Going through Yellow Light and Hitting a Car Turning Right

So, me and my mate are trying to work out who is at fault in this car accident we witnessed this afternoon, mostly out of curiosity as we continued to discuss this after the fact

Here is the situation:

Hand Drawn diagram
Time of day is peak hour traffic ( heavy traffic coming from right side)
Controlled intersection ( controlled by lights)
Car A is in the intersection and is waiting to turn right
Car B is approaching the intersection and is about 30-40m away from the stop line, no cars are behind them.

Light has just turned Yellow

Car A begins to make turn and is hit by Car B

Who is at fault and why?

The road rules that I could find that relate are:

57 Stopping for a yellow traffic light or arrow

(1) A driver approaching or at traffic lights showing a yellow traffic light must stop—

(a) if there is a stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the stop line—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the stop line; or
(b) if there is no stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the traffic lights—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the nearest or only traffic lights; or
(c) if the traffic lights are at an intersection and the driver cannot stop safely in accordance with paragraph (a) or (b), but can stop safely before entering the intersection—
and must not proceed past the stop line or nearest or only traffic lights, or into the intersection (as the case may be), until the traffic lights show a green or flashing yellow traffic light or no traffic light.

But they also state:

62 Giving way when turning at an intersection with traffic lights

(1) A driver turning at an intersection with traffic lights must give way to -
(d) if the driver is turning right—any oncoming vehicle that is going straight ahead or turning left at the intersection (except a vehicle turning left using a slip lane).

if we go by rule 62, Car A is clearly at fault for failing to give way.
if we go by rule 57 then wouldn't Car B be at fault?

EDIT
I should point out that it was more out of interested and to understand why, not whose fault it was (yes, that is what I said in the original post) but primarily why those rules wouldn't apply to both drivers or affect one another

Car A is at fault because they turned into oncoming traffic when it was not safe to do so, but then as this was a controlled intersection - has lights to control the flow of traffic , then wouldn't Car B be at fault for failure to stop at a yellow light if it was safe to do so?

[Intersection] (https://goo.gl/maps/jLiWRiWznHKxxsQNA)

Lights do have arrows to allow turning traffic first before allowing cars to cross the intersection, it then allows for cars to turn right.

Car A is going against peak hour traffic (North Dandenong Clinc would be on its left) and was in the intersection attempting to turn right.
Car B is in Peak hour traffic (30 to 40m would be in line with the trees behind the Qik Wash on its right side), Lets also say that it had no cars behind it for 60-80m

Speed Limit is 60. it would have been a somewhat lower speed for Car B due to peak hour traffic
On Car A side appeared to be going the 60 km limit before the lights changed.

it is extremely common for people to be Car B- trying to beat the Red light after it had gone Yellow(not slowing down or speeding up Especially during peak hour traffic, so are they getting of free and why would Rule 57 not be a factor in this situation?

Poll Options expired

  • 116
    Car A at Fault
  • 10
    Car B at Fault

Comments

  • +27

    Car A is at fault because it was not safe to proceed through the intersection

  • +4

    me and my mate are trying to work out who is at fault in this car accident we witnessed this afternoon

    Where were you both located in the diagram?

    • +12

      Car A.

      • No way !!! :D…

        from my friend, mate, asking for a friend's friend, to now "witnessed".

  • +17

    Both cars were proceeding through an intersection on a yellow light, but only one was turning.
    Shouldn't be hard to work out who was at fault.

  • -1

    C) Lawyers' Picnic

  • +3

    Unless A had a green arrow they have to give way (In which case Car B would have a red light anyway).

    Technically Car B must stop if it is safe to do so, however that does not override that Car A should not enter the intersection unless clear.

    I'm not sure on this next part, but I think the only way Car B can be at fault as well is if speeding/drinking/distracted.

    • +2

      I'm not sure on this next part, but I think the only way Car B can be at fault as well is if speeding/drinking/distracted.

      Unless, OP and friend may somehow contributed to this "accident".

    • Technically Car B must stop if it is safe to do so

      Exactly. And if they had someone right on their tail, it may have been dangerous, hence going through was the right thing to do.

  • +19

    Pretend there were no traffic lights.

    Who's at fault?
    Car A

    Now assume it was not safe for car B to stop and I'm assuming they had a yellow as well.

    Car A is at fault.

    What should have Car A done?
    Waited in the intersection until it was safe to turn.

    What should Cars A and B do now?
    Contact their insurance and don't post on ozbargain.

    Here is a a thought experiment OP.
    The boom gates are open, there are no flashing lights at a train crossing but you hear the horn of a train.

    Do you:
    * Speed over the tracks
    * Stop, look, listen and spend a few seconds ensuring it is clear before crossing?
    * Post on ozbargain a train hit me even though the lights were not flashing

    Cars are a tonne of steel at speed, humans also make mistakes. People will forgive you for being 1 minute, 1 hour late. They can't forgive you if you are dead. Being right doesn't matter if you are dead.

    Drive safe.

    • Being right doesn't matter if you are dead.

      +1

  • +5

    If I was Car A, my story would be "I was waiting when the light turned yellow. I stayed there until it had turned Red, and then proceeded with my turn, at which point Car B proceeded through a Red light and collided with me"

    On the face of it, I would say both cars share blame. Car A should have given way, but Car B should have easily been able to stop safely at the yellow in 40m as required by law.

    • +1

      I remember driving in the moving lane, the left lane was parked cars. Some p-plater pulls out from being parked and into the moving lane, and I drive into the side of his car - there was no reaction time to stop and even my autonomous emergency braking did not activate because he pulled out the last second. There was some significant side damage, activating his side airbags etc. so I stop my car and check if he and his mates are OK - life is more important than property right?, and he yells back 'you drove into me' rather than, "I am ok, thanks for asking".

      His friends decides to leave the scene whilst we were waiting for the police (and I am guessing his mates distracted him as he pulled out).

      Cut the story short, the police turned up - they approach me after speaking to said p-plater, and say 'the p-plater said he saw you speeding' .. and I deny that but remind them that hypothetical if that was the case (which it wasnt), he had to give way to cars moving in the lane as I was anyway. I had no issues with my insurance that the other guy was at-fault fwiw.

      Dont know if that made sense but you can mislead if you want, just be careful that nowadays it is easy to be recorded (dash cam, phone cameras etc).

      • You did the right thing, but I would point out to the cop that if he saw me speeding before he pulled out, why would he pull out. Obviously he did not see you at all.

        • Good point, the guy saw me speeding yet decided stilll decided to pull out from the parking lane and into the moving lane ;)

  • +5

    Car A would be at fault for the purposes of insurance.

    However, that being said, I've no doubt that it's likely the driver of Car B is an (profanity) who tried to zip through the yellow lights with less than a second to spare. I've seen plenty of these types of drivers, especially in the inner city, and they are absolutely dangerous. Not only are they likely to hit the car that's now trying to turn right before the other side turns green, but I've also seen cars that are zipping through yellow lights end up rear-ending a car on the other side of the lights, swerving out of control onto the footpath and many other such incidents (I used to drive a lot for work, so I see plenty of these sorts of things).

    FWIW, I think the way we approach accidents and road rules is completely wrong. Who is "at fault" for the purposes of insurance is not the same as who is at fault morally. There are a lot of drivers who use "right of way" as a defence for acting with complete impunity and disregard for the general safety of other road users. The way I see it is that the primary objective should always be to act safely, and that road rules or "right of way" is only there to resolve civil disputes or to provide a guide to keep things running smoothly.

    Just because a driver has "right of way" doesn't mean that it is a good idea to just barge in without thinking and/or observing. Some people seem to forget the golden rule, which is that when there's a serious accident, the gates of heaven and hell don't give two shits about who had right of way.

    • Time for the obligatory "there is no such thing as 'right of way' in Australian road rules" comment. Only the obligation to give way.

      In an instance like the OP, both could legally be at fault and receive an infringement notice for each of the laws they broke. As you mentioned though, insurance is a different story.

    • Like you said, this scenario happens plenty.

      The one I saw, Car B accelerated into Car A in full line of sight. I think it was so that Car B could claim insurance as Car B was a bomb.

    • +1

      There's no way there will be two yellow lights or a yellow and a green.

      I kind of agree here… There is information missing. To me it seems like someone has run a red light. Either car A turned on a red because B had a green/yellow, or car A turned on green meaning that car B had a red. Seems unlikely that a right turn only lane and an oncoming traffic lane both would have green signals to go.

      • +5

        Both sides would have yellow at the same time and if there is no arrow for turning through the intersection then B would have to wait until it was clear and proceed with caution. As A was turning across traffic they are in the wrong. I assume it would work the same in all states.

        • -4

          Both sides never have yellow. A light is yellow for a short time before the other side goes from red to green.

          • +4

            @Quantumcat:

            Both sides never have yellow

            Why not? On a straight road, when you're facing each other across the intersection (as in this case), the green lights in both directions change to amber and red at the same time. Whatever light Car B had, Car A would've had the same (since there was no turning arrow for Car A).

            • -4

              @bobbified: They won't both go red at the same time - only one needs to go red to allow turns from the other side.

              I would be interested to see the location in Google maps. Maybe I'm wrong but I really don't think so. Two roads going red together asks for accidents like this one, and would be poor design.

              • +1

                @Quantumcat:

                They won't both go red at the same time - only one needs to go red to allow turns from the other side.

                I think you're referring to when there is a turning arrow. In this case, there isn't an arrow. When there is no arrow, the car that is waiting to turn right has to wait for there to be no oncoming traffic or when all the oncoming traffic has stopped (at amber or red) before they can complete their turn.

                • @bobbified: Maybe there aren't intersections like that here in Canberra 🤔

                  Why do they bother having traffic lights if the intersection is treated like a signless intersection or one with give way / stop? Surely that is extra confusing - if there are lights you expect you can simply obey the lights and all is fine, if no lights you know you need to watch for other cars and use your own judgement on when to go, but here there are lights and you get double-crossed into needing to use judgement too.

                  • +2

                    @Quantumcat:

                    Why do they bother having traffic lights if the intersection is treated like a signless intersection or one with give way / stop?

                    It seems like they don't bother with turning arrows at less-busy intersections. It's not bad, I guess - it means that a driver can turn when it's safe to do so rather than have to wait for an arrow to turn green.

                    Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I come across these no-arrow intersections more often than the ones that do have the turn arrow! lol

                  • @Quantumcat: It's to keep traffic flowing at less risky intersections. Even those that have right arrows often go blank after a time to act as the above intersection.

            • +2

              @bobbified: This is the missing information. Was it just straight lights? Were there right turn arrow lights? How do these lights operate? Where was OP seeing he lights from? Perspective A or perspective B or somewhere else?

              If they could give an indication of what intersection it was, what lights are shown there and where they were located when the incident occurred, it would help.

              Without this information, everyone is just stabbing in the dark. It could well be that B had a red light and A had an orange right turn arrow. It could be that the lights don’t have a green turn arrow or the arrow turns off when everyone from that direction can go.

              I don’t want an MS Paint diagram… I want a google maps link.

              • @pegaxs:

                I don’t want an MS Paint diagram… I want a google maps link.

                Yes! Otherwise we are all just judging based on our own preconceived ideas and experience, and not anything to do with the real situation

                • @Quantumcat: You are wrong. Eastbound and westbound traffic would be on the same traffic signal sequence and they'd both have green lights at the same time. Right hand turning movements need to give way to oncoming traffic. You will never have a right hand arrow if the oncoming traffic has an amber light. The oncoming traffic needs to be red for 2-3ish seconds before the traffic turning right receives a green turning arrow. What you are suggesting would result in accidents all the time.

              • @pegaxs: You're right - there's missing info.

                I've assumed that OP has seen the amber light that Car B had (since he's placed the traffic light on Car B's side in his diagram). If that's correct, then Car A also had an orange light (if there was no turning arrow) or red arrow (if there was a turning arrow).

    • +1

      Wrong. I know an intersection where yellow and red hit simultaneously. In qld, you must commit on green when turning. It's bloody dangerous.

  • +1

    If B could have stopped safely, they should stop. Bit of a subjective test.
    A should not be sitting there waiting for the light to change.
    HOWEVER, A must always give way to B, even if B is doing the wrong thing.
    Tell your insurer, they will work it out.

  • do you have a dash cam?

    otherwise its hard to see the distance/timing.
    everyone would say A is at fault.

    but generally in cases like this A/B would share blame and both would pay their respective insurers

  • +4

    It sounds like Car A was panicking because he thought the light was going to turn red.( Even if the light turned red, he is already in the intersection and can complete his turn).
    Car A should've waited for Car B to come to a stop or driven past him before proceeding.

  • My friend had similar accident.
    According to police, both drivers were at faults.

  • Car B is a dick and should have stopped to let Car A turn at the yellow.

    As to fault it might be both. Where is Car A hit? If it's straight into the side then Car B should have had enough time to avoid the accident. Car A shouldn't have turned if there wasn't enough time to complete the maneuver before Car B gets there.

    • +3

      Car B is a dick

      These people usually get through the yellow and get caught in the next set of lights with a red. There is drivers out there who are just dangerous and jacking up our insurance.

    • Curious on the negs? Hope it's not all the "Car Bs" out there getting called out on their selfish behaviour.

    • +1 vote from me, i agree with Hellfire. Car A could have caught in the middle of the intersection and Car B was indeed being a dick.

  • +2

    In my personal opinion, I think they should change all traffic lights to include a red/green arrow for right turns. The "waiting in the intersection to turn right" option is unnecessarily risky as demonstrated in this incident. While the Car A can complete his turn under red (could this trigger a red light camera?), this again puts him/her at risk from straight-through traffic.

    • +1

      You can continue to turn even after the light has gone red as long as you've entered the intersection when it was green.

      • +1

        True but there is a lot of car B types on the other side who would honk soon as lights on that side turns green without any thought on traffic conditions.

      • -2

        On the other hand you're not supposed to enter the intersection if the way is not clear :)

        • wrong, if you're turning and there's no arrow you must enter the intersection and give way. Assume it's to keep traffic moving.

          • +1

            @dylanando:

            if you're turning and there's no arrow you must enter the intersection and give way

            Keen to see where it says in the Road Rules that you MUST enter the intersection. Got a link to that relevant rule ?

            • @pegaxs: Well obviously you're not held against your will to enter the intersection by why wouldnt you?

          • @dylanando: Fair enough, I was reading the general rule

            It is an offence to get caught in the middle of the intersection when the lights change.

            where there seems to be an exception for turning right at lights

            When turning right at traffic lights:
            Enter the intersection as shown in the diagram, unless a sign indicates otherwise or there is a red right turn arrow displayed.
            Wait until oncoming traffic clears, or there is a break in the oncoming traffic, and then turn safely.
            If the lights change to yellow or red while you are in the middle of the intersection, you are allowed to turn right. You must turn as soon as it is safe to do so. Be sure your front wheels and car are straight and not blocking the oncoming traffic.

  • +1

    You fail to mention the speed limit of the road in which Car B was travelling. If it is >= 80kmph, Car B could argue it wasn't safe to stop at the yellow light.
    You also failed to mention if there is a right arrow traffic light for turning right for Car A. If there was one and Car A had the green, then Car A could argue that Car B was at fault if Car B went through the intersection after red.

    It depends on who can prove it (with a dashcam).

  • +1

    how fast was car b travelling, 30 to 40 m behind the line, to get to the line, before it turned red i assume and hit the car

    are they all dead?

    a is prolly wrong but how fast was b going? and whats the speed limit around there

  • Car B is at fault, only if they ran the red (or were speeding, but that's a separate offence often not taken into account by law in specific incidents such as this). Too many times I've seen this happen on Dash Cams Australia - we love to speed and floor it through yellow lights. Another common accident is vehicles, especially trucks, rear ending cars at lights because they don't leave a gap and anticipate drivers braking for yellow lights.

  • +1

    it was more out of interested and to understand why.

    Car A is at fault because they turned into oncoming traffic when it was not safe to do so, but then as this was a controlled intersection - has lights to control the flow of traffic , so wouldn't Car B be at fault for failure to stop at a yellow light when it could have stopped

    [A Similar Intersection] (https://goo.gl/maps/jLiWRiWznHKxxsQNA)

    Lights do have arrows to allow turning traffic to go through first, before allowing cars to cross the intersection, it then allows for cars to turn right until the end of the Light cycle.

    Car A is going against peak hour traffic (North Dandenong Clinc would be on its left) and was in the intersection attempting to turn right.
    Car B is in Peak hour traffic (30 to 40m would be in line with the trees behind the Qik Wash on its right side), It had a ~1 1/2 car lengths in front of it and ~2 car lengths behind it

    Speed Limit is 60. it would have been a somewhat lower speed for Car B due to peak hour traffic, so anywhere I would say anywhere from 45 to 60km

    • You've been given the answer above and at this time the poll is overwhelming 107 to 9 says Car A is at fault.

      Car B MAY have received an infringment if caught, but Car A still has to give way.

      For a hypothetical, you seem quite invested in proving Car A right…

      • Yes, also the information seems too detailed for someone that is not directly involved in the collision. Even a crash investigation team wouldn’t know as they weren’t present at the time of the collision, only reverse engineering the aftermath.

        Many fellow Bargainers already hypothesised the role OP played in the said scenario… but OP still hasn’t disclosed where they were to be able to observe such detail and clarity.

      • Yes, Because I've been in this situation before as a passenger and it was a much worse outcome, seeing this brought it up again.

        So I'm just wanting to understand why the road rules around the traffic lights being yellow are not a factor in this situation.

        When is it deemed unsafe to stop at the lights when they have turned yellow? knowing that speed, position of the cars behind them and distance to the stop line play a factor. And when is it deemed you should have stopped for the yellow?

        Also, to those that say wait till its Red, I've done that before and I got fined for going through the intersection, even though I was already fully in the intersection and waiting for it to be safe to complete my turn.

        As I said, I just want to know why so that I can avoid the situation when I'm the driver.

  • It's 50:50, both are (profanity)

Login or Join to leave a comment