Q&A - Who's At Fault After a Wide Turn Collision?

Q&A Imageso if I take a left turn onto say hastings which has three lanes I will obviously take right of center line or closest lane, other vehichle turning right does same thing and goes wide arc straight toward right of center bypassing the use of slow or center lane and we collide, whos fault?

I actually know what to do which is yield to everything near me when taking a left but legally do I need to sit and wait or can I ram him in driver door whilst accelerating? lol,, whats even more humorous is at same intersection 4 or 5 cars without signalling took right hand turns while I sat in intersection and watched and waited then cursed them,,

the drivers I see on a day to day basis in this city r the most unqualified sloppy clowns ive ever witnessed in my life,,violation after violation, follow the same car for three blocks after he or she turns in front of me and I see 3 tickets or more instantly,,,,

sad

Comments

Who do you think is at fault

Who do you think is at fault when a driver knowingly "ram him in driver door whilst accelerating"?

While everyone has a duty to turn into their own lane, a left turning driver will always be at a disadvantage in an accident as the one who has to yield to everything (that has lawfully entered the intersection). Sure you could sue for insurance coverage and argue that you've had no expectation of somebody being in that spot because such situation is not allowed by the rules, but do you really want the hassle of litigation at your own costs against a corporation that is only limited by the resources of the BC taxpayers?

I too notice drivers turning into the wrong lane on a daily occasion - so much so - that I've come to expect it. I still turn into my own lane, but I've managed to "turn the tables" and I now take delight whenever I see someone make proper turns, or not use their brakes excessively, or have good situational awareness on the roads :)

The Courts

In my reading of case law for this site, I've seen that the court's view is that you as a driver are entitled to expect other road users to follow the rules. That is tempered with the fact that you can't be blind about it. If it is reasonable to anticipate that someone won't follow the rules you need to be prepared for that.

The 'right' lane? Hmmm I'm not sure there is such a thing ...

The right-turner would be in contravention of Section 165(1).  Depending on how he ends up in the lane where you collide, he could be in contravention of Section 151 (a) & (c).

The left-turner would be in contravention of Section 174.  But unless there were mitigating circumstances, they would almost certainly be held at least 75% at fault in that type of collision, it's a fundamental law.

To the best of my belief and knowledge, there isn't any specific law regarding lane use, or the 'correct lane' at the completion of a turn into a 2-Way street, probably because the rules were written before they ever invented multi-lane roadways.  People like to argue with me on that point, but nobody has presented any evidence based on the Motor Vehicle Act & Regulations to the contrary.

The driver who swings wide is

The driver who swings wide is in breach of Section 151 of the Motor Vehicle Act, and probably could be ticketed for failing to signal and an unsafe lane change as well (depending on circumstances).  See section 151:

**************************************************************

Driving on laned roadway

151  A driver who is driving a vehicle on a laned roadway

(a) must not drive it from one lane to another when a broken line only exists between the lanes, unless the driver has ascertained that movement can be made with safety and will in no way affect the travel of another vehicle,

(b) must not drive it from one lane to another if that action necessitates crossing a solid line,

(c) must not drive it from one lane to another without first signalling his or her intention to do so by hand and arm or approved mechanical device in the manner prescribed by sections 171 and 172,

(d) when approaching an intersection intending to turn left must drive the vehicle in the centre lane or in the lane nearest the centre of the roadway on the right hand half of the highway,

(e) when approaching an intersection intending to turn right must drive the vehicle in the lane nearest to the right hand side of the roadway,

(f) must not pass a vehicle on the left if that action necessitates driving on that part of the highway designated for travel in the opposite direction, and

(g) if a traffic control device directs slow moving traffic to use a designated lane, must when driving slowly drive the vehicle in that lane only.

**********************************************************

Just because someone is in breach of a provision of that act doesn't mean that they bear 100% responsibility for a motor vehicle collsion - but at least their unlawful behavior is evdience of some negligence.  You don't get to "ram" someone who is doing something they ought not to do scott free.

That's a presumption, not a fact

The driver who swings wide is in breach of Section 151 of the Motor Vehicle Act, and probably could be ticketed for failing to signal and an unsafe lane change as well (depending on circumstances).  See section 151:

That depends entirely on how they turn.  If it's executed in a 'right angled' manner, where the driver goes deep and then turns into the lane, then he has not executed any kind of lane change and is not in contravention of Section 151.

I make left turns into the second lane quite often like this, perfectly safely and perfectly legally.  But I never change lanes without signalling.

Google Ads