Very sorry for you Blake and good luck with it all

_________________
Stop Licking the Dog...I Don't Care Who Started It

Unfortunately if you run into the back of them, it's always classed as your fault. They say you should be travelling at a safe speed and braking distance if an emergency arise. Good luck with it Blake, especially if the other party take partial responsibility.
If he turned in front of you, forget what I said. I was thinking, you were travelling in the same direction.

Mate I'm sorry but youre simply wrong. It is obvious you are wrong and any reasonable person would see that lanes are there for a reason and no one bar emergency vehicles has priority over you when entering a lane you are traveling in. If what you saying was right then the whole system of multi lane roads would have been ineffective as everyone would have been cutting each other and anyone could ran you off the road and be in the right as they were 5 cm ahead of you but in the next lane.

I was sure you were wrong, but just in case I had a look in the NSW RTA Road Users Hanbook - it thinks you are wrong as well. I quote "Before you change lanes give your signal in plenty of time, check your mirrors and look over your shoulder for other vehicles. You must give way to vehicles in that lane" (Lane Markings pg. 72).

A case of what Dave Richards writing for UK's Classic and Sports Car refered to as "technical forums: 21st century bar room gossip" -
Why do otherwise responsible people give incorrect advice on serious topics with no regard to any damage it might cause the other party?

Mate, you've lost me. I wasn't talking about multi lanes and your Road Users Book is there as a guide. In the real world if you run into the back of another vehicle, in the eye's of the law, your at fault. That's why in multi car pile ups the last vehicle is responsible for the damage. I have had some experience over a number of years in this area. The police can't always determin the fact's that occurred, because a majority of the time there are no witnesses to the accident and the Police weren't there. Sorry to say if you hit another vehicle you must take some responsibily no matter how small. Take your Road User's Handbook to the Police, Insurance company and quote it in Court. Sorry to say, Blake I wasn't trying to quote from a bar room only past experience. I really hope everything works out for you. I could be out of date, as I haven't even dented a vehicle in nearly 20 years and I still marvel at the high standard of driving ability from young drivers.

Brakes are there for a reason and at all times you must be prepared to take evasive action in emergency situations. Notice if a child or dog runs in front of you, 9 times out of 10 your booked for neg. driving ? Stick the Road Users Handbook. I' m not trying to blame Blake in any way shape or form, good luck mate.

Unfortunately that is not the document from which we are governed. I agree with FIGJAM, it is a guide only. The only true law is the Motor Traffic act NSW. That is the one to front up to court with.

And whilst I agree with the paragraph you quote, where does it say the consequences if you are in an accident?
The fact is, the lane changer must ensure it is safe to do so AND the guy following must maintain a safe distance from other vehicles. But all of this is irrelevent I thought because this guy turned across in front of Blake, not doing a lane change?
KB

You hit it on the head when you said they changed lanes. I was badgered in my younger navy years and learning to drive a Bedford fire tender. Bottom line is where blake was and where the "offending car" was, Blake is in the clear. The driver on his left, irrespective of if there are lines or not, must ensure it is safe to merge or change lanes with the give way to the right rule. If Blake was not past the B-pillar, the other driver is at fault.

My 2 bobs worth - BTW Blake - hope all goes well. Shannons are probably the best about at the moment. I just flicked AAMI as they are raising my insurance on my car due to my house getting burgled 12 months ago - go figure that one out!! I dont think "Duane" at AAMI liked it when I told him to go forth and procreate...

Hooroo

Rob Forsyth
Miniot!!

_________________
Rob Forsyth
Miniot!!

"Motor Traffic Act NSW"? Eh? Never heard of this particular act.

Now I wanted to stress that such a general statement about "Unfortunately if you run into the back of them, it's always classed as your fault" - is quite simply bull. As you said "in the real world" this statement becomes dubious if the other party is reversing, if they are manuevering (parking for example), if they are not illuminated in poor visibility conditions and indeed if they enter your lane in an unsafe manner.

In "the real world" a magistrate will consider the case and even if they are no witnesses as you said and the police arent there they could record immediate statements (that tend to be most truthful) the direction and intensity of the tyre marks on the road after he locked the brakes indicating the direction of travel in the lane as well as the angle of impact with the other vehicle (indicating the entry of the other vehicle into the lane) as well as the character and driving record of the parties involved etc - and hey presto its not as simple as "you hit their tail its your fault". And what particular law is that anyway - where are you quoting from?

How about an example: A two lane road with an 80kph limit - Car A is in the left lane traveling at 60kph, car B is overtaking in the right lane at 80kph. Suddenly and without warning as car B is 5 metres behind Car A, car A swerves right infront of B. At 80kph these 5 metres will be covered in under a quarter of a second - so driver B will never even react. Now according to your theory driver B is automaticaly in the wrong even though they followed the speed limit and the law by staying in the centre of their lane and maintaining a safe distance from the car infront of them in the same lane - were they expected to maintain a safe distance from car A in the different lane too?

I can give you 10 other examples in 20 other situations but true its all realy irrelevant as the travel in this case was in different directions.

This is the last time I'll comment on this, but are we talking about hitting the side of the car or the left rear? If you locked up the brakes and slid into the rear part of his car on the left side, it seems to me your travelling a little fast in a car your not familar with. The truth is, if you hit the rear of another car more than likely your classed as at fault. If you hit the side of the other car, thats a different story. I shouldn't have bothered to comment as i wasn't there, It's not rocket science. I'll make sure from now on I post exactly what people want to hear. HAS ANYONE HEARD OF PEREPHERAL VISION AND THE DREADED BLINDSPOT OR DEFENSIVE DRIVING, YOUR OBVIOUSLY NOT MOTORBIKE RIDERS.

Your being a ****. No wonder your mini was jacked, I would have done it too. Yeah and the magistrate would also consider you've had the car for under 24 hours and you should have been driving the unfamilar car more defensively.

[/quote]
THIS A MINI FORUM WHY WOULD WE BE HAVE A CRY FIGJAM

Yes, unfortunately that's the crux of the problem.

Let's just hope Blake gets it sorted to his benefit and leave it at that.
Have a great day everyone.
KB

THIS A MINI FORUM WHY WOULD WE BE HAVE A CRY FIGJAM [/quote]Thanks for that mate, learn to speak english or talk with your LEB mates.

Figjam dont compare me to any of them **** true aussie here thats why i aint havin a cry like a whinging pom. not your car or your accident so build a bridge. tool.

No I mean (and that is the crux of tre problem you two speaking out of your less attractive parts) there is no such act
IT DOESNT EXIST

Traffic law in NSW used to be based on the ancient Traffic Act 1909 and later ammendments. But from a few years back NSW just like the rest of Australia adopted the Australian Road Rulles - have you heard of that scheme? They had TV commercials running for awhile back then? Well here it is.

Now in NSW the traffic law is contained in two acts
Road Transport (General) Act and Road Transport (Traffic Management) Act and their regulations. Are these the acts you're refering to? But everything relating to right of way etc is simply adopted from the Australian Road Rules (have a look at is sometime maybe?).

Oh and I understand your desire to support your friend in his abbusive histeria (he seems to need two posts each time to convey his anger) but notice that uniike figjam I dont start swearing and getting off my nut because of a mini forum post. And I wasnt abusive either.

And yea figjam my car was jacked precisely because I'm a **** ... what a smart comment - not childish at all.