Witnessed a SMIDSY collision this morning

[siadwell]

Shame you looked away at the crucial moment. Agree the Ka was going too fast, so I wouldn't be devoid of sympathy for the crossing driver who may well have looked and seen a clear lane before the Ka came along. I'll go 50:50.

 

[StuartG]

Has the HC changed? Flashing lights used to be a warning (in place of horn) - not a come-on. Ambiguity in signalling causes accidents.

I always treat them as I would a 'clear' from a fellow cyclist. His/her view is helpful but no substitute for re-checking as I pass through a junction. In this case all it signals is that the motorist has seen me and maybe prepared to give way. It doesn't mean he is saying anything about other traffic around him (how many have checked our rear view mirrors let alone our blindspots before flashing?).

Hence it is the oncoming driver that is to blame though undertaking in a separate lane (real or virtual) should, of course, always be done with extreme care, if only to be spared left hooks.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Has the HC changed? Flashing lights used to be a warning (in place of horn) - not a come-on. Ambiguity in signalling causes accidents.
I always treat them as I would a 'clear' from a fellow cyclist. His/her view is helpful but no substitute for re-checking as I pass through a junction. In this case all it signals is that the motorist has seen me and maybe prepared to give way. It doesn't mean he is saying anything about other traffic around him (how many have checked our rear view mirrors let alone our blindspots before flashing?).
Hence it is the oncoming driver that is to blame though undertaking in a separate lane (real or virtual) should, of course, always be done with extreme care, if only to be spared left hooks.

Yes, that's all correct. Unfortunately, it seems quite common for drivers who, having been given priority by someone where they wouldn't otherwise have it, then mentally abdicate responsibility for their own actions. It's wrong of them, but seems sufficiently common to suggest there is some clear psychological cause behind it. We all must have experienced this on our bicycles many time over. I know that after I saw Gaz's collision last year (or was it the year before now?), I have been even more cautious when passing up the inside of a queue, both on the bike and in the car ... but perhaps should be even more so:

View: http://youtu.be/cmfqifs0NZ0

(That was yesterday evening.)

Regarding the meaning of flashing headlights, I agree again, this is a real issue. So much so that it is dangerous now to use them as a visible warning of approach lest they be misunderstood.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Shame you looked away at the crucial moment.

I know, sorry. I'll try to do better in future.

 

[Jezston]

Yikes MHC that's almost identical to Gaz's crash video, but without the crash. You're lucky!

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

Yikes MHC that's almost identical to Gaz's crash video, but without the crash. You're lucky!

To be honest, it wouldn't have happened, for two reasons. First, I was practically stationary by the time I would have reached the car because I really am very cautions in that situation. Second, there's no way I can get anywhere near the kinds of speeds Gaz is capable of.

You can see the tell-tale "read ahead" sign in the video, when a gap started to open up between the small van and the big one in front of it.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

As soon as I wrote that, I thought 'damn, bad grammar - shall I go back and change it?'. I decided I couldn't be bothered as people would understand the point, and no one would think its a 'right' to have to stop when involved with an accident!

I should have guessed...

I wasn't having a go, just seeking clarification.

 

[pshore]

If there's one thing I hate on the road, its panic-lane-switchers who dart unpredictably across lanes when faced with their lane braking. It adds so much danger because there is no chance for anybody to assess the traffic around and react safely.

 

[CopperCyclist]

I wasn't having a go, just seeking clarification.

No probs - was more kicking myself for not changing it, should have guessed someone would ask.

Yep, by definition the 'flasher' would be involved, and as such should have stopped and exchanged details. If anyone got the reg, the common sense approach the police would take here is a visit, and explanation. A second repeated explanation when they don't believe it () and then simply a swop of details all round, with no prosecution for a fail to stop, even thoughts technically happened.

I have no idea, and have often been interested about what insurance companies do after the fact when the flashers details have been passed (if anyone got the reg). Would they actually apportion any blame, or do they just deal with the other cars - anyone got any experience of this?

 

[SquareDaff]

Looking at the video: 100% the right hand turners fault. Just because someone flashed them doesn't mean they shouldn't assess the situation first before turning. I would and if it wasn't safe I wouldn't go -having been flashed or not.

 

[Kiwiavenger]

No probs - was more kicking myself for not changing it, should have guessed someone would ask.

Yep, by definition the 'flasher' would be involved, and as such should have stopped and exchanged details. If anyone got the reg, the common sense approach the police would take here is a visit, and explanation. A second repeated explanation when they don't believe it () and then simply a swop of details all round, with no prosecution for a fail to stop, even thoughts technically happened.

I have no idea, and have often been interested about what insurance companies do after the fact when the flashers details have been passed (if anyone got the reg). Would they actually apportion any blame, or do they just deal with the other cars - anyone got any experience of this?

Generally liability is only apportioned to the parties involved, the flasher can be bought in as a witness if needed but generally wont be issued on.
The judges comments in this case sets a precedent for that.

(ii) Leeson – v – Bevis & Tolchard Ltd (1972) (CA)

A van driver was waiting to emerge from a driveway. A lorry driver stopped and flashed his lights. The van emerged slowly but a motor-cyclist overtook the lorry and collided with the van.

Held:

A motorist who flashes his lights, or gives some other signal, to another motorist who is seeking to execute a manoeuvre, is merely saying, "I shall wait here until you have finished"; he is not saying, "It is safe to proceed." The van and motor-cycle were equally to blame. (Clarke v Winchurch [1969] 1 WLR 69 distinguished).


References: [1972] RTR 373;

 

[Tynan]

Quite right too

All on the driver making the manoeuvre, the driver passing on the left should use due care and attention etc etc but at the end of the day it's the person turning's fault

Anyone using a signal from another driver as an excuse for not driving properly is an idiot, although of course there's plenty of those about

 

[Norm]

Looking at the video: 100% the right hand turners fault. Just because someone flashed them doesn't mean they shouldn't assess the situation first before turning. I would and if it wasn't safe I wouldn't go -having been flashed or not.

I'm not sure about that. When the right-turner started moving, the Ka was not in that lane (if indeed it is even a separate lane). The Ka switched across very late and very quickly and almost straight into the side of the other car.

I'm also not convinced that, at that point, the road is a two-lane road. There are no white lines in the lane and the bus-stop would take up the whole of lane 1.

IMO, the Ka swerved left to pass on the left of queuing traffic which is in the same lane that she is in, she gets the majority of my blame.

 

[400bhp]

I'm also not convinced that, at that point, the road is a two-lane road.

It's one of those roads that is wide enough for 2 vehicles side by side. The traffic light on the roads have lane markings for 2 lanes. Here

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

I'm also not convinced that, at that point, the road is a two-lane road. There are no white lines in the lane and the bus-stop would take up the whole of lane 1.

It is definitely a 2 lane road and is always treated as such. Interestingly, the wide angle lens on the Google Street Level camera makes it look a lot narrower than it is.