Which driver is at fault ???

[Yoga Face]

You are pulled over and stopped on the right lane of a four lane city street where there is no parking but there is also nothing saying you cannot stop to let someone off (Eglinton, Lawrence for example)

Just as you continue the driver on your left decides to pull into your lane and there is a collision


Who has right of way the car that was stopped car or the moving car ??


Does it make a difference if the stopped car had his right signal on or his four ways ??

If you have your four ways on it seems to me you have indicated a complete stop until four ways are taken off making you guilty

If you had only your right signal on other guy is guilty as the lane is still yours

 

[blackrock13]

Amateur answer. You're both at fault, it's a matter of how much. That's the grey area that the courts would have fun with.

Did you have a curb/shoulder/sidewalk to pullover onto or were you blocking the right lane completely? Was the other driver directly beside you, to your rear quarter, or your back quarter? How much time elapsed between you pulling over and the collision? what was the traffic conditions? Was there a better/safer place to pull over into? A whole lot of variables come into play for a proper analysis. 50/50 would not be out of the question.

 

[Yoga Face]

The stopped car should have checked his sidemirror so he could have prevented it but that does not make him guilty

I think it depends on which signals he was using

Does he have to indicate a left turn to start moving even though he is not turning left ?? That is what the TTC buses do

I saw this exact scenario play out on Eglinton with a TTC bus

Bus was stopped in front of driveway and car on left decided to turn into mall in front of bus just as bus took off

 

[blackrock13]

The stopped car should have checked his sidemirror so he could have prevented it but that does not make him guilty

I think it depends on which signals he was using

Does he have to indicate a left turn to start moving even though he is not turning left ?? That is what the TTC buses do

I saw this exact scenario play out on Eglinton with a TTC bus

Bus was stopped in front of driveway and car on left decided to turn into mall in front of bus just as bus took off

Now you're losing me totally. Your bus scenario is always tricky and I take extra care when doing that move. The bus weighs how much and you weigh how much? Yuo'll lose every time.

I don't see what the signals have to do with who's at fault as much as other factors. How many times have you heard well officer he was in the left turn lane and he was signaling left, how was I supposed to know he wasn't going to turn left, 50/50?

So who hit you or somebody you know?

 

[oldjones]

You were stopped, then started w/o making a signal to alert the other drivers, you were at fault. If you checked your mirrors, saw the car behind who was going to pull in and he wasn't signalling, he too was at fault. But if you didn't bother to check for other people coming up behind to do exactly as you did, you're doubly at fault. No body can guess what the other guy's gonna do; that's what signals are for.

You should have signalled left, checked that the way was clear and then proceeded. A right turn signal when your right wheels are next to the curb, means nothing. Nor does cancelling it, then moving. Four-way flashers don't tell anybody you're about to do something unpredictable: like start from a stop. They should ONLY be used if you're forced to drive in a hazardous manner—limping on the 401 w/ a flat f'rinstance, and you'd use hand signals as you changed lanes—or have to park where you present an unexpected danger.

The rule is: You don't enter the flow of traffic from a parked position w/o signalling. It was a trick question on my driving test.

 

[Yoga Face]

Now you're losing me totally. Your bus scenario is always tricky and I take extra care when doing that move. The bus weighs how much and you weigh how much? You'll lose every time.

I don't see what the signals have to do with who's at fault as much as other factors. How many times have you heard well officer he was in the left turn lane and he was signaling left, how was I supposed to know he wasn't going to turn left, 50/50?

So who hit you or somebody you know?

I suspect signals have everything to do with it

which is why I ask

Should you put four ways on when doing a quick stop ??? I say do not just use right turn signal because if you put on four ways the car on left has right of way in front of you and you will be at fault

 

[blackrock13]

I suspect signals have everything to do with it

which is why I ask

Should you put four ways on when doing a quick stop ??? I say do not just use right turn signal because if you put on four ways the car on left has right of way in front of you and you will be at fault

I think OJ just answered your query well.

 

[Yoga Face]

You were stopped, then started w/o making a signal to alert the other drivers, you were at fault. If you checked your mirrors, saw the car behind who was going to pull in and he wasn't signaling, he too was at fault. But if you didn't bother to check for other people coming up behind to do exactly as you did, you're doubly at fault. No body can guess what the other guy's gonna do; that's what signals are for.

You should have signaled left, checked that the way was clear and then proceeded. A right turn signal when your right wheels are next to the curb, means nothing. Nor does canceling it, then moving. Four-way flashers don't tell anybody you're about to do something unpredictable: like start from a stop. They should ONLY be used if you're forced to drive in a hazardous manner—limping on the 401 w/ a flat f'rinstance, and you'd use hand signals as you changed lanes—or have to park where you present an unexpected danger.

The rule is: You don't enter the flow of traffic from a parked position w/o signaling. It was a trick question on my driving test.

So do not put on four ways is settled here (unless you are stopped for longer period)

I agree with left turn signal even though you are not turning left (so just a few quick flashes)

So you must use right turn signal or how would you signal your intent for a quick stop ?? Keep foot on brake so brake lights are on ??

Fellow on left could do an unexpected quick right and if you signaled left then you are not at fault ( even though he cannot see this signal when he is beside you ) ??

 

[Anynym]

I can't imagine any way of twisting this scenario to make it the fault of the driver who was stopped for some interval.

Whether still stopped, or starting out after being stopped, it seems clear enough that the other driver could not pass safely and should not have been in that lane. Having collided with the first car from the rear it seems that driver failed to exercise control over his/her vehicle.

It is up to the driver from behind to exercise due care: if the forward car slammed on their brakes and a collision ensued, it's the fault of the second driver for following too close and failing to stop.

 

[papasmerf]

You are pulled over and stopped on the right lane of a four lane city street where there is no parking but there is also nothing saying you cannot stop to let someone off (Eglinton, Lawrence for example)

Just as you continue the driver on your left decides to pull into your lane and there is a collision


Who has right of way the car that was stopped car or the moving car ??


Does it make a difference if the stopped car had his right signal on or his four ways ??

If you have your four ways on it seems to me you have indicated a complete stop until four ways are taken off making you guilty

If you had only your right signal on other guy is guilty as the lane is still yours

you are for failure to yield the right of way

 

[Yoga Face]

I can't imagine any way of twisting this scenario to make it the fault of the driver who was stopped for some interval.

Whether still stopped, or starting out after being stopped, it seems clear enough that the other driver could not pass safely and should not have been in that lane.

Unless stopped car has 4 ways on

This would indicate the car will be parked until 4 ways are off so it is safe to turn into stopped car's lane

Or does it ?????

This is not an academic question as most of us do this so we need to do it in a way that we are not liable

 

[oldjones]

If you are stopped and you start up and enter the travelled roadway without signalling, you are at fault. Think of it as a change of direction. A staionary car is travelling in no direction, but when it moves it now has a direction, the change should have been signalled. The protocol is to use the left signal.

If the overtaking car that wanted to pull in and park was beside you, and you moved so you hit them as they pulled in, you'd still be at fault, having attempted to enter the roadway without ensuring it was clear and safe. If a car that is in the roadway is positioned so you cannot see its signals you'd better wait for it to clear. There's no requirement to signal your intentions to parked cars. But you have an obligation, as the entering car, to check for oncoming traffic and avoid it.

The OP's example of dropping off a passenger and "continuing" just as the driver to the left pulls in, would work if the passenger jumped from the moving vehicle. In that case both cars are legally on the road at customary speed, car to the left pulling over to the curb has to keep clear. But once you have stopped, you are parked as far as other drivers can tell. And pulling out of a parking space without signalling or being aware of the moving traffic and avoiding it is dangerous, and illegal—whether or not the pulling out involves cranking the wheel.

 

[Yoga Face]

If you are stopped and you start up and enter the travelled roadway without signalling, you are at fault. Think of it as a change of direction. A staionary car is travelling in no direction, but when it moves it now has a direction, the change should have been signalled. The protocol is to use the left signal.

If the overtaking car that wanted to pull in and park was beside you, and you moved so you hit them as they pulled in, you'd still be at fault, having attempted to enter the roadway without ensuring it was clear and safe. If a car that is in the roadway is positioned so you cannot see its signals you'd better wait for it to clear. There's no requirement to signal your intentions to parked cars. But you have an obligation, as the entering car, to check for oncoming traffic and avoid it.

The OP's example of dropping off a passenger and "continuing" just as the driver to the left pulls in, would work if the passenger jumped from the moving vehicle. In that case both cars are legally on the road at customary speed, car to the left pulling over to the curb has to keep clear. But once you have stopped, you are parked as far as other drivers can tell. And pulling out of a parking space without signalling or being aware of the moving traffic and avoiding it is dangerous, and illegal—whether or not the pulling out involves cranking the wheel.

I see your logic but I am unconvinced as car is not "parked " so it still retains right of way

You can argue the stopped vehicle still has ownership of the lane it is in (unless it has put on 4 ways ) and the passing vehicle cannot assume the stopped vehicle will not move ahead as the stopped vehicle has not indicated it is going to remain stopped

It is the responsibility of the passing vehicle to enter another lane safely

But I am not sure as this is a tricky one

 

[oldjones]

Besides the logic, I am going by what that driving examiner told me. 'You always have to signal when entering the roadway from a parked position, even if you're just moving straight ahead'

Consider the possibility if any car at rest in the curb lane is still considered 'in the roadway' (or as you put it, to have ownership of the lane): The passing vehicle that wants to move into that curb lane, how can he determine what is a safe distance? We all do it when everyone is moving, and don't even consider the unconscious math that comes up with the safe distance to allow one to move right (after signalling of course). But what is that distance for a stationary car? Enough to let it get to 50kph then slam on the brakes? The space of a typical parking slot? What? Completely impractical.

Here's another reason why Mr. I Stop and Start Whenever and Wherever I Please should learn to signal: That passing car on his left (signalling right) gets a smidge ahead and makes his move, just as he starts forward. He clips the turning car from behind. What's the defence? Clearly he was 'following too close' or , as I said, 'entering the road way from a parked position w/o proper signals or care'. The guy to the rear must keep clear.

But if a stationary car—not at a stop sign or other signal, not stopped because of traffic or other obstruction—'retains the right of way', I am sure you'll be able to quote something from the Motorists Manual or the HTA that says so. I just ask how anyone but its driver can detect the difference between a real parked car and a fake one that still has the right of way but isn't moving?

Sorry, bad enough to stop in the roadway as if you owned it, but then to start up w/o a thought of warning for the other people on the road is dangerous, and illegal bad driving. One should do both manoeuvres with the utmost care, and concern for alerting everyone else sharing the road.

They have no time to read your mind.

 

[auto doctor]

I my opinion. It is your word against his. Therefore how the damage on the cars look will impact who is at fault, side by side colision mark. person changing lane fault. Front bumper to rear bumper. Following to close for the front bumber damaged car. Cops not going to believe anyone. He is going to look at the cars make a decision.

 

[NorthernBear]

First of all you must signal to begin moving again to alert other vehicles that you will be moving. The other driver is partly to blame if he did n ot allow enough room to enter your lane but that was likely because you were not signaling.

Secondly in regards to using four-ways, they are not intended for use when you are pulling over to let someone off or to pick somebody up. The purpose of the four-ways is to alert other drivers of trouble. That is why they are called hazard lights on your dashboard. Dropping somebody off is not considered a hazard. I'm licensed to issue parking tickets in Mississauga and if I ticket a vehicle in a fire route for example that has his four-ways on, if he tells me that it is okay to park because his hazards are on I am to ask, "What is the emergency?" because that is the only reason that they should be used. Most delivery drivers use their hazard lights but they all deserve tickets.

 

[rhuarc29]

You are pulled over and stopped on the right lane of a four lane city street where there is no parking but there is also nothing saying you cannot stop to let someone off (Eglinton, Lawrence for example)

Just as you continue the driver on your left decides to pull into your lane and there is a collision


Who has right of way the car that was stopped car or the moving car ??


Does it make a difference if the stopped car had his right signal on or his four ways ??

If you have your four ways on it seems to me you have indicated a complete stop until four ways are taken off making you guilty

If you had only your right signal on other guy is guilty as the lane is still yours

Just to be clear: I'm assuming he pulled a lane change as you were taking off resulting in his right-rear coming in contact with your left-front. Am I correct?

Stopping with no signalling (braking excepted) is a good way to be found at fault. It doesn't matter if there is no sign prohibiting stopping, you just don't stop in a lane without signalling your intention. It's dangerous. In this case the guy who cut you off may have thought you were having car troubles.

See, I have a hard time imagining this occurring when there is atleast one reasonable driver of the two of you. You should have been going slow enough just prior to the collision to have avoided it; even without him signalling you should have had sufficient time to realize he was moving over. Which leads me to believe in this case that you (or your hypothetical guy) knew he was attempting to switch into your lane and wanted to prevent that by being an asshole and making it unsafe to switch lanes. Unfortunately for you both, he failed to recheck to make sure it was safe because judging by your speed when he passed you it SHOULD have been safe. I can't see any other way this scenario would have unfolded. If this is the case, I'd say you were at fault, but courts will probably rule according to the point of impact (Did you rear-end him - your fault - or did he side-swipe you - his fault). Of course, the other way it could go is since you were "pulled over and stopped" to "let someone off" they have a fair argument to say you were not in possession of the road and YOU failed to check to make sure it was safe before rejoining the flow of traffic. Either way, I'd put most of the blame on you UNLESS you actually weren't trying to be a jackass in the first scenario and he's just a really inept driver who somehow switched lanes right into you when you were almost sitting still.

 

[Saskatchewan]

I think it depends on which signals he was using

Nope, I disagree.

Any car that hits a stationary car is the car at fault. The no parking/stopping sign is merely a red herring.

 

[rhuarc29]

Nope, I disagree.

Any car that hits a stationary car is the car at fault. The no parking/stopping sign is merely a red herring.

He wasn't stationary anymore.

Just as you continue the driver on your left decides to pull into your lane and there is a collision

I'm guessing the driver was assuming the car was still stationary and switched lanes by "feel" rather than by checking his blind spot.

 

[Anynym]

First of all you must signal to begin moving again to alert other vehicles that you will be moving. The other driver is partly to blame if he did n ot allow enough room to enter your lane but that was likely because you were not signaling.

Secondly in regards to using four-ways, they are not intended for use when you are pulling over to let someone off or to pick somebody up. The purpose of the four-ways is to alert other drivers of trouble. That is why they are called hazard lights on your dashboard. Dropping somebody off is not considered a hazard. I'm licensed to issue parking tickets in Mississauga and if I ticket a vehicle in a fire route for example that has his four-ways on, if he tells me that it is okay to park because his hazards are on I am to ask, "What is the emergency?" because that is the only reason that they should be used. Most delivery drivers use their hazard lights but they all deserve tickets.

Who gave you a license to issue tickets? If a car is stopped in a fire route, it is a hazard and should have their hazard lights on. That doesn't excuse parking there, but you incorrectly claim that hazard lights should not be used.