Here’s the scenario, involving car A and car B. The weather is sunny and warm, and at the time it took place the sun is not directly in the face of the drivers. Both A and B are exiting a parking lot by attempting to turn right (eastbound) on to a surface street which has three lanes going in each direction and is divided by a center island with occasional breaks in the island to allow for a left turn. At this location there is such a break in the island so that someone can turn left from the westbound traffic into the parking lot, but it is not possible to turn left out of the parking lot. This exit lane is around 28 feet wide per google maps, and surrounded on both sides by short raised concrete barriers.
Car A is stoped at the end of the lane waiting to turn right, and in this case is waiting several seconds for the oncoming traffic to clear. During this time, Car B maneuvers into the space to the right of Car A, between Car A and the concrete barrier on the right side of this exit lane. Once there is no oncoming eastbound traffic, Car A pulls out, striking the front left side of Car B (around the left headlight) with the R mid passenger side of Car A (center impact between the front and rear passenger door). Both eventually manage to safely pull back into the parking lot at a different entrance several yards down the road and exchange insurance information.
Was there a full lane for car B to drive in? In other words, were there two lanes turning right? If not, then car B was probably driving on the “shoulder,” (such as it is), and hence, is mostly, if not 100% at fault.
And, even if the law says they were not to blame, doing that is a dick move.
The only marking on this exit lane is a broad white line on the right half with STOP painted in white behind the line, set back a few yards from the spot where the parking lot exit lane and the main street intersect. No lane markers are present on the lane in the parking lot. The impact itself occurred a few feet past that line, while Car B was still fully in the parking lot and the front left end of Car A had already entered the rightmost lane of the main street.
ETA: Let’s see if this works. Here’s the location on google maps. The impact occurred right around where the white SUV / van is leaving the parking lot in this image.
That didn’t quite work like I was hoping. If you click on the map square on the bottom left to bring up the satellite view, you can see the area in question. The white van isn’t on this image like it was in the one I was trying to link to, but the area is still clearly visible.
Okay, there are a lot of factors here, and part is going to depend on the state in question. But, at a glance, there are a couple of things going on.
One, car A is generally expected to be to the far right when attempting to turn right. If they were more centered, an adjuster could try to claim additional shared responsibility. But, again, looking at the intersection, there is no opening to turn left at the intersection, and there is only one right turn lane. At which point, @beowulff is correct, car B is basically attempting to pass on the right/shoulder to turn.
Buuuuut… car A is actively in motion, and apparently either unaware of car B, or taking insufficient caution to make sure they clear car B in the turn. A way to look at it is if there had been a pedestrian standing their and had been struck by car A, it would have likely been predominantly responsibility.
If I had to go back and forth as an adjuster, I’d probably try for 60/40 or 70/30 for car B being majority responsible. I might have to settle for 50/50, rather than going to court if there is no police report or impartial witness.
Because I’m going to bet money that in this hypothetical, car B is going to claim they were there first, and car A came around the left and tried to pass. At least, based on my cynicism.
From the image I think it’s like beowulff said. That’s not a double turn lane or even a double lane. Car B should not have driven along side car A. There was no lane there.
The driver for Car B in fact had a different claim. They stated that Car A “was sitting there for several minutes and not moving”, and so they tried to go around on the right side. Clearly Car B wouldn’t be in a position to judge whether or not there was any oncoming traffic. They may make a different claim at a later date, but in the heat of the moment that was their claim.
ETA: By now it’s clear I was driving Car A. This area is fairly busy mid afternoon, and there’s no way there would be only two cars waiting to turn had I been sitting there for several minutes. Admittedly I could have been a little further to the right in the lane.
I should stop ranting. I have a fear (irrational or not) that I will die in a car wreck, and incidents like these don’t help. There’s too many idiot drivers out there, and it seems like there’s nothing that can be done about that. I’ll go read some other threads that are less stressful.
ETA: I’ve been pondering the question about a pedestrian, because that would indeed have been a very different story. It wouldn’t make sense for a pedestrian who isn’t impaired to be in that spot. If they were actively crossing they would have to either go behind my car, in which case the whole thing is moot, or in front of me, in which case I would have seen them when I turned my head to the right to start my turn. But there would have been no reason for them to be in my blind spot / the 4:30 position relative to my car, unless they were walking up to my car to knock on the window or some such thing.
The turn signal is a important. I can’t tell from the aerial view - is there any indication that says “right turn only?” If so (and even if there isn’t), a reasonable driver would know that they were cutting you off by passing on the right. I would be interested to hear how it all shakes out,
There’s no right turn only sign or marker on the pavement, but there really is no way of turning left unless you drive over the traffic island separating the east and westbound lanes, go the wrong way (westbound in the eastbound lanes), or drive into the lane meant for westbound drivers to turn left into the parking lot and then make a sharp u-turn.
I do not want to increase your stress, which is why I tried to use that example, it’s one we adjusters used to try to take us out of the argument and focus on what happened.
The statement I quoted though is admission (to an adjuster) of partial guilt, as you were not aware of the other party being present, but as I said, their effort to pass on the right/shoulder is IMHO a proximate cause.
Or in another words, you should have been more careful, but they were driving in a very unsafe manner, thus if I were your adjuster, in line with the facts you shared, I’d be saying around 70/30, which in the states I adjusted, would result in a ‘Not-at-Fault’ ruling.
I don’t want to event guess what they’ve changed their story too, and again, zero surprise that they’re trying to shift as much blame as possible.
Best of luck, and agreed, don’t let it make you crazy!
Am I missing something? Because the satellite view of that intersection clearly shows a “right turn only” arrow below the STOP line on that street. It’s about as clear as day that it’s one lane only and that one lane is only allowed to turn right.
And even if you were sitting there for minutes at a time that doesn’t matter because you, being at the head of the line as it were, are the only one with a clear view of oncoming traffic and nobody gets to go until you do. Now people behind you can get impatient at you being unreasonably slow (like today, when I saw a woman refuse to turn right on a red light in spite of about four miles of no cars coming down the street she was turning into and the people behind her were visibly pissed off that she insisted on waiting for the light to turn green) but they don’t get to decide when YOU feel it’s safe to proceed. Car B is fulla shit.
Are you sure that is an arrow and not a smear of dirt? I really can’t tell. My first thought is that it was an arrow but on second thought I was less sure because it sure looks like the dirt on the road a bit further back.
That arrow was there at one time in the past, but now is gone just due to lack of maintenance of the parking lot. But either way, I would expect that someone wanting to get around me in such a manner would have at least honked to demonstrate their displeasure. In this case there was no honking involved. Maybe their horn was broken from a previous accident. It wouldn’t surprise me.
It used to be an arrow, but has gradually faded out of existence due to lack of repainting over the years.
This is 100% on car B, and I don’t want to victim blame, but… were you really sitting there for several minutes? If so, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to think that you were broken down or something. It’s still, as I said, 100% on car B if they’re going to scoot around you to do it safely and not, you know, hit you. I’m just trying to understand their perspective.
Absolutely a dick move by car B. As others have said, it’s very clear from the aerial view that there is only one lane available at that junction. So they could not successfully (change their) claim that they thought you might be going straight or turning left, or even that they thought you might turn right into the left-most lane (leaving them space to turn right into the rightmost lane). Especially as you had your right turn signal on. And, again as others have said, even then, what would they hope to gain by that, given in their position they could not see if it was safe to emerge anyway? That is only a reasonable manoeuvre when there are 2 or more clearly marked lanes, and a light. If I were the driver of car A in this situation, I would be seriously annoyed.
Having said all that - unfortunately, despite car B pulling a dick move, car A still bears responsibility for checking the way is clear for their manoeuvre. A lawyer for car B may even try to claim no fault on their part, since they were stationary and car A was moving. I have no idea if that could hold up, hopefully not. I’m not an insurance adjuster, but 70% car B at fault seems fair to me.
Collisions are always a pain to deal with, no matter who is fault. At least no flesh was injured in this one. Best of luck to you.