Hi.
My friend (don't have insurance) was driving Honda Civic and he was going in a street. Traffic was stopped and there was KEEP CLEAR area, from where he has to enter, but another car i30 (have insurance) came from bus lane and hit the front bumper of Honda Civic, so who is at fault? Please check photos for more understanding of it.
Update-The another guy (i30) does not accept the liability, and AAMI also putting a blame on (civic) now.
Your friend who is turning right into the street must give way to all opposing lanes and only turn when it is safe regardless if the car should/shouldnt be in the bus lane. Who knows, the other i30 driver could be turning left onto the street using the bus lane as its within 100m but even if the car isnt turning -road rule prevails and your friend is still at fault.
Indeed!
The bus lane may not have been in effect or the i30 may have been turning left.
Drivers need to positively see that the way is clear before proceeding. One shouldn't assume that an obscured lane is clear just because other lanes have stopped and left a gap. This type of crash occurs way too often!
If a bus was coming your friend could've been injured.
@tshow: I ran it through a noise analysis program and the cars have differing levels of noise to the street. Had me convinced at first glance though.
coming in the bus lane, and he was not able to see him.
Would your friend say the same if it were an authorised vehicle?
First of all is it a bus lane at all times or just at peak times ? Second of all, you if the other car wanted to turn left into the street where the keep clear sign is, they can use the bus lane.
Thirdly and finally your friend MUST give way to on coming traffic when turning right. (Is that what he was doing ?)
Friend is at fault. My I suggest he gets insurance and visits a eye doctor if he’s having trouble seeing cars. I hope he has savings…
paying $30k to uni don't help in saving.
sigh this again, uninsured driver and at fault too. You must be partially blind to not see the red car coming. Moral of the story, don't assume every other driver will follow traffic rules, lookout for everything, even on greenlight. 3rd party insurance is cheap these days. Cop the repair costs, ask for installment. Case closed.
@Jugganautx: I don't particularly agree with that, I just did a quick quote with RACQ and under 25 male was $195.77 with a $650 excess, I would expect comprehensive on a 10k car for $700 unless you had an awful driving record. maybe try a quote with RACQ and see what you get to compare. I know there are many variables but 3-4 times the price is a little bit of a stretch.
If im reading this correctly, your friend is at fault regardless if the other driver was in the bus lane or not as he should have given way
Exactly this. There's no chance at all your friend will have this go in his favor. LUBE UP!
Fun fact my friend don't have insurance
Doesn't sound fun
I know but the problem I used to tell him please buy insurance but he never listens to me.
Then upu should laugh at make jokes every time your friend see you.
Fun for us to read that he'll be copping it.
"he" will from now on
Shouldn't be on the road without insurance
This. Also shouldn’t be on the road if basic problems like giving way like this are apparently above their understanding of simple road rules.
Fun fact: your "friend" will be paying for repairs to both cars now.
Where was he going in a street?
He was thinking of taking U-turn after he thought just go in the street and come the main steet from another street.
This just keeps getting worse and worse for your "friend" lol.
How did you get an actual photo of the event occurring?
Call me suspicious, but I reckon it's been professionally photoshopped
It took me 1-hour photoshop this.
Call me suspicious, but I reckon it's been professionally photoshopped
I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time.
I loved how he used a civic photo with a transparent background but completely messed it up haha
How did you get an actual photo of the event occurring?
And from OUTSIDE the car!!
I am impressed at how the arrows appeared in real life!
Nice paint job there.
Yeah your friend should give way. He's entering that lane, whilst the i30 is already in it. Doesn't matter if he is in bus lane or not.
Good luck
A new low in photo examples. Cheers for the laugh.
White car is in the wrong and should consider themselves lucky it wasn’t a bus in that lane at full steam…
Had to check the photos after reading this comment - quality. Civic definitely at fault, that will learn your friend for not having insurance.
Seems insurance is only a conditional bargain.
They both hit a house at the same time? Did the house owner have insurance?
FYI Keep clear doesn't mean you have right of way.
Like the petrol station, could go either way I reckon. Eg The red car has a solid line and the white car has a broken line.
right of way.
Australian road rules doesn’t cover the concept of right of way like in some other countries.
The white car has the holding line and must wait. If they didn't wait, they're at fault.
I thought the OP's English was bad then I saw the his photoshop.
thanks for the compliment
Seems like you and the OP learnt English at the same place.
Judge: you were not supposed to turn unless traffic was clear.
Plaintiff: I didn't have vision of the bus lane, I assumed cars wouldn't be on the lane.
Judge: how bout busses?
Plaintiff: .
Judge: I've heard enough. Take him to the gallows.
The bus lane is from 6am -9pm accident happened around 7 and traffic was a standstill.
Sounds like the i30 was using the bus lane to skip the queue - or turn left which he/she is allowed to do.
Regardless civic should have given way.
@dasher86:
The i30 isn't allowed to use the Bus Lane for more that 50 metres (?). Which means he wasn't going to turn left, as that would require him to decelerate and consequently prevent a collision. It looks like the i30 was instead accelerating, so he was essentially ripping off the traffic and jumping queue using the wrong lane.
The point is that, the Honda should've stopped at the side of the Keep Clear zone.
Waited. Then slowly moved into Lancaster St…. if it did do that, it would still be possible for the Honda to be struck by the i30 because the i30 was speeding and using an illegal lane without eyesight. Ask a cop, and they would tell you the i30 was the one to cause the accident in that situation.
But again, without a dashcam we can't be sure what the Honda actually did and what the i30 actually did. I hope that makes sense to fellow brodens.
Honestly, your friend is damn lucky he didn't hit a bus as the damage bill would be far higher.
Which means he wasn't going to turn left, as that would require him to decelerate and consequently prevent a collision. It looks like the i30 was instead accelerating,
Did you get all of that information from a manipulated 2d image?
@Kangal: My brother boss believes, i30 to blame.as
One thing I forget to mention traffic was STAND Still.
does your source show that the one of the vehicles were accelerating and the other vehicle not turning left?
@whooah1979:
It does.
The main road is travelling uphill, to turn left you would need to maintain a small speed and decelerate. Otherwise, it's negligent driving.
I mean why do people drive slow at schools, is it just for the School Zone, or is there some common sense about driving more carefully around young children?
@Kangal: You are correct.
Even though the i30 has right of way, given that the other 2 lanes have stopped, that the i30 is possibly driving illegally in the bus lane, possibly speeding (or driving at an inappropriate speed given traffic conditions) it could easily be argued it’s “reasonably foreseeable” that a car would pullout in front of them from the clearway.
The Civic could indeed get a ticket for failing to give way but that doesn’t get the i30 off the hook in terms of at least partial liability for causing the accident
Finally, I'm not the only one that gets it.
But this is all conjecture, as I wasn't there so I'm talking the OP's word in good faith.
If the events unfolded as the OP says, and that it was recorded by a dashcam, and a police officer saw the event…it would be the i30 getting a fine and being liable to fix the Honda.
Again, it's not "fact" as it really depends on the details.
OK,
Civic is at fault, no matter what way you look at it. It doesn't matter if it was an i30, a Taxi, a bus or a Motorcycle in the bus lane, the Civic is in the wrong and should have yielded to the i30. There is no give-way, stop or yield at that intersection for the i30. The Civic is turning right, therefore has to yield.
Keep clear signage is not a stop sign.
The Civic is lucky it was a car and not a motorcycle, or he would be likely up for manslaughter charges and a long gaol term.
Civic driver should hand their licence in and lube up for the drilling that is coming from the insurance company.
Yes the i30 has right of way but no one is really questioning that.
The real question is who can be proven to have been negligent in causing the accident.
The fact that the Civic failed to give way doesn’t bode well for them. However the i30 hit the Civic – anytime you hit another car it raises the possibility that you were negligent (probably the legal angle the mysterious Taxi Club is talking about).
It’s might not be too hard for the Civic to build an argument that the i30 contributed to the accident.
Maybe the i30 was speeding illegally down the bus lane while Civic slowly crept out…but then again maybe the Civic jumped out without looking at all. It all depends on exactly what happened and what can be backed up in court.
There is a reason that all insurance policies say “do not admit fault” - there are be heaps of ways to argue contributory negligence in a civil court even if you broke a road law.
If OP’s “friend” had insurance then his own insurance company would not lie down and accept full liability. Unfortunately he doesn’t so he’d have to contest it all by himself, so on this point:
…lube up for the drilling that is coming from the insurance company
Yes I do agree with you.
But all these comments saying Civic is wrong end of story have no idea how a Civil court action works.
Please hand in your license if you believe anything other than the Civic being at fault in this case.
This, never assume. Always check your mirrors, indicate and then blind spot (a.k.a MIB).
Probably one of the most common accidents on dashcam aust.
If you're turning right: don't assume all cars have stopped or can see you. If inner lane car has stopped, don't assume outer lane has or will
If you're going forward: if you see the car on the right inner lane has stopped and left a huge gap, use your brains, go slowly and try to peek through the windscreen of the RHS car. Even if you're in the right, who wants to waste time on this crap.
probably people feel pressured when they see a fat queue behind them
I'll never understand people who drive uninsured cars, especially when there's a risk of hitting 6 figure cars.
I drove my car —uninsured.
I didn't have any fines, but my $1,700 car was wanting $2,600 for insurance every year at the cheapest.
Why? I was under 25. That's the market for you, the few bad apples in my age bracket ruin it for the rest of us.
Couldn't afford a better car, let alone the insurance. Still no problems on my license, and never damaged anyone.
I did get a bumper hit and scratch by a bad driver in traffic, that was about it.
But not anymore.
Dashcam + Insurance ($1,400pa) + $9k car.
Its a phase and we the youth suffer, then we get older and yell at the new youth, rinse repeat.
Third party insurance doesn't cost $2600. This is what you NEED!
No, everyone here is mentioning Comprehensive Insurance which costs over $2,000 every year for Under 25's.
I concur, people should get 3rdP F&T. But I'm just saying there is a legitimate excuse for not getting it: your budget.
Regarding 3rd party insurance..If you cannot afford to insure your vehicle, you should not be driving that vehicle. End of story.
It's like $28 per month for Fire, Theft and Third Party Insurance through RACQ for a 18 year old. See this https://imgur.com/a/dlQeldF. NRMA and RACV will be no different.
There is literally no excuse.
OT: if you cant afford third party property insurance, you cant afford to drive
Obvious the Civic is at fault; whether the bus lane is in effect is not relevant.
I can’t comprehend how anyone would think otherwise and they probably shouldn’t be on the road. This is about the most basic road rules.
How can people afford cars but not insurance…….probably the same people who can afford overseas holidays but not travel insurance.
Or motorcycles but not protective gear.
Or sex without condoms?
is there a way to see who voted for the i30?
I wanted to vote for the bus, but OP didn't put that as an option.
So I voted the i30.
Mmmmmm these accidents always seem to be "my friend" and no insurance…
haha, belive me this is not about me I drive ford Fairmount and have third part insurance from aami,if you need can you send my details:)
It makes sense. All OzBargainers have been well educated on the importance of insurance. That only leaves the friends of OzBargainers.
From the photographic evidence it doesn't look like any cars are stopped. Would have been pretty easy to see the red car coming.
Mate, if you look very closely, and enhance, you will notice that the image has been tempered.
Yes mate, the red car looked very angry
MORAL OF THE STORY - stop being a cheap skate and get insurance. END OF STORY
On initial review, I'd say the friend is 100% to blame. Even if the friend was able to argue that the red car was doing something not permitted (eg driving in bus lane and doing-so to queue jump not turn left), I doubt that that argument would completely remove blame and only reduce it. But as others have said, a bus could have easily been driving in that lane and the friend is/was required to give-way.
I'd guess the friend is going to have to pay one way or another (in terms of a financial amount…).
In the case of doing something not permitted, it's still hard to get contributory negligence, especially if you're uninsured.
One is a criminal matter and the other is a civil matter.
Your duty of care remains the same.
The interesting scenario is that the red cars insurance company can rule that he was part liable, and not make payouts at all. Then both drivers lose.
Yes, I like this.
I don't quite understand this reasoning.
A bus is not going to drive fast going uphill. And the bus can be visible over and between most other vehicles. And the bus driver sits high enough to see a vehicle in the Keep Clear zone. Had a bus been driving, he would've been doing so slowly, he would've spotted the i30 before the i30 entered the Keep Clear zone, and the i30 would've seen it coming and stopped entering. The i30 would've waited for the bus to slowly pass, reassess the traffic and make the turn.
If you argue otherwise, then you are essentially saying No Cars Can Make A Turn at the Intersection. Because the argument will come back circular to you as "you can't cross, its dangerous, what if a car is going to come in the next 5 minutes on the empty road?"
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-r…
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-r…
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-r…
Basically i30 must give way to buses and all traffic, and if traffic at stop they must give way to i30 (excluding buses and emergency vehicles).
What about a minibus?
Motorcyle? Taxi?
I love the way on OzBargain with these sorts of threads, you can't down vote them. So as soon as the OP replies to a comment, everyone neg's it, even if the reply it's self is reasonable.
Dare we say it again?
Your friend doesn't have insurance. This was bound to happen sooner or later.
He/She is liable for the damage.
People, DON'T DRIVE WITHOUT INSURANCE and if you do, expect to be out of pocket and have to represent yourself in the event of an at fault accident!
Wish I could upvote the forum thread just for the professional photoshop job.
RIP FRIENDS WALLET
If im reading this correctly, your friend is at fault regardless if the other driver was in the bus lane or not as he should have given way