Asking for a friend (of course) who had a near miss at a roundabout.
Car A was approaching a roundabout and car B is approaching the roundabout from the right. Car A slows down expecting to give way to the right but then sees car B has the indicator signalling to turn left.
The car A proceeds to go straight but B doesn't turn left and also proceeds straight with the left blinker still on.
If there's an accident, who's at fault if they both entered the roundabout at the same time.
But really - the rule is give way to anyone already in the roundabout so regardless of whether car B had an indicator on or not, car A needs to give way if car B was in the roundabout first.
If car A entered the roundabout first, then car B is at fault.
It sounds like Car B was in the roundabout, but Car A understood them to be "not really in the roundabout for my purposes since they're leaving soon" and thought the roundabout was therefore clear to enter.
That’s how I read it too.
@jjjaar: You have to give way regardless of indicators. If Car B is indicating, it's exactly that, an indication. It doesn't put Car B at fault if they don't leave.
@TogTogTogTog: That’s what I said
regardless of whether car B had an indicator on or not, car A needs to give way if car B was in the roundabout first.
@jjjaar: Sorry was clarifying for people as OP states they both entered at the same time (which still puts Car A at fault).
@TogTogTogTog: except if they both entered at the same time then Car B would have rear-ended Car A while both were in the round-about.
If the Collision is Car B rear-ending Car A I would say it is Car B's fault if it is Car B hitting the front or side of Car A it is Car A's fault. the second option cannot occur if they both enter at the same time.
@TogTogTogTog: I waited for the indicating car to start turning before I enter the roundabout in my driving test and the test examiner took off a point from me. When I asked why he said the car already indicated so I should go….smh
@DumplingBoi: Dammmmmnnn lol. To be honest, I have no idea if my state has the exact same rules in this situation.
You should try politely quering why with your instructor; the point is to learn. Better make sure you know why you lost points lol :)
@DumplingBoi: That examiner needs to be examined. Car's indicator could have been on for the last half hour - how would you know?
@DumplingBoi: Better safe than sorry! I would follow that up and query why he said that! If you have to give way it means you have to be fully assured the path is clear and if you were not fully assured it is your right to wait till you consider it safe! And many people have indicators on accidentally and don't turn! Sometimes you see a car going fast and you know they arent going to turn!
From my experience, I’d say most drivers don’t know that you don’t have to give way to a car approaching a roundabout on their right if they are able to enter the roundabout first. But I always stop anyway and give way because what’s the point of risking a prang just because you’re in the right, and then having to prove you had entered the roundabout first.
Oh totally agree. Everyone has a responsibility to be safe on the roads and in many cases it is safer to come to a stop.
But there are also many situations when you can tell the other driver will be coming to a stop so if there’s no other obstructions, it will be safe for you to continue through.
When in doubt, stop.
Can you prove that "if they are able to enter the roundabout first" rule?
@JimCarter: Australian Road Rules, embodied in the different states' statutes.
https://www.ntc.gov.au/laws-and-regulations/australian-road-…
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
(b) a tram that is entering or approaching the roundabout.
So give way to the right to a tram, or get on the roundabout first.
Interesting that, not how I understood the rule (and tbh my understanding is probably lacking…). I thought roundabouts were installed to keep traffic flowing. If every person did not enter the roundabout when the persons on their right were about to enter / have entered with their indicator on, traffic would never move!
Traffic keeps flowing as they don't have to wait for lights to change you can always go when it's clear. If a car is heading straight from opposite you they will block off the traffic to the right and you can get out.
Yes you give way to the right when they have entered the roundabout. It's why on busy roads you can sometimes be stuck waiting for 5 mins or more for all the traffic if you are coming out of a side road onto the main road. Council has to identify those roundabouts and get traffic lights on them for peak periods.
This +1
I can't believe at the time of me posting there are 69 votes for Car B at fault LOL
Paint diagram always needed.
In the event of collision (and likely absence of video recording ~how many dashcams record the sides~), car A will have no grounds for arguments and be at fault by default.
If there is no accident then nobody is at fault.
And everyone pls stop "asking for a friend": because you are just wasting everyone's valuable time here on OB.
Your friend doesn't care what we think and wont listen to people who cant mind their own business.
You must give way to vehicles already on the roundabout. Car B is at fault.
What if they entered the roundabout at the same time
then how do they collide? unless B is going much faster, then A should exercise more caution
.
different speeds in navigating the 'bout
??? how could they collide then?
In any case, it doesn't matter if they entered at the same time. You must give way to cars already on the roundabout, in which case Car A is in front of Car B so I would say Car B is still at fault.
Car B hits car A as car A has slowed to give way but realises that don't need to as car B is turning left. Car B going at speed and going straight but maybe indicating left by accident expects car A to give way but car A doesn't as expecting car B to be turning left.
In this scenario, if an accident did occur -> Car B would have travelled the greater distance, therefore implying Car B was in the roundabout first.
The only way Car A could not be at fault is if there is evidence that Car B was speeding to cover the greater distance - even with a dashcam this is near impossible as you would not be able to get a read on the speed.
Not sure who is upvoting you but based on the description Car A is at fault.
You're incorrect.
Op changed the scenario, it was right when I posted it
Who entered the roundabout first?
If B entered first, A is at fault.
If A entered first, B is at fault.
nah mate you could have indicators on or off it doesn't matter
it's about whoever's already on round about already and who doesn't give way
generally you give way to your right and if they managed to hit you no matter the speed, then you haven't given way
How would this work on a t intersection? Say you want to turn right onto a main road (coming out of a t intersection) and the cars to your right all have their left indicator on.
But one of them goes straight and t bones you as pull out…
Would you be at fault as the indicators don’t matter?
@Pinchy: cars on your right would have a green arrow to turn left only and you would have a green light to turn right
if cars on the right have green light to go straight or left, then would would have a red light
if you are talking about the T sections without lights then you would have to obey a give way sign / line on the ground and even if there was not you would need to give way to all cars on your right regardless of them going left or straight or indicating wrongly. Yes you would be at fault if they T-Bone you because you didn't give way
Before you turn right, you can judge if the car on the right is turning left or going straight before you head off
Car B was probably driving in the right hand lane of a two lane road but you can only go straight from the left lane so he merged over and the car didn't turn off the indicator
Yep, car B is in the wrong.
First in best dressed
Actually neither A or B is at fault, because it didn't happen.
I don't know who's at fault legally if there's a collision, but Car A shoudln't be making decisions based on other cars' indicators in the interest of self-preservation. Wait to see what they actually do with their brakes/steering to confirm what their intentions are.
Exactly - indicators are indicative only!
Can be a blinking nuisance when someone has them on for no reason
True, although it's much more common for people to forget to turn them on.
If both cars entered at the same time, how could they possibly collide?
Moving the goalposts until my friend, who is definitely not me, is in the right.
driving different speed.
you are assuming both cars a travelling at the same speed.
You can't just drive into another car because you're going faster.
@Joney: Physics says you can.
Assuming same direction or geometrically on intersecting lines travelling to the point of intersection.
If both cars entered the roundabout at the same time and there is a collision, then I would say car A is at fault as it runs into the rear of car B.
@redforever: Car B is to the right of Car A. You mean Car B would be at fault for running into the rear of Car A.
I doubt they entered at exactly the same time, although it could be very close to the same time.
Fault may be apportioned equally between the two vehicles if it was in fact at the ‘same time’.
Dash cam footage would probably be required to show car B indicating the wrong way, otherwise both drivers would probably say they indicated correctly and it would be impossible to prove.
Fault may be apportioned equally between the two vehicles if it was in fact at the ‘same time’.
Actually curious about this, but if determined by insurers as same time, then wouldn't Car 'A' be responsible simply for not giving way to the right. (irrespective of the blinker situation)
Edit: NVM just read ur comment down below, guess the methods taught by dad were wrong. But yeah I guess it applies from a common sense perspective.
Dash cam footage would probably be required to show car B indicating the wrong way, otherwise both drivers would probably say they indicated correctly and it would be impossible to prove.
And then Car 'A' would be deemed at fault.
The car that enters the roundabout second must give way. The car that enters first doesn’t have ‘right of way’ (there is no such concept in traffic law) but would not be at fault if the other car failed to give way.
Cars indicating wrong at roundabouts is to be expected. Do not trust the indicator of another vehicle at a roundabout.
If there's no dash cam, no witnesses etc then it's dependent on someone owning up to it.
Very easy for either party to say indicator was or was not on.
Given Car A slowed down, I think they should have maintained giving the right of way for enough time to judge where the other car is going. Too often people forget to indicate at the round about or pre-empt an action that causes a mess.
There was dashcam in this case. I'm wondering if the fact that the other car indicated one thing and did something else that caused an accident would put them at fault or that the other car shouldn't take an indicator as gospel and should have exercised more caution
No
Correct
You should never assume that people are using their indicators correctly or that they actually intend to do what they’re indicating.
There have been times like this situation where I’ve been car A but I make sure the roundabout is large enough and the other car is either going slow enough or I see them actually starting to exit the roundabout before I enter it.
Same with if you’re leaving a side street onto a main road. If someone is approaching with their left turn indicator on to presumably enter that street, I always wait for them to either slow down or start turning before I’ll exit the street so I don’t get smashed into. Unless they are far away that I can get onto the road without them crashing into me.
Me too, and often have to ignore the dhead behind me beeping me because he wants me to trust the indicating car.
Roundabout Rule #1: Give way to your right
Roundabout Rule #2: Give way to all cars currently on the roundabout.
An indicator signals an intention, yes it's annoying but you can't take the indicator as gospel. It's in the word, it indicates the possible direction the car may take.
Roundabout rule 1 does not exist, however it is a sensible thing to assume that a vehicle to your right can enter prior to you which would require you to give way.
Unfortunately, because so many people think "give way to your right" is a rule, you kind of need to follow it, otherwise expect to get plowed into by a Hilux flying through the roundabout at high speed because they are on your right.
This!
If you approach a roundabout, the cars already in the roundabout would be approaching you from the right so either way, give way to cars already in the roundabout and give way to the right would be similar
not sure about your roundabout rule #1 https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/motoring/on-th…
NRMA has some issues with it:
A spokesman from NRMA, Peter Khoury, told news.com.au that waiting for cars on your right if you get to the roundabout before them can impact the traffic flow.
“We are not quite sure where this misconception comes from,” he said.
I don't understand why the NRMA can't see where this misconception comes from!
Watch every driving school instructor (including their own branded instructors) teaching their student and they'll see it very quickly. And it harks back to the 'give way to the right' rule that was in force for many years in this country. Thankfully, Stop and Give Way signs have largely made the 'give way to the right' rule redundant, but it persists in drivers' minds when they don't see one of those Stop or Give Way signs, it seems.
Speaking in practical terms, if I'm stopped at a roundabout and someone is approaching the roundabout from my right at (say) 40km/h, I should just move into the roundabout (and get in there first) and then expect the other driver to give way?
The reality of it is that most roundabouts are a bloody nightmare as they (1) are usually installed in such a way as to give greater priority to those fiddling with side streets than continuing on the "main line" and (2) the road rules surrounding roundabouts are simply contrary to the way most people actually drive.
Why would you be stopped at the roundabout, unless there is other traffic to give way to? The visibility limit will determine your approach speed, but most have good sight lines to allow you to make that decision earlier.
(1) That is the exact reason that roundabouts are installed, to smooth the traffic flow for the benefit of side-road users. Or, they are installed where two (or more) "main line" roads cross
(2) I think the way some people drive are contrary to the road rules.
Why would you be stopped at the roundabout, unless there is other traffic to give way to?
Exactly that reason. I've stopped because a line of cars are proceeding through the intersection … there is then a gap to the next car … big enough that "I'm in the roundabout first", but not enough that I'm going to get through unscathed.
This rule based on "who gets there first" is IMHO opinion ridiculous as it suggests there are simple ways to prove who got their first. Should the government have Formula 1 standard timing cameras installed at roundabouts to determine this?
I contend that smoothing traffic flow in and out of side streets, and therefore disturbing traffic flow of the "main line", is precisely why they are a nightmare … only in a government bureaucracy could the concept of imposing on the majority to make improvements for the minority be considered a good thing.
@Seraphin7: Surely this is just basic driving skills.
If you can't enter a roundabout because you won't get through 'unscathed', you don't enter. That is not rocket science.
If you can't determine if another car is in the roundabout or not, when you arrive or are approaching, either wait or hand in your license.
As I previously mentioned, not all roundabouts have a "main line"; they are not at all intersections, only at those where there was a demonstrated volume of traffic on all of the intersecting streets / roads to warrant the roundabout. Roundabouts are expensive to install; governments don't put them in without a reason.
If you can't enter a roundabout because you won't get through 'unscathed', you don't enter. That is not rocket science.
I'm not disputing that. But if you follow the arguments of many here … referencing the comment I've replied to which quotes the NRMA … it suggests that "waiting" at a roundabout shouldn't be done. All well and good until someone T-bones you regardless of what the road rules say.
It's for this reason that I believe (if you have to suffer roundabouts) that giving way to the right is far more practical than give way to those already in the roundabout. It's a more certain rule and is not subject to the ridiculousness of attempting to determine who crossed the threshold first.
I agree that governments don't do things without a reason … but I can assure you there are a double digit number of roundabouts installed in by broad neighbourhood where that reason is solely to pander to vocal minorities in the hope of currying favour at council election time.
Rule #1: assume all other drivers are incompetent and expect the worst from them. Adjust driving habits accordingly.
Rule #2: Assume you are incompetent. Adjust driving habits accordingly.
An indicator signals an intention, yes it's annoying but you can't take the indicator as gospel.
Exactly..
Its like someone looking like they are signalling to turn left into a street, then drive past the street into the servo on other side of intersection…
This is the example I was going to give
Bang on
People who indicate when going straight are stupid. Regardless, you must always give way to cars in the round about. If there was an accident, car A would have been at fault for not giving way.
Isn't the rule to use your left indicator as you leave the roundabout? So even though you are driving straight through, you still need to use your indicator.
Only turn on the indicator when you have past the exit before your intended exit.
By which time, on most roundabouts, you are already out of the intersection!
Based on the drivers around my area, the more time they spend on basic control of the vehicle, and the less time they spend with anything else, the better.
Yes but some people indicate left before the enter the roundabout despite their intention to go straight through. This confuses other drivers who think they are turning left.
I think it depends on the state. I believe it is the law where I learned to drive, however it is not the law in Victoria. In any case it is irrelevant to this situation, as you wouldn’t indicate left an entire exit early. This crash is probably an example of why it’s not required in Victoria.
Yeah this is the case in QLD - I'll give klonky the benefit of the doubt in that they are in a different state
What colour was Car A ?
Car A red, car B silver
Asking for a friend
Guilty as charged
JV strikes again
rookie mistake
people indicting doesnt mean they will 100% make that turn
hell i mean i was taught by dad and even he passed that one onto me
I know that and the wasn't an accident in this case, just wondering from a legal point of view who would be at fault
you have to give way to anyone already on the roundabout, even if they are indicting their intention to leave, and they dont
its not even arguable
there's right and there's moral… and people can change their mind even at the last minute
tough world out there
Paint diagram needed