Recently, a policeman pulled me over for failing to signal a lane change. (He let me go with just a warning, so this is not asking for legal advice.) The lane change in question involved an intersection: one lane went into the intersection, two lanes came out. The lane going in lines up fairly closely with the left outgoing lane. I exited the intersection in the right lane, and the policeman said I needed to signal a lane change in this situation.
As far as I can tell, this situation is pretty much the same as if a lane split with no intersection. I don’t think you have to signal a lane change in that case, although I could be wrong.
So what’s the straight dope? This happened in Oregon, if it makes any difference.
As a general rule, it’s a bad idea to do anything which constitutes or can be interpreted as a lane change in an intersection.
At a minimum, police can call it an “unsafe lane change,” if they want to. I don’t know if Oregon makes this more explicit, but several states do; lane changes even with a signal may be prohibited not only in the intersection but for a given distance (often 100’) before and after it.
The Oregon “Class C (Non-Commercial) Driver Manual” is online here, but I didn’t see your specific case in it. Not to worry, the Oregon “Vehicle Code Book” is here. Per its section 811.375:
“A person commits the offense of unlawful or unsignaled change of lanes if the person is operating a vehicle upon a highway and the person changes lanes by moving to the right or left upon the highway when…The driver fails to give an appropriate signal continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before changing lanes.” (But if you signal during 200-101 feet away then it’s lawful?)
I couldn’t find a specific mention of a(n unlawful) lane change in an intersection, like if the intersection is longer than 100 feet. But if it’s your funeral, then you have the right of way.
I agree, it’s changing lanes in an intersection, which is probably illegal in some fashion in most areas.
We have an intersection like that here too, where it changes from two lanes to three (where the third lane is at the far right). There are vehicles sitting at the cross waiting to turn right in to that new third lane. If people change lanes in the intersection (which is illegal here, but people do it all the time), there could be a collision.
Well, the cop didn’t say anything about changing lanes in an intersection, just about changing without signalling. But I was really more interested in the question of a lane splitting not in an intersection. Do you have to signal which lane you’re going into? There are several places this happens in the area I frequently drive in, and I need to know if I may get stopped for failure to signal.
If it’s simply one lane opening up into two, and there are no intersections around (or parking lots letting out onto the road, etc., that could supply vehicles from other directions) then you should not have to signal which of the new lanes you’re taking; they’re both continuations of the one you’re in, and there’s no way to cut off someone else’s travel path without warning. I don’t signal in such a case.
In most circumstances, it is a request, whether it signals your intent or not. The car in the lane that you want is already there. You’re obligated to cede right of way. You can’t just take it. Therefore it’s a request.