Two lane road, one lane in each direction. Two cars are heading towards each other, in opposite directions (in their respective lanes). Car A has enough time and space to make a left turn (into a side street or driveway) in front of Car B, and begins to do this. Car B, expecting that Car A will be out of their lane by the time they arrive at that point, keeps going (either not slowing down at all or not slowing down enough). Then Car A stops suddenly while still in Car B’s lane (they saw children in the road or driveway they were turning into). Car B is unable to stop in time, and hits the back passenger side bumper of Car A’s car. Who has the right-of-way in this situation?
On the one hand, Car B is traveling straight and Car A turned into their way. While Car A had legitimate reason for stopping in middle of the road, possibly the onus is on them to make sure they can complete the turn before turning into Car B’s path. On the other hand, Car A was in the area where the collision happened first, and they had legitimate right to be there based on the assumption that they could safely complete the turn, and perhaps Car B is responsible to make sure that they don’t hit Car A in the event that they end up stopping.
My understanding has always been that this is the case: if you are making a left turn, it is incumbent on you to make certain that your path is clear, and that you can safely complete the turn (and clear the lane) before beginning it. Cars which are proceeding normally on the roadway (Car B, in this case) pretty much always have the right of way.
If the issue which caused Car A to stop was legitimately not there when Car A began the turn (e.g., a child suddenly ran into the driveway), the driver of Car A might get a little leniency from the police officer who starts writing tickets, but if it’s a question of “I just didn’t see it until after I started turning,” it’d definitely be Car A’s fault.
In many states, nobody “has” it, ever. Depends on how the law is written, and some states use the term inconsistently.
A is expected to yield the right of way to B and only turn when it is safe to do so. But B is expected to slow down or stop if the road isn’t clear, even it’s blocked by someone doing something wrong.
In speaking to the driver’s wife last night (I don’t think she was in the car, but she seems to have taken the lead in negotiating) she claimed that pedestrians entered the roadway after her husband began his turn.
But FWIW, this is about who insurance will find liable and not about whether the police will give someone a ticket.
Car A did have enough time to make the left turn, and did not assume the other car would slow down for him. However Car A then saw pedestrians in his path and was forced to stop instead of completing the turn.
Essentially both Car A and Car B were operating under the assumption that Car A would be out of the road before Car B reached Point X. Therefore Car A elected to make the turn and Car B did not slow down soon enough. But when Car A was forced to stop unexpectedly, then Car B had to slow down in a real hurry and was not fully successful.
Yeah, I was always taught that you had the responsibility to avoid any accident you could, even if you weren’t the one who made the mistake that set up the conditions for the accident. I had something like this happen to me recently-a guy was about to make a left turn in front of me as I was coming up to an intersection. He hesitated at first, which made me think he knew he didn’t have enough time to clear the intersection, but then he went for it. I had to slam on the brakes, and came within a few feet of T-boning him. It was all his fault for making the turn too late, but it ended up being on me to avoid the actual accident, both because he was too stupid to be relied on, and there wasn’t much he could do at that point that would have made a difference. Even if he’d sped up in his turn, I’d have hit him if I hadn’t hit the brakes.
If the driver was aware that there were pedestrians there, they should have considered the possibility that the pedestrians would enter the roadway, and added that to their calculations concerning the feasibility of making their turn safely. Every driver should always assume the pedestrians will do the stupidest thing possible at any given moment, and judge accordingly. If the pedestrians don’t start to cross the side road, all you do is waste a few seconds waiting for the oncoming car to pass. But if they do start to cross, you end up in an accident.
The driver should have waited.
There might be an exception if the pedestrians were literally hidden from sight behind a bush or something, but if they were plainly visible, the driver is at fault.
Car B clearly saw and comprehended an obstacle in their path and elected not to slow down until it was too late to avoid a collision. I’m with Horatius on this one:
If a pedestrian is standing in the highway on a clear sunny day and you see him 200 yards ahead of you, you are not allowed to mow him down just because he’s not allowed to be standing there, or because you assume he’ll get out of the way before you reach him. If you do run him down under these circumstances, you’ll go to jail for manslaughter. Same goes for a car that’s blocking your lane. If you have enough time/space to safely stop or avoid, and you consciously elect not to, you’re responsible for the consequences.
I agree Driver A is at fault. The pedestrian probably had right of way to cross, since Driver B had right of way through the intersection. Perhaps driver B should have stopped, but it might have been impossible depending on when Driver A stopped. I hit someone pulling out of a parking lot without looking, and I was definitely not held liable, and did not get a ticket.
Depending on the state, who the insurance company finds to blame isn’t probably going to matter much.
Yes, which is why I also mentioned you have the responsibility to avoid an accident if you’re able to. We’d need to have a lot more information about how fast everyone was going to really figure that out, though. Defensive Driving teaches you to assume everyone else will make huge mistakes, and plan accordingly. Car A did not do this.
But, regardless of what Car B might or might not have been able to do, there’s no question in my mind that Car A should have waited, so they bear most of the responsibility, even if it’s not 100% their fault. Car A should just suck it up, and be glad that no one is dead.
Not exactly the same thing, but I always heard that if you have a car ahead of you and it stops suddenly and unexpectedly, you have responsibility to be aware of the situation and stop in time, or you’re at least partially at fault, no matter the reason why the driver in front stopped.
An actual scenario that’s much closer to the OP’s I that I witnessed, was when I was in a vehicle that my (now former) brother-in-law was driving. He tried to beat an oncoming car to make a left turn at an intersection, misjudged it, and the oncoming car hit him (just a fender-bender–they tried to stop in time, but didn’t quite make it. Nobody was hurt).
The police were called. In my opinion (kept to myself) my BIL acted recklessly and was totally at fault. To make matters worse for BIL, he had recently had a beer or two and blew non-zero on a breathalyzer. Not over the legal limit, but I understand that any amount over zero when an accident is involved can make things much worse legally.
However, my BIL was calm and respectful to the officer, while the occupants of the other vehicle were very belligerent, loudly swearing and demanding that the police do something about it. Which the cop did-- he gave the oncoming vehicle a ticket for failure to stop in time, and my lucky bastard former BIL got off scott-free.
ETA: I just remembered another time where I was the driver-- I was making a left turn on a yellow light at an intersection, with a panel van also turning left in front of me that blocked my view of oncoming traffic. When the van cleared the turn, I suddenly saw a car coming through the intersection that barely missed clipping the back of the van, and ran into me, crumpling my grill. Happened to be a guy from my high school class. Not a fun reunion. He also got a ticket for failure to stop at a yellow, and I was not held liable for anything.
OP indicated that driver B consciously elected not to reduce speed on the (dangerous) assumption that Driver A would get out of the way. It sounds like when B first saw A, B still had ample opportunity to safely stop; maybe @SpacemanSpiff_II can clarify this?
That’s a fair question for the crash that actually occurred. But the purely hypothetical scenario in the OP posits that B could have slowed but chose not to, and asks who is responsible for the resulting crash.
First of all, our newbie’s handle is crying out for an appropriate avatar!
WI a bush or trash can or other obstacle blocked A’s view, of say a little kid running out into the street? Must he be held liable for ALL contingencies, no matter how improbable? I once asked a cop (after ye olde backing out with blocked vision preventing me from seeing the car coming from the given direction which hit me) what the hey do you do to avoid ALL possible liability & scenarios, when there are two huge honking SUVs parked next to you (with tinted windows to boot!), meaning you are basically playing Russian Roulette when you back out. She was VERY noncommittal & equivocating, other than to quote rule and verse to say that I would still be held liable. [Tho in my case it was a huge oak tree and not another vehicle]
[My personal solution from that point onwards has been to NEVER park where I am forced to back out blind like that, even if I have to park twice as far away]
Actually this is a crash which actually occurred, and the basis for my description is that my daughter was the driver of Car B and this is what she told me.
[She initially called me up and told me she hit “the back” of someone’s car, and I assumed she meant she rear-ended them which would mean she’s at fault, and I was very busy with work stuff so I just told her it was her fault and she should give her info to the other driver and let them take it from there. But it subsequently turned out that she hit “the back” because they had turned into her path and all of Car A was out of her way besides the rear passenger side by the time of the collision. This seems more ambiguous, so I decided I would put in my own claim (it’s my car) against their insurance as well, and was wondering how the whole thing would turn out.]
Well, this is why defensive driving should be the default. There’s lots of reasons why a car turning left in front of you might not make the turn - as with this case, some pedestrians getting in the way. But, they might also hit a pothole, or blow a tire, or have sudden engine or transmission problems. I had the latter happen to me one time while trying to turn left, I made the turn because I had a lot of room, but it was definitely trickier than normal.
Basically, everyone here screwed up in some way, but I think Car A made the bigger screw up. Call it 66-33%, with 1% attributed to the random violence of the universe.