read at the VIC road rules site
Travelling straight through a roundabout
If you want to travel straight through a roundabout:*stay in the same lane through the roundabout
*do not indicate as you approach the roundabout, but if practicable, signal left as you exit.
*If there is more than one lane, you can approach the roundabout in any of the lanes, unless the lane is for left or right turns only.
yeah its a bit of a grey area. i'd say with stupid laws as per usual.
what court said to him was…. what if it was a MR HR truck. theres a lot of double laned round abouts that are way too tight for them to go thru without cutting thru lanes.
then the judges second statement was… youre the 2nd car that is oncoming into the round about as they were already in the roundabout. so regardless car A is doing right or wrong… you didnt give way to the right.
they broke up the incident per section.
i.e car A entering roundabout
car b entering
sure car A may be doing the wrong thing, but its up to authorities to nab him for that. like 99% of time, cops aint there to see it
car B should be giving way to the right and turning when safe to do so. regardless if car A is being a nimwit.
lastly if you took out the round about of the scenario with car A changing lanes prior car B entering. b would be in trouble straight away.
so i think the main thing is how court cases break up the incident is:
1. Car A vs Authorities.
2. Car B vs Car A
just on the side note as more of an advice for my friend future driving experience. "even when a car isn't indicating for a turn, looks like they're going straight, but they turn and you hit them or they hit you when approaching the the round about whilst they're within the roundabout already, its 80%+ your fault" thats what court said. other variable may help change that. type of round about, solid/broken line/indication signs on roads, roads signs. etc
that's another one of those tricky round about scenarios.
after all that my friend was furious
sure he had insurance but wasnt happy with the results
take it further to court and lost another 4000 dollar over his excess.
Yeah its pretty frustrating that it isn't a lot more clear. If it was we'd all be safer
Obviously A is at fault but in the investigation, B may very well get stung with it unless there is video or witness report on which lane A entered the roundabout in.
Busy dual lane roundabouts are an accident magnet.
Aha, this almost actually happened to me. I was in Car B's position. I saw him coming in my mirror and avoided the crash by accelerating hard. The idiot then beeped me. Shoulda called the bikies.
Just out of curiosity, whcih mirror did you see the other vehicle? How woukd the accident be like - the other hit yours on the side or the tail?
Car A moved into Car B's lane and hit it.
Car A as at fault
I say Car A is at fault.
He's switched lanes and dangerously so with no real ability or time to check his mirrors before doing so.
He'd probably pull the "have to give way to the right" defense being am oblivious tool but i ask why would they have multiple lanes in round abouts in the first place if giving way to the right was always the case?
Laws may differ from state to state or spose and the timing of events like when Car B entered the roundabout or when Car A switched lanes.
Final verdict = invest in dash, rear and side cams
This is an extract from South Australia AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 114 :
114—Giving way when entering or driving in a roundabout
(1) A driver entering a roundabout must give way to—
(a) any vehicle in the roundabout; and
For this rule, "give way" means the driver must slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision
So guys, it is quite clear that Car B must give way regardless what Car A is intending to do while still in the roundabout.
Car B will be liable for causing a collision while Car A is probably fined for not indicating when changing lane
So guys, it is quite clear that Car B must give way regardless what Car A is intending to do while still in the roundabout.
It's quite clear that Car B did give way, that's how Car B was able to enter the roundabout safely…
Agree with you too. But the others are saying B is already inside the roundabout, ie A changes lane carelessly is the cause of accident. Hard to tell unless look at the damage.
Since the regulation added the clause "to give way to cars inside the roundabout", instead of give way to the right. People do not slow down anymore, instead they speed up to beat you and to get inside the roundabout, whether they are on your left or right.
The rule round about In Australia is now like the game called "Who dares win".
I play " Price is right" - your life is more expensive than the other idiots.
Assuming the drawing is correct, the collision occurred inside the roundabout therefore it looks to me that Car B didn't give way. I think Car B must have assumed that Car A will stay on right lane while exiting the roundabout and thinking it will be safe to take a left turn. So I'll stand by my comment that Car B is liable for causing a collision.
It did occur inside the roundabout, but not when Car B was entering; it was when car A was exiting.
@ozhunter: Then it is clear that Car B is at fault because it's not supposed to enter the roundabout while there's a car in the roundabout. It doesn't matter whether Car A is exciting or not, but while it's still in the roundabout, no other car should enter. Remember the regulation states "For this rule, "give way" means the driver must slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision"
@tiara:
As has been quoted above from various state road rules, in many states you can't change lanes on a roundabout. If driver A can't legally change lane, then Driver B doesn't have anybody to give way to.
@picket23:
Please read the rule again, it is simply black and white, you have to give way to any car in the roundabout So it doesn't matter if Car A changed lane illegally, as long as it's still in the roundabout Car B should not enter. Car A could be penalised for changing lane, but Car B will definitely penalised for illegally entering roundabout
Then it is clear that Car B is at fault because it's not supposed to enter the roundabout while there's a car in the roundabout
Is that a joke? Only ONE car allowed at the roundabout at a time?
It doesn't matter whether Car A is exciting or not, but while it's still in the roundabout, no other car should enter
Lol
but Car B will definitely penalised for illegally entering roundabout
Lol again. There was no car in the lane into which Car B entered. Car B entering didn't cause a collision.
With the assumption that car B had four tires in his lane at the time car A collided into him, the Victorian Road Law would rule in favour of car B as that motorist legally entered and occupied the lane prior to the avoidable collision by car B who attempted to turn left from the inner lane (stupid driving) and hit car A.
I don't understand. Most comments say B is at fault, but Vote shows 2:1 A is at fault. What does this mean?
Voters for Car A don't really need to explain their reasoning as it's clear who is at fault if you look at the picture carefully.
Car A but car B could have avoided the collision by not entering a roundabout until car A was past.
But Car A could have avoided the collision by making sure it was safe to change lanes and exit.
Car A has right way in roundabout. Car B should giveway to car A.
If accident happens in roundabout, car B is at fault.
Always give way to the right in a roundabout.
Not to mention the only way that the collision could have occurred is if A was already in the roundabout before B started going in. Unless A was going stupidly fast.
Car B is at fault.
The fact that there is a group of people that think "car b" is a fault is alarming… this reasoning would suggest if a vehicle is on the inside lane of a roundabout there cannot be a second car on the outside lane, you cannot change lanes on a roundabout, period.
Completely false.
You can change lanes in a roundabout in all states. Find a link that says otherwise.
Given the distance A had to travel to intersect with B means that he had to be in the roundabout first, and you must give way to cars already in a roundabout above all else.
I'm under the impression it works like this:
http://www.drivingnt.com/img-tips/ra-signal2.gif
If so then Car A exited in the wrong lane and therefore is at fault.
Let's all end these arguments.
Here's a court case I found on the net, with similar scenario.
Who's at fault ?, read your self.
http://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCA/2011/037
Nah that sounds more like car b was going straight ahead on our diagram rather than what we have which is car b exiting to the left. I'm pretty sure that's the case anyway. That combined with the other car incorrectly indicating makes it totally different to our situation.
Although yeah I'd say they'd both be held responsible to some degree in our case too.
In Japan, car collision liability is not always split 100% like it is here. (They also don't have roundabouts, which is a shame because I like them.) So if there's a scenario like this, it might be in their rulebook as, say, 60% car B to 40% car A. Then there might be modifiers like +20% car B if it didn't stop at the line, or +10% if car A's speed was 40-60km/h (within the limit but above recommended speed for roundabouts). It's an interesting system.
Car B is at fault and Car A is an asshole and hopeless driver.
Well when I got my licence about 35 yrs ago we were taught that A ROUNDABOUT IS A GAZETTED ROAD. That means all the usual rules apply as if entering a road from a give way sign:
Enter at any time when safe to do so. So if the car entering did not take due care to avoid an accident, did not give right of way etc, then he is in the wrong.
Things may have changed now though.
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/roads/safety-rules/road-rules/roun…
Car A merges lanes illegally and is at fault.
Every example I can find shows if there are 2 exit lanes the car on the right must exit to the righthand lane.
http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/documents/roads/safety-rules/nsw-r…
Driver may change lanes in the roundabout if they wish.
"Drivers may change lanes in a roundabout if they wish. The usual road rules for changing lanes apply. Drivers must use their indicator and give way to any vehicle in the lane they are entering."
Yep and thats a merge in the picture, so case closed, Car A at 100% fault.
Car A - open and shut.
The fact that I've seen so many "Car A is exciting!" oh my! by the B-fault voters says a lot to me…
nb. exiting.
Wow this is alarming that 1/3 of people think what car A did was ok and that car B is in the wrong.
Explains why there are accidents.
If car B cannot enter to turn left into the same road when car A is travelling straight through, what's the point of the second lane?
What's with all these people saying you need both lanes clear before turning into a road?
Where is that written? It's a load of rubbish.
Be wary of cars in both lanes, yes, because dying is not good even when the other party is at fault. But to suggest there is a give way requirement is rubbish and will lead to accidents.
I'd say funniest comment is this one https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/216388?page=1#comment-3146… which she then says in the following comment that Car B entered illegally.
Only one car allowed in a two lane roundabout? Ridiculous.
Ozhunter, Are stating your feeling or your interpretation of the rule?. I'm not making the rule but simply quoting it, unfortunately you still can't read properly. Here it is again.
ROAD RULES - REG 114 :
114—Giving way when entering or driving in a roundabout
(1) A driver entering a roundabout must give way to—
(a) any vehicle in the roundabout
Which part are still not clear?, do you understand the meaning of "any vehicle in the roundabout"?
How do you not understand that Car B DID give way, which is why when it entered the roundabout, there was no collision.
The collision occurred when Car A changed lanes without first making sure it was safe.
IF Car B DID NOT give way, the collision would have occurred where the red circle is located in this picture.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7z0ehzqkjk4hxk/car.gif?dl=0
@ozhunter:
Firstly, You haven't answered my question, can you read the rule?. Do you understand the meaning of "any vehicle in the roundabout"?. Does it say Except in multilanes? Does it say Except you are turning left?.
Your logic is so false,
I read the rule and it says that Car B should give way. It seems that you cannot comprehend that Car B DID give way.
That is why I said further down it is both A and B's fault. I cherry picked the first sentence because that what edfrane was talking about. He said that "He gave way to his lane and his lane only" and that was what I was replying to. I didn't have a problem with his statement that A was driving dangerously so I did not rebut it.
In terms of his statement about "not inside the roundabout which he was if there was to be impact", then no accident would be B's fault if he drove fast enough.
True he was in the round about, but that is not what "give way" means. Give way means when you are approaching a roundabout and there is a car coming from your right, you do not enter. Not if it requires the approaching car to either slow down or crash into you. It doesnt matter if you managed to drive fast enough to be considered "inside" the roundabout instead of "approaching it".
In accidents, what normally happens is they each pay 50% of the total damages. Or a split around there.