road_rascal
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 172
- Reaction score
- 104
- Location
- Twin Cities, MN
- Country
- United States
- Dash Cam
- Many
Captured on my wife's dashcam:
Not sure that is correct, the turning car did have reason to move left first in order to make the sharp turn. I think it is more the fault of the following car which decided to overtake and had responsibility to make sure that the overtake was safe. The turning car should of checked their mirrors, but the overtaking car unexpectedly went into their blind spot at the time the mirrors would have been checked, so I think most of the legal fault is with the overtaking car, certainly the following driver was lacking common sense!I would assume you would have to keep right to turn right into your driveway like that, doing from a lane leading up to a intersection like that you better use your mirrors and wits.
Did the missus share footage / information's ?
In my book the turning car are to blame, though it is also clearly indicating so the other car just looking for problems or at the least wasent been driving by a intelligent person.
The turning car is 100% at fault. In every jurisdiction I'm familiar with turns must be executed from the lane nearest the direction you're turning unless there are specific lane markings indicating otherwise.Not sure that is correct, the turning car did have reason to move left first in order to make the sharp turn....
That may well be the case under the local law, it would not be the case here. Of course they should be driving according to their local law and not the law of other countries.The turning car is 100% at fault. In every jurisdiction I'm familiar with turns must be executed from the lane nearest the direction you're turning unless there are specific lane markings indicating otherwise.
In this case, because it appears the turning car may have been attempting to enter the driveway and it was a sharp turn, it was the turning cars responsibility to slow enough to make the turn instead of 'swinging wide to make it easier. At a minimum I see them being cited for improper lane usage. Nothing more than laziness on the turning drivers part.
'Common sense' does not make an otherwise illegal action legal. If the turning car had been using the proper lane nothing would have transpired....Common sense still applies though
The turning car is 100% at fault. In every jurisdiction I'm familiar with turns must be executed from the lane nearest the direction you're turning unless there are specific lane markings indicating otherwise.
In this case, because it appears the turning car may have been attempting to enter the driveway and it was a sharp turn, it was the turning cars responsibility to slow enough to make the turn instead of 'swinging wide to make it easier. At a minimum I see them being cited for improper lane usage. Nothing more than laziness on the turning drivers part.
CR-V. Big shocker. They're the worst.
I think with the global warming problems, these "crazy" energy wasting designs should be banned!At least it is CR-V, cuz the C-HR are designed by a Dane called Stephan Rasmussen and it is in itself crazy so no need for drivers to act negative on it.
The relationship between the Prius and the hybrid C-HR runs deep. Both use the new GA-C platform which is part of Toyota’s New Global Architecture, and both share an identical hybrid drivetrain. There isn’t even a massive amount of difference in the dimensions of the two cars. Prius is marginally longer and wider, C-HR a bit taller. The Prius is by far the more slippery though. It has a drag coefficient of 0.24 to the C-HR’s 0.33; blame those aforementioned shoulder pads.