Car Accident, Is The P Plater Responsible?

Lbeefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 09:58
Last edited 23/10/2018 - 10:56 by 1 other user

MSPaint as requested
https://imgur.com/gs3U2Kz

Just want to share an incident I witnessed. Should the P plater have stopped to let car into the lane?

On a 70km/hr road a P plater cut from left lane to middle lane because of stopped bus. Once successfully changed to middle lane, the P plater continued to slow down to near stop, to let a car in front into the middle lane.

At this point I hear a loud crash and car behind and saw a semi-trailer smashed into a Ute with forces enough to push the Ute to the side curb.

I caught up to the P plater and told her she should not have stopped and let the car into the lane. The P plater oblivious to the incident and believe she is not at fault which I kind of agree and also disagree.

My opinion, the fault is the semi-trailer because the semi-trailer should have kept a safe distance. If I understand correctly it is always the car behind involved in the accident is at fault, but I feel the P plater should not have stopped to let the car in, especially on a 70km/hr road. All these could have been avoided if the P plater just keep on rolling forward.

I will create a poll, everyone loves poll.

Poll Options

  • 30
    Yes, P plater is the cause of the accident.
  • 308
    No, P plater is not the cause of the accident.
  • 18
    Some where in between Yes and No.
Automotive

Comments

  • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 10:01
    +43

    The P plater oblivious to the incident and believe she is not at fault

    She is right. The truck driver failed to keep a safe distance from the vehicle in front.

    • WhyAmICommenting on 26/10/2018 - 23:07

      Lesson learnt hopefully, and no serious injuries, also hopefully.

      If the P plater slammed their brakes to let the car in then that is slightly different IMO (but not legally different).

      Edit: this is old but in the top 5

    • jorf on 27/10/2018 - 09:50
      +2

      Yes, however this also demonstrates why you should follow to road rules by not randomly giving way to others when there is no requirement to do so.

      If the P plater had to stop in flowing traffic to let another car in, they should not have given way in the first place. If you have right of way, take it.

      • whooah1979 on 27/10/2018 - 11:26
        -2

        you should follow to road rules
        If you have right of way, take it.

        There is no such definition as right of way in the nsw road rule.

  • pyramid on 23/10/2018 - 10:03
    +25

    MS Paint diagram is needed…
    Also you created account 30 mins back and straight on car accident query, are you P plater?

    • beefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 10:06

      Nope, I am not the P plater. So even if everyone blames the P plater I will be sound a sleep tonight knowing I was not in anyway involved.

      The accident is stright foward second and third paragraph explain it all..

    • beefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 10:29

      Is there any upload services in Ozbargin?

      • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 14:40
        +41

        Let's see. You've got a few different colours in there, a poorly drawn fireball, and three of the vehicles are represented by oblongs while two are simply letters for no apparent reason; that's all excellent in keeping with the theme.

        Some areas for improvement: Too many straight lines and text boxes, free hand or a mixture is preferred. Some misproportioned stick figures would've been nice, bonus points for facial expressions and cultural stereotypes (eg the ute needs a southern cross or longhorn sticker at minimum).

        I'm going to give it a 7/10.

        • pyramid on 23/10/2018 - 15:41
          +3

          free hand is the way to go for accident related pics..

        • MessyG on 25/10/2018 - 19:55
          +2

          I agree, so not enough freehand.

        • BanannaMan on 27/10/2018 - 22:00

          perfect score 5/7

    • rentonc on 26/10/2018 - 00:15
      +2

      MS Paint is ok, but try http://accidentsketch.com

  • [Deactivated] on 23/10/2018 - 10:03
    +39

    MS paint or it didn't happen.

    • waterbottled on 23/10/2018 - 10:12
      +6

      funny joke, here's an upvote.

      • [Deactivated] on 23/10/2018 - 10:17
        +16

        Keep em coming. Rent is due end of the week.

  • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 10:06
    +7

    I strongly feel

    Having the feeling that someone is at fault doesn’t make so. Motorists are required to keep a safe distance. A driver that hits another vehicle from the rear because they failed to keep a safe distance is always at fault.

    • beefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 10:07
      -8

      Well, I dont want to give my position too much.

      • smartazz104 on 25/10/2018 - 21:02
        +2

        You hit the ute didn't you…

    • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 10:19
      +1

      It depends - this is true, except for if someone changes lanes in front of you without giving you enough space. OP didn't say the P-plater did this, so I don't think the P-plater has any blame here, but just something to consider I guess.

      (Especially in front of large vehicles like semis that need a longer distance to slow down/stop.)

      • Bargain80 on 26/10/2018 - 09:48

        but OP didn't mention how hard the P plater hit the brake.
        And how much the distance with the car in front.
        what the current speed at that time.
        If the P Plater was travelling at 70 and suddenly brake hard just to let car in front to merge then P Plater has a role to cause the accident as well.

        • HighAndDry on 26/10/2018 - 10:03

          If the P Plater was travelling at 70 and suddenly brake hard just to let car in front to merge then P Plater has a role to cause the accident as well.

          Yes, that's true, but I assume OP included all relevant information so for any specifics not volunteered, I'm going to assume it was normal/standard. If that assumption is wrong, then yeah my conclusions would also be wrong.

  • rompastompa on 23/10/2018 - 10:11
    +7

    Always be aware of your surroundings. Obviously, it's hard to know the circumstance without seeing the incident (as above, MS Paint paints more of a picture)

    Semi-trailers can not brake as fast as cars. Sometimes, being 'courteous' and letting someone in creates confusion.

    It's likely that it's the semi's fault for not keeping a safe distance in terms of insurance fault, but the P Plater may have created the incident (not at fault).

    • Flying Ace on 25/10/2018 - 07:44
      +5

      I agree, whilst the law states you must keep a safe distance, you must also be aware of what’s going on around you. Use your mirrors and anticipate what is going on behind you too.

      Too many people totally ignore the rear view mirror and focus solely on what’s ahead of them.

      • whooah1979 on 25/10/2018 - 09:03
        -2

        Too many people totally ignore the rear view mirror

        Using rear view mirror is optional in nsw. It’s not a legal requirement to have one that works.

        • ChickenTalon on 25/10/2018 - 09:50
          +1

          Incorrect.

          It is a legal requirement by way of the Australian Vehicle Standards. See section 34; Cars are required to have two rear view mirrors, one on the right-hand side of the car, and another mounted inside or on the left-hand side of the car.

          Vehicles are required to meet these standards. If you drive a vehicle that does not meet the standards then you can be fined. You probably also void any insurance, very risky.

          • anzacpaul on 25/10/2018 - 10:39
            +1

            @ChickenTalon: I think what whooah meant was you don't need an internal rear view mirror by law, as you stated if you have 2 side mirrors you don't need an rear view inside the vehicle.

          • pegaxs on 25/10/2018 - 10:54
            +1

            @ChickenTalon:

            Using rear view mirror is optional

            You can have 20 rear vision mirrors and 10 rear facing cameras, but it’s up to the user to actually utilise them. I don’t think there is any regulation or fine for simply not “using” (as opposed to “not having”)

      • Ughhh on 25/10/2018 - 09:46

        That's the problem, unless it's written specifically in the books, people won't use it, people won't use their brains-unless the books say you need to use your brains.

    • dannyboi on 25/10/2018 - 11:07

      Although not what happened here, what if the car, in front of the P-Plater, had attempted to merge/cut-off the P-Plater? What would the P-Plater do in that scenario?

  • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 10:14
    +13

    I caught up to the P plater and told her she should not have stopped and let the car into the lane.

    Don't give advice if you're wrong about that advice. UNLESS the P-plater didn't leave enough room between themselves and the ute or semi in changing lanes, they don't share any of the blame.

    Your post doesn't really say where the ute or semi was in all of this.

    • elgrande on 23/10/2018 - 10:22
      +2

      Yes.. surprised you didnt try and perform a citizens arrest.

      Perhaps you caused the accident by spending too much time rubber necking at the P plater.

    • jjjaar on 23/10/2018 - 10:24
      -2

      Probably the opposite carriageway going in the other direction, but the P Plater is still at fault.

    • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 10:26

      I hear a loud crash 7 car behind and saw a semi-trailer smashed into a Ute

    • beefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 10:28

      Yeh, I think you are right, I should have mind my own business, but feel sorry for the Ute driver, looks like a bad crash.

      • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 10:38

        That's fine and I wouldn't want to be rear-ended by a semi either - it's just that especially P-platers who might not be as familiar with the road rules to begin with and probably younger and more impressionable, the impact of bad advice might be bigger than it'd be on someone else.

        While we weren't there and so in this specific case your view might even have some validity - generally it's almost always a better idea to let in cars who're trying to merge, or who might need to merge, than not. (again, unless you need to brake suddenly or unsafely to do so in situations where the other car isn't, say, veering into you and it's not necessary, etc).

    • Name on 27/10/2018 - 07:20

      One of my mates is great at this. Always giving unwanted advice to people that is often incorrect.

      If it wasn't for my kid being good friends with his kids I'd have nothing to do with him.

  • BuyoTheCat on 23/10/2018 - 10:22
    +13

    rule of traffic: keep safe distance.

    However we should also not slow down unnecessarily. If the ambient traffic speed is 60kph, I will not slow down just to let someone merge.
    If it was crawling around at 20kph I would not accelerate and let the person merge.

    People who say "you fail to keep a safe distance, so it is your fault", need to understand rules are black and white. Circumstances are not.

    I have had a case where the insurance ruled in my favor even though I hit the car in front. it was a case that needed MS paint drawing and animated gifs

    • dannyboi on 25/10/2018 - 11:08
      +1

      If that bus had indicated right, you would've had slowed/stopped to give way?

      In NSW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MjREnEcj8M

      • Benji on 25/10/2018 - 18:49
        -2

        I'm not sure if that would apply here? Isn't that when a bus is pulling in/out?

        The bus is stopped on the left lane, other traffic is in the middle lane. Unless there's stopped traffic in front of the bus why would the bus need to pull into the middle lane? They should accelerate in their lane. Would you legally need to give way?

        But either way, there's still no reason for the P plater to come to an almost complete stop in the middle lane unless they're driving badly. Whenever I see a bus pulling out I slow down, but I don't stop.

        The only way the P plater would need to stop for a bus would be if they're flying up behind a stopped bus in the left lane, switch lanes late, see the buses indicator on and slam their brakes on. That's just poor driving.

  • Oz8argain on 23/10/2018 - 10:24

    It doesn't sound like a high way, with buses stopping, parked cars on the side, side roads, so I think the driver is not to blame.

  • hawkeye on 23/10/2018 - 10:25
    +1

    Well I learnt something new today thinking give way to busses was up to 60 KPM but in fact it's 70 KPH.

  • Ryanek on 23/10/2018 - 10:26
    +7

    I generally slow down around buses, you never know what kids can do. Seems P-Plater was being courteous which is rare nowadays. Truck was at fault.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 14:55
      +2

      Seems P-Plater was being courteous which is rare nowadays.

      The P-plater was female. Say what you will about women drivers, but when I'm waiting to manoeuvre in heavy traffic and someone lets me in, most of the time they're female.

  • gmail92 on 23/10/2018 - 10:26
    +13

    A lot of accidents actually happen because someone gives way when they are not supposed to.

    • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 10:32
      +2

      The is no road rule that state that motorists can’t give way when they’re not required to. The inexperienced p licence driver gave way out of courtesy. Good on them.

      • Ughhh on 23/10/2018 - 10:38

        Is there a road rule that specifically states that a driver must have a functional brain?

        • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 10:39
          -1

          We call it dkt in nsw. It’s compulsory for all motorists in nsw.

          • Ughhh on 23/10/2018 - 13:25
            +1

            @whooah1979: If it was the same thing, there wouldn't be so many stupid accidents on the road.

            • whooah1979 on 23/10/2018 - 13:41

              @Ughhh: I see. Yes, the truck driver may need to do a safety driving course.

              • Ughhh on 24/10/2018 - 10:30

                @whooah1979: So does the girl.

                • whooah1979 on 24/10/2018 - 12:37
                  -2

                  @Ughhh: The p licence driver kept a safe distance and gave way to merging traffic. That’s driving by the book. It may cause some inconvenience for the motorists behind them, but better that than getting rammed off the road.

                  • Ughhh on 24/10/2018 - 13:16
                    +4

                    @whooah1979: It wasn't a merging lane, that would be a different story. Looks like you need to read the book. It was more than inconvience the girl caused.

            • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 15:18
              +1

              @Ughhh: The problem is that drivers are only tested once, and their brain might cease functioning after that. Typical causes include drink, drugs, age and poor attitudes.

              Someone might fail their driving test 10 times before lucking out. Then they're ruled fit to drive for the next 60+ years, that needs to change! Drivers should be retested every 10 years and if ever they want their licence back after losing it. There are too many poor drivers on our roads. Standards need to lift. Driving should be a privilege for those qualified, not a right for everyone. Some of the people driving today aren't qualified to operate a pair of shoes, let alone a motor vehicle.

              These changes, of course, won't occur. Our democracy/gerontocracy is ruled by the lowest common denominator and the elderly. Hopefully self-driving cars solve these issues, but I hope manual control remains legal for those qualified.

      • dogboy on 25/10/2018 - 10:21
        +4

        No, this is not something to applaud. When people do not follow the normal road rules and try to be 'nice', they can actually cause accidents. Obviously the truck driver in this instance was not being cautious enough but nothing would have happened if the P plater did not try to stop traffic.

        • whooah1979 on 25/10/2018 - 12:03
          -4

          When people do not follow the normal road rules

          Their is no legal requirement in nsw that prevents motorists from giving way in the manner that op describes.

          • CMH on 25/10/2018 - 12:33
            +4

            @whooah1979: Actually, it is against the road rules to drive in a hazardous manner. Being stopped in free-flowing traffic would be considered hazardous, and if there was a serious injury or death the p-plater may have something to answer to.

            • whooah1979 on 25/10/2018 - 18:34
              +2

              @CMH: The p licence driver was slowing down to overtake a bus. Motorists in NSW are required to slow down to 40 km/h when overtaking or passing a bus with flashing lights road rule 24-3. They're also required to give way to buses under road rule 77.

        • CMH on 25/10/2018 - 12:31
          +6

          When people do not follow the normal road rules and try to be 'nice', they can actually cause accidents.

          Yep, agreed.

          I never give way when I'm not supposed to because it generally just confuses everyone else.

          Also, I actually failed a driver's licence test because I gave way when I wasn't supposed to (it was safe to do so as both parties were stationary).

          So, no. It may seem like a duck move, but it's safer not to.

      • Jugganautx on 25/10/2018 - 15:14

        Who the f slows down 40 km to let someone change lanes… absolute numpty…

    • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 11:02
      +3

      I'd rather someone give way when they're not supposed to, than that they not give way where they're supposed to. Erring on the side of caution basically - especially for a P-plater. As they drive more and get more experience, they'll (hopefully) figure out more specifically where the line is, but for now this is the better approach imo.

  • pantsparty on 23/10/2018 - 10:32
    -1

    God, another new account with a stupid question. Are you mates with the guy buying the 10 year old BMW with 200k on the clock (also a new account)?

  • Ughhh on 23/10/2018 - 10:36
    +15

    Legally the semi is at fault. But she's not completely innocent and smart either. It is so dangerous to just stop in the middle of a busy road, especially when it's not even an emergency. She was nice to one fella, but mean to the other 20 behind. Just stupid.

    • knobbs on 23/10/2018 - 11:25

      Yes I agree, the P plater should not have stopped as it is the job of the merging traffic to give way and enter where safe/possible. The traffic already on the road (P plater) should not be stopping to allow cars to merge on in free flow traffic.

      That being said you legally have to leave room to safely stop before you hit the car in front. So semi is legally at fault but the P plater should not have done what they did either.

    • dogboy on 25/10/2018 - 10:23
      +2

      People trying to be 'nice' on the road to one driver and causing massive issues for everyone else. Not smart at all. This thing only works if we all follow the same rules on the road.

  • ronnknee on 23/10/2018 - 10:46
    +4

    The P Plater may have contributed to the cause of the accident but from the eyes of insurers, it's ultimately the semi-trailer's fault for not keeping a safe distance. Sucks for the semi-trailer and the ute drivers though.

  • AdamFury on 23/10/2018 - 10:49
    +2

    P Plater should not have stopped however is not the cause of the incident.

  • pegaxs on 23/10/2018 - 11:15
    +4

    Yep, truck driver is at fault. If truck driver left enough space, it would allow for idiot drivers like this. As a truck driver, you can see much further down the road than a car… and a majority of car drivers are retarded… source: I’m a truck driver.

    It’s hard to say who contributed to the accident, as the P plater may have been avoiding the car merging and the only way to do that was to slow down. Did the bus have a right to stop there in a 70km/h zone? Did they have the right signals on? Did the ute merge into the trucks 3 second gap and give the truck driver no option. But at the end of the day, what the P plater did was probably a bit over cautious, but are no way in fault for an accident that far behind.

    • beefmaster on 23/10/2018 - 11:25

      I agree it is the truck driver fault. The P plater is slowing/stopping to give a hesitant car into the lane. Yes there is a bus stop at 70km/hr zone. The Ute is few cars behind, I only saw it mounted to a curb.

      The P plater have every right to give way but for this incident lead to the crash behind

      • MessyG on 25/10/2018 - 20:02
        +2

        I think the conflict here isn't that one person is at fault. It's not an either/or situation, it's a multifactorial one.

        You have a bus stop in a freaking 70km/hr zone which is ridiculous.
        You have a car stopped behind the bus trying to get out.
        You have a licensed but somewhat inexperienced driver who may not be able to gauge whether that car is going to come out from behind the bus and into them, so they err on the side of caution, but probably don't check their rearview, or if they do, incorrectly gauge the speed of the ute behind them (unless the ute was speeding, which is possible)
        You then have a ute travelling at speed who could have left enough distance but wasn't expecting someone to be very slow/stopped on the road at that particular point on a road with a higher speed limit.

        For insurance purposes ute is at fault, and I understand why the p plater chose that course of action, she probably thought she was either being nice or worried that the car stuck behind the bus was going to do pull into her. Nowhere in driving school do they tell you to take a deep breath and drive past that, she probably learned on a nice slow road that the good thing to do would be let them in.

        The people who should be copping a hard time over this are the numpties who thought it was a good idea to put a bloody bus stop on a 70km.hr road.

  • 87percent on 23/10/2018 - 11:21
    +3

    one of the worst things drivers do though, is to change lanes at the last minute.. if you see a parked car/bus or whatever in your lane up ahead, get out of the lane early and not at the last minute expecting drivers to give way to you!!!

    • Antikythera on 25/10/2018 - 18:45
      +1

      this is correct. however then some moron will fang up the left hand lane, undertaking all the sensible drivers, and change lanes at the last minute at speed. the road is a race track after all.

  • cloudy on 23/10/2018 - 11:38
    +4

    I hate people who cut into a lane and suddenly come to a complete stop.

  • The Wololo Wombat on 23/10/2018 - 11:53
    +5

    Didn't read the post, but yes. The P plater is responsible. P platers are always responsible, not only for traffic incidents, but the younger generation is my go-to scapegoat for all of society's woes.

  • rgr on 23/10/2018 - 11:58

    i came here for the MS Paint

  • Yummy on 23/10/2018 - 13:13

    The ute, bus and C are innocents.

  • Strahany on 23/10/2018 - 15:36

    Are there any circumstances where it is not the fault of the driver that is in the car behind, in the case of a rear-collision? For example, if the car in front is performing an illegal right-hand turn (as sign posted) and someone behind hits the illegal turner, would it still be the fault of the behind driver? I've always thought it to be a clear cut case of "if they're behind, they're at fault".

    • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:52

      Very rarely would the person behind not be at fault - generally only in cases where the car in front entered that lane suddenly or illegally (for example, if someone merges into your lane without leaving a safe interval and then brakes suddenly). Even if the car in front does something completely illegal, like stopping to make an illegal U-turn, if they were already in that lane and the driver behind should've seen them, still at least partly at fault.

    • Herbse on 24/10/2018 - 22:23

      Yes. If you change lanes without leaving a safe distance and then brake, you are at fault.

      There's no such thing rule as "driver behind is always at fault"

      • Miss B on 27/10/2018 - 10:33

        I had a car pull out in front of me in the wet a number of years ago and stop a few metres later for a side street that's almost exactly opposite the one they pulled out of. Can confirm I was definitely not at fault when I hit them. I slammed on my brakes as soon as they started pulling out, but there was no way I could have stopped in time.

  • PissLUR on 23/10/2018 - 17:08

    Based on the MSPaint diagram, it is a Continuous White Lines. so you can't move to the right. C and P are wrong.

    • Yummy on 23/10/2018 - 22:07

      C & P are invisible/imaginary cars.

  • John Kimble on 23/10/2018 - 18:33

    I reckon not technically "at fault" in terms of liability, but coming to a near stop in free flowing traffic is just plain stupid and obviously if that didn't happen, the accident wouldn't have happened…

  • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2018 - 11:16

    A lot of posters here speak of…safe distance.

    Can anyone define "safe distance?"

    • John Kimble on 24/10/2018 - 11:19
      +1

      Isn't it 3 seconds?

      • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2018 - 11:36

        At what speed? 50kph? 110kph?

        • John Kimble on 24/10/2018 - 11:42

          From memory that advice is for highways/higher speeds. But I suppose it is variable depending on the conditions.

        • Antikythera on 25/10/2018 - 18:48

          3 seconds at 110 km/h and 3 seconds at 50 km/h are different distances.

    • whooah1979 on 24/10/2018 - 12:41
      +4

      A safe distance is stopping without hitting the vehicle in front in the event of an emergency.

    • BobLim on 24/10/2018 - 22:50

      If the car in front stops immediately (eg hitting a tree), you will be able to avoid it. Hopefully you don't drive without knowing this?

  • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2018 - 13:27
    -3

    Still haven't nominated a time or distance.

    At 100Ks you are traveling at 27 metres per second. At 60Ks you are traveling at 16 metres per second.

    3 seconds at 100Ks is a gap of 81 metres. At 60Ks the 3 second gap is 48 metres. Try leaving those gaps and see what other motorists think.

    • misu p on 25/10/2018 - 10:34

      Your calculation is terribly wrong if you start to break you will not travel at 100k for the entire period. You will go slower and slower before coming to a complete stop. The stopping power is also very important, cars stop at different speeds depending on their breaks, weight, speed etc.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join