Road Rules - Turning accross the road to angle park?

Submitted: Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:50
ThreadID: 74019 Views:16172 Replies:22 FollowUps:27
This Thread has been Archived
Image Could Not Be Found

Situation. Car A wants to turn across the broken lines in a town area to 45 deg angle park on the other side of the road.

Waits for truck coming down the other side of the road, meanwhile car B is also waiting to back out and waits for the truck.

Truck passes and car A dives across the road to park, at the same time car B has started backing out.

Car A sideswipes car B on passenger rear as Car A drives into the parking space and Car B is backing out into the lane.

Car B stated where the hell did you come from?

Car A blamed car B for not looking.

My bet is Car A is in the wrong.

Not easy to find a rule for this one, except when doing a U turn you must give way to all cars and pedestrians. What do you think?

Cheers
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: you eat the bear - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:59

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 17:59
Well the basic rule is give way to the right - so Car A is in the wrong in that case.
Car B on the other hand is entering the road and has to give way to oncoming traffic.
I think it depends upon where they actually made contact but a toss up between 50/50 at fault or car A being in the wrong.
Good question though.
Is there an official interpretation?


AnswerID: 392729

Follow Up By: Out of here - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:03

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:03
Not that I have found - Cheers
0
FollowupID: 660710

Reply By: ob - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:01

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:01
I'll go with car "B" being in the wrong because he is the one pulling out into the road.

Just a wild guess lol

Cheers ob
AnswerID: 392730

Follow Up By: Out of here - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:08

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:08
Not an easy one :-)

What chance would car B have of seeing car A considering they are looking down the road? Is a car coming sideways across the road counted as coming down the road?

Car A is a ute and Car B is a Toyota Landcruiser Station Wagon.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 660712

Reply By: Member - Mark G Gulmarrad - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:04

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:04
the truck has right of way.....size has right of way!!!!!


sorry...hahhahhhahhaah :-)))
AnswerID: 392731

Follow Up By: Out of here - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:10

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:10
He got it too and was not involved.

My car was, but I was not driving it (Car A) - My wife lent it to a mate ;-) Typical
0
FollowupID: 660714

Reply By: Member - Fred B (NT) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:39

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:39
It is a difficult one... but technically... they are both in the wrong... both could go for undue care .... while B is responsible for making sure all traffic on the road has right of way before reversing out..... Cops would probably fine both and let insurance sort it out... No fun for anyone...
regards
Fred B
VKS 737: Mobile/Selcall 1334

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 392738

Follow Up By: Out of here - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:51

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:51
That sounds reasonable Fred - Cheers
0
FollowupID: 660723

Follow Up By: Rob! - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:38

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:38
I'm with Fred. Both are in the wrong.
0
FollowupID: 660860

Reply By: Member - TJ (VIC) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:42

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:42
Is this question about liability or road rules?
AnswerID: 392739

Follow Up By: Out of here - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:50

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 18:50
Road Rules - Turning across the road to angle park?

Thats the question :-) What rule would cover it?

I am swinging towards both being wrong as per the above thread. That sounds reasonable.

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 660722

Reply By: Member - TJ (VIC) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 19:05

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 19:05
Vicroads says:

"When making a U-Turn you must give way to all pedestrians as well as vehicles when making a "U" Turn.

Safely complete your U Turn without disrupting other traffic."


To add to the complexity of this question: Is the driver actually making a U Turn? It doesn't appear that he is. He's crossing the road to park.

From a liability point of view we were involved in this type of accident with the exception a solid white line. The wife was reversing out and the guy tried to zip around her into the car park to our left. We were found not to be at fault and the other guys insurance forked out. The solid white line made it clear cut. I pushed this aspect when we put in our insurance claim. Had it have been a broken line as per this example who knows what might have happened.
AnswerID: 392741

Follow Up By: Member - Tony V (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:21

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:21
I'm with you, car "A" is doing a "U" turn. in NSW "U" turns not allowed unless sign posted.
Car "A" is also crossing into the opposite lane and its his responsibility to ensure that lane is clear.

MY 2 CENTS
0
FollowupID: 660737

Follow Up By: disco driver - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:00

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:00
Car A is not doing a U turn, a U turn is 180 degrees.

Car B is at fault regardless of anything else, a vehicle reversing must give way to all traffic.

Disco.
0
FollowupID: 660748

Follow Up By: Member - Tony V (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 22:36

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 22:36
Disco driver,

If there is not a right turn into a street or driveway, then Car "A" is is accessing a parking spot that is available from the other direction.
If the parking spot was parallel it would be a full 180 degree, just because its 135 degree (which is a lot more than 90 degree or right turn) does not mean it is NOT a U turn.

Car "A" is crossing a broken white line and must not do so unless that lane is clear.

Car "B" is reversing into his lane, he is not crossing into another lane or crossing the road.

Just think about it if you ar not turning into another street, or a property or driveway then you are not performing a lawful turn.

Reversing from a 45 degree parking bay, you will look to the direction of the traffic in your lane so looking left, not for people crossing the the line from you right.

In NSW the offence's can be.

If U turn is allowed.
Rule 37 (b) Driver not safely begin U-turn without obstructing traffic* $197 and 2 demerit points
Rule 38 Make U-turn without giving way to vehicle/pedestrian* $253 and 3 demerit points
Rule 39 (1) Make U-turn at break in dividing strip contrary to sign* $197 and 2 demerit points

If U turn is not allowed.
Rule 132 (1) Not keep left of centre on two-way road $253 fine and 3 demerit points
Rule 132 (2) Not keep left of dividing line 5 253 fine and 3 demerit points
Rule 132 (2A) Drive across dividing lines to perform U-turn 253 fine and 3 demerit points

With a possible
Not give way (move from one line of traffic to another) or Not give way (diverges left or right within marked lane) Rule 148 $253 and 3 demerit points.


NSW General Driving Offences - Effective 28 September 2009
0
FollowupID: 660777

Follow Up By: Member - Timbo - Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 19:20

Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 19:20
TJ, I'm not so sure - obviously it worked out well for you in that case but it will come down to whether the other vehicle is performing a u-turn or whether it is leaving the road (entering a road-related area ie. parking area at the side of the street).

Image Could Not Be Found
This diagram from p129 of the Australian Road Rules (available here) indicates that driving across a single continuous dividing line is permitted to enter or leave the road (example 2A), even to enter a road-related area (example 2B).

If it is determined to be a u-turn then it's a different matter because that is NOT permitted over a continuous line.
0
FollowupID: 663003

Follow Up By: Member - TJ (VIC) - Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:42

Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:42
I could add that when he struck us the wife had spotetd him and hit the anchors. It was clear that the way he tried to zip around us that he was trying to beat us backing out, He even said that after the stack. In fact he said way too much which aided me greatly. I mentioned all of this when we made our claim. Even though we had been reversing and stopped he knew he was wrong for trying to shoot around us to get to the angle park on our left.He even apologised. Just goes to show how grey some of these sorts of stacks are when it comes to liability.

Had it been a question of criminal law he may be in the right as per the info you provided above. As for liability, our Insurer was happy to fix our car with no excess payable and no loss of NCD.
0
FollowupID: 663058

Follow Up By: Member - TJ (VIC) - Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:43

Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:43
Hmm, Spellcheck!
0
FollowupID: 663059

Reply By:- Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:18

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:18
The reversing vehicle must give way to everyone.
AnswerID: 392751

Follow Up By: Travelling Pixie - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:54

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:54
exactly what I reckon
0
FollowupID: 660764

Follow Up By: Kev - Member - Wynnum - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:20

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:20
Spot on.

In Qld car B would be in the wrong on two counts. Reversing without due care and attention and failing to give way when leaving a parked position.

Car A would also be to blame for failing to give way when leaving a road to park.

Car B would probably be breached.

0
FollowupID: 660831

Follow Up By: Rob! - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:41

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:41
A car doing a U turn also has to give way to everyone. So both are in the wrong and the insurance will see it that way (especially if they're both insured by the same company.)
0
FollowupID: 660861

Reply By: Member - Dennis P (Scotland) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:30

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:30
Years back I was car 'B', in Dean Street, Albury.
I got done for 'Driving without due care or attention' or something like that.
Up to me to ensure traffic was clear in all directions!


Cheers,
Dennis

AnswerID: 392754

Follow Up By: Member - Roachie (SA) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:52

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:52
I think they were right....

In the case set out in the original post, the driver of car B should have checked for other traffic. That means not only looking over his/her shoulder to see what traffic was coming (behind the truck), but also checking driver's side and internal mirrors. Internal mirror (or possibly driver's side external mirror) would have shown the car A doing the U turn (or, more correctly; making a right turn).

When reversing from a nose-in 45 degree parking space, there's no point ONLY checking for oncoming traffic (from the direction the truck would have just come from). No, you need to check what is behind your vehicle (kiddy etc) and also what is on YOUR own side of the car...(could be that somebody has opened the passenger's side door on the vehicle next to your driver's door for example). The driver of car B is singularly responsible for this situation (IMHO).

Roachie
0
FollowupID: 660744

Follow Up By: Member No 1- Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 07:04

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 07:04
your probably right except for one thing...who began making their manoeuvre first?

I would say that whoever began to move first must be given way to...not to be confused with having right of way.

0
FollowupID: 660812

Follow Up By: Out of here - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 17:31

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 17:31
From what my wife told me Car A after starting the turn saw car B reversing so sped up to try to make in before getting t boned in the door.

Suppose I am happy about that, because car A was mine the wife had lent to a mate.

He was quick and blamed car B. Car B had a lot of damage to the tail light area, my car only some bent rails on the tray

Cheers
0
FollowupID: 660909

Reply By: Hairs & Fysh (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:42

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:42
This Nose in parking S*&^% me.
Honesty, It does. This is just my opinion about it.
I first came across it in 85 in Albury/Wodonga, I was about 19. I was driving a HZ panel van, you know the ones, 308 4 speed, Slippery, press stud leather interior, over head console,a real Shaggin wagon, anyway you get the picture. Having come from the Far NC of NSW I had never encountered nose in parking. What a PITA to reverse out into traffic with no side vision. Honestly, near 8 foot of the van was out in the traffic lane before I could see it was clear. At the time I had only just got my heavy vehicle license and was taught to reverse into any lane way or docking bay so that you had full vision of traffic when entering the street. So this just contradicts that.
To me nose in parking is a lazy mans way of stopping.
Besides not all streets are wide enough to allow for a verse out lane.
As I said, it's just my thoughts on the matter.

AnswerID: 392757

Follow Up By: Member - Roachie (SA) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:59

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 20:59
G'day Hairs,

I grew up in Narrandera (not all that far from Albury). It must be a southern NSW thing as i was brought up on 45 degree nose-in parking and have always just accepted it as the norm. Because of this, I tend to find the idea of 45 degree reverse parking (rrrrrrrrr's to the kerb) to be very foreign and a PITA.

Parrellel parking is the best option, but where you have a wide street available, it tends to waste a lot of parking spaces.

I can just picture you in the old shaggin wagon mate....I bet you had the bumper sticker too....."If'n it's rockin; don't ya be a knockin". Or did you have the sticker on the glove box: " Get in, sit down, hang on and shut up".

hahahahaha.....ahhh the good ol' days, eh??!!

Roachie
0
FollowupID: 660746

Follow Up By: Hairs & Fysh (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:19

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:19
Hows it going Roachie?
Mate the van had the tinted/blacked out tear drop bubbles in the sides at the back and a Blacked out rear glass in the top of the lift up tail gate. Four droopy drop down pipes out the back and the 308 was fed by a pair of 600 square bore Holly's on a Edelbrock tunnel ram with a 30/70 cam in it :)
Hmmm

Anyway, yeah, at the time it must of been a southern thing.
These days Yamba has the 45 degrees nose in parking, and people shoot across the road to grab a park, it's like watching a Dodgem car track at the show.
Nah, sorry mate, not a big fan of nose in parking.




0
FollowupID: 660752

Follow Up By: Member - Duncs - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:32

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:32
Hey Jon,

I first encountered nose in angle parking in 1979 in Ballina which is on the far north NSW coast.

I first backed into the traffic in a Ford Escort. That was bad enough. The panel van would have been plain scary.

Ballina is trialling rear to kerb angle parking now. I always preferred that.

We did get pretty comfortable with nose in while living in Broken Hill.

Duncs
0
FollowupID: 660845

Follow Up By: Hairs & Fysh (NSW) - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 16:01

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 16:01
Hi Duncs,
Grew up in Ballina from 73 to 82, did the big move up the road to Byron, all of 30 k's away. Left home when I was 16, so I didn't notice the nose in parking cause I didn't get my license till I had move to Byron where they never had nose in parking.
I did notice last time we drove down River St it was nose in, that was about 4 months ago, usually when traveling back to Byron we would go through East Ballina from the round about in front of where to old Tinkerbell C/P was, It's a shopping center now. If you haven't been there for awhile you'd notice a lot of changes over even the last five years or so.
I wonder why they are reverting back to rear to kerb after such along time? It would be interesting to hear why.
Ballina did have a lane that you could reverse back out into, so you weren't blocking traffic.
Hey Duncs, you probably knew my father Maurice Kenny who owned a taxi there about that time.
Hmmm, How things change.


0
FollowupID: 660890

Follow Up By: Member - Duncs - Saturday, Nov 28, 2009 at 23:14

Saturday, Nov 28, 2009 at 23:14
Hi Jon,

I never lived in Ballina, went there chasing a girl. Have visited just about every year since 79.

The mother in law lives just down the road from the K-Mart & Coles complex.

Check your MM for more details.

Duncs
0
FollowupID: 661061

Follow Up By: Member - Mike DID - Thursday, Dec 03, 2009 at 08:49

Thursday, Dec 03, 2009 at 08:49
Nose-In Angle Parking !!! Which maroon thought that was good idea ????
0
FollowupID: 661686

Reply By: Wilk0 - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:19

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:19
Hi Out of here,

I reckon B just think that hes reversing out on to traffic and should give way.


Interesting discussion though.

In my home town we angle park rear to the kurb. It is common to see out of towners ( mostly victorians) who go across the traffic to park nose in.

There could be 100 cars parked rear to the kerb either side of them but they park nose in (prob habit).

When you park the cars stop approx 10 mts short of you allowing you to reverse & park

A nieghbouring town 100kms away have rear to the kerb, the cars go around and you have to wait until the road is clear to park.


I believe the person who is parking would be in the right if there was a collision though

Cheers Wilko
AnswerID: 392768

Follow Up By: Hairs & Fysh (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:26

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:26
Hi Wilko,
In the reply above I mention to Roachie that in Yamba they now have nose in parking in some streets, But it's not every where. and you get the same thing, all the cars are parked rear to kerb and there will be a few nose in.

Funny thing is, I've never seen someone park rear to kerb, in a nose in area, but it common to see it the other way round.



0
FollowupID: 660757

Reply By: Member - Flynnie (NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:39

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:39
Well regardless of the intricacies of the law I reckon Car A driver is in the wrong.

It is more than reasonably foreseeable that doing that manoeuvre could result in a prang. Anyone making a habit of it would be a panel beater's friend. To me it is reckless in the extreme to do that manoeuvre. Car A should have proceeded up the road to a spot where a safe u turn could be made and then returned and parked. Drive in a safe manner.

It is unreasonable to presume a driver in B's position would have clear uninterrupted 360 degree vision. In fact I think a good solicitor could argue Car B driver was required to concentrate his attention to ensure that his lane was clear and he did that and it was up to driver A to keep well clear and to keep on his side of the road which he did not.

Another point driver A has crossed to the wrong side of the road, He is not turning into another road or driveway and that may be relevant. Arguably he drove on the wrong side of the road. At no time does driver A appear to be proceeding along the side of the road B is on in the same direction as the traffic flow. He did not pull of the road and park in the direction he was travelling.

Also I think he was not doing a u turn at all, as since parking was nose in he could never complete a u turn that way. 135 degrees maybe but not 180

In a broader sense driver A has failed to drive with due care. Possibly has been negligent and possibly could be successfully sued for damages regardless of who got booked. At the very least he has not driven in a manner to avoid collision.

Just my opinion.

AnswerID: 392771

Reply By: BuggerBoggedAgain - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:55

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 21:55
I would suspect that the driver of A would have seen the reversing lamps of B and noticed B was also moving in reverse, to turn any sooner he would have collected B, so that means he would have had to move a bit along to enable a 45 degree park, look at the diagram again, you will see the angle.

At what point do u think Roachie the driver of B would see the A vehicle turning, and a lot of you have not mentioned the drivers blind side which is behind on his right, seeing as he had a clear view of oncoming traffic, why would anyone assume that somebody would turn on the drivers blind-side, next thing we will need is cameras on all sides.

After waiting for truck to pass I would glance on my right, yep, no-one next door, no peds on my right, turn head to left and behind looking for oncoming traffic, proceed to reverse into traffic flow making sure that I do not hinder any vehicle coming towards me,

Now should a vehicle on my blind side wishes to cut across my direction of reversing and park in the space on my left side, then I believe A is at fault.
It only takes a few seconds of courtesy and sight to see someone trying to reverse and wait their turn
AnswerID: 392775

Reply By: Dave B ( BHQ NSW) - Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 22:54

Thursday, Nov 26, 2009 at 22:54
I saw the same thing happen here in town some months ago, with B reversing into the side of A as A hurriedly tried to get into the park before someone else nabbed it.
I must have thought that B would be in the wrong because he was reversing, because I said to the guy who was with me that "you don't have to be dead to be stiff", referring to the guy in B.
I could imagine he is totally focused on watching his left rear as he is reversing in that direction, but I don't know who cops the bluey.

Dave
'Wouldn't be dead for quids'

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 392790

Reply By: Voxson - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:53

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:53
Ok.. I stopped reading the last of the posts so if i have doubled up then sorry....

Take the truck out of the equasion because both of the other cars have to give way to that first....

It come downs to the two cars....

Car B has to give way to all traffic on the roadway.
Car A cannot make his turn unless it is safe and clear to do so.

It come down to percentage of fault.
The insurance company would try and work out something like,,,,,

Car B 80% fault.
Car A 20% fault.

Every accident comes down to percentage of fault.

Even if you drive through a blood red light (yes a blood red light),, and you clean up someone coming a green light and they are on your left the law will see the result as follows............

The car came through a green light and didnt give way their right which resulted in an accident...

Percentage would be approx.....
70% Red Lighter....
30% green lighter....

Because the law states you cannot enter an intersection if it is not safe and clear to do so,,,, and if you have hit a car which ran a red light,, then that means you didnt really look,,, because if you cant see a car running a red light then you must be blind,,, etc etc....

There are only 4 accidents you can have which will result in you being 100% in the right..

1. If you hit someone doing a proven "u" turn.
2. If you hit someone leaving a sliplane at the exact time they leave if you are on the road they are entering travelling the same direction.
3. If you are hit by someone from behind within reason.
4. If you hit someone turning right across the road into your path of travel with the front of your car and the passenger side of theirs.

AnswerID: 392845

Follow Up By: Member - Tony V (NSW) - Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 14:33

Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 14:33
Voxson,

Dissagree

You say.
1. Car B has to give way to all traffic on the roadway.
2. Car A cannot make his turn unless it is safe and clear to do so.

I would suggest that.
Car B has to give way to all traffic in his lane NOT the other side of the road, because it is illegal to cross the white (solid or dotted) line.

Car B waited until his side of the road was clear and his manoeuvre was never going to impinge on the lane of traffic going in the opposite direction.

There is no doubt that Car A on the other hand is changing lanes has crossed the lane and had did not checked to make sure it was clear.

What is forgotten is that a normal road is 2 x one way streets joined in the middle the law for changing from one to the other is clear.

Forget about car B and imaging a pedestrian who is looking for traffic from the right and you have a dead person.

NSW Road Rules.

If U turn is allowed.
Rule 37 (b) Driver not safely begin U-turn without obstructing traffic* $197 and 2 demerit points
Rule 38 Make U-turn without giving way to vehicle/pedestrian* $253 and 3 demerit points
Rule 39 (1) Make U-turn at break in dividing strip contrary to sign* $197 and 2 demerit points

If U turn is not allowed.
Rule 132 (1) Not keep left of centre on two-way road $253 fine and 3 demerit points
Rule 132 (2) Not keep left of dividing line 253 fine and 3 demerit points
Rule 132 (2A) Drive across dividing lines to perform U-turn 253 fine and 3 demerit points

The person driving forward has 280 degrees of vision, the person reversing and looking over his shoulder has 30 to 45 degrees.

Have a look at the drawing again.



V or U turn, semantics, Car A definitely changed lanes, quote: "a turn made so as to head in the opposite direction"
To get to that parking spot that is accessible from the opposite direction, car A had to access the other lane, no matter how briefly and needs to ensure that that lane is clear or pedestrians or vehicles.

This turn was not at a marked junction or access to an off road property (driveway), so not a legal turn, it is either changing lanes or a U -Turn.

For all those who debated if this action was a U Turn

u-turn definition
U·-turn (yo?¯o¯'t?rn') noun

a turn made so as to head in the opposite direction: used esp. of a vehicle in a street or road figuratively, a reversal of opinion, strategy, etc.

Etymology: so named because the path of the turn is typically -shaped

Webster's New World College Dictionary Copyright © 2009 by Wiley Publishing, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio.
Used by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Definition of a U - Turn.
0
FollowupID: 661566

Follow Up By: Voxson - Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 16:55

Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 16:55
South Aust.......

What was drawn is not a "U" turn.

You can cross a centre broken dividing line for any purpose as long as all the right observations and indicatons are adhered to.

You can cross a solid centre dividing line (single) for the purpose of entering or leaving a road.

30 - 45degrees over your shoulder,,, WHATEVER......

If you are only checking over one shoulder then you are looking for a smash.

I gather you are reading these straight from a book....
0
FollowupID: 661585

Reply By: brushmarx - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:07

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:07
For what it's worth, I put car A in the wrong.
I see it as car A doing two different manouvres combining it into one illegal move.
The first act would be the U turn to position the car in the opposing lane, followed by a turn into the carpark.
Indication should be right flashers for the U turn, and then after the legal time equalling 30 metres of travel (or whatever NSW has), left flshares to turn into the carpark.
If car A turned into the carpark, I would assume correct indication was not forthcoming, putting Car A in the wrong.
Cheers
AnswerID: 392847

Reply By: DIO - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:27

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:27
'A' - Reversing without Due Care. 'B' - Drive without Due Car.
AnswerID: 392854

Reply By: HGMonaro - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:28

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:28
hate people who try this... Years ago... 1997 to be exact... I was parked in the carpark beside/above the empty one in this picture, picking up a wedding cake... old mate attempts this and fails to turn enough and scraps his bumper down the side of my brand new HSV Clubsport... the brides car in the wedding we're picking up the cake for! thankfully it was the drivers side and not the passengers side, not that most wedding guests whould have noticed! Luckily I was on the way back to the car and got his details before he could do a runner... cost him about a grand.
AnswerID: 392856

Reply By: OREJAP - Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 21:07

Friday, Nov 27, 2009 at 21:07
Car B at fault reverse when unsafe.
AnswerID: 392948

Reply By: get outmore - Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 22:49

Wednesday, Dec 02, 2009 at 22:49
car B has reversed without duecare
3 demerit points and a fine
been there done that
AnswerID: 393548

Reply By: Member - Timbo - Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 19:08

Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 19:08
Generally, the car that is reversing is usually the one considered to be at fault.

As has been said: Car A performing the u-turn must give way to all vehicles and pedestrians. However, I think what is implied in the u-turn rule is that the driver must give way to all vehicles and pedestrians travelling along the road (in either direction) rather than those entering the road, refer Rule 37 and Rule 38.

Further, Car B reversing must give way to all vehicles and pedestrians, refer Rule 296. Additionally, Car B entering the road (from the side of the road, or road related area) must give way to all vehicles already on the road, refer Rule 74.

I had a sneaking suspicion that it was illegal to enter an angle parking space from the opposite side of the road (ie. the manoeuvre that Car A did) but after quite a bit of searching I can't find any reference to it.

So in summary, I'd suggest that Car B is in the wrong. Car A failed to give way to a vehicle that was not even on the road but Car B failed to give way while reversing and failed to give way while entering the road - yes, there's an awful lot to watch out for when reversing out of a parking space!

The National Road Rules can be viewed/downloaded (PDF) by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.
AnswerID: 394659

Reply By: Member - TJ (VIC) - Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:48

Friday, Dec 11, 2009 at 23:48
I think there is so much confusion in this thread about "who is in the wrong". There are two aspects of law to this. Criminal Law and Civil Law. Sometimes you may be doing something that may be technicallly considered by the Police to be illegal but when an insurance company has to consider if they can make a recovery this illegality can be tossed out the window.
AnswerID: 394706

Reply By: Best Off Road - Saturday, Dec 12, 2009 at 07:14

Saturday, Dec 12, 2009 at 07:14
I would suggest it depends on which law overrides which.

Here is an example. Years ago I looked after our self insured cars at the company I worked for. One of our Sales Reps gave another vehicle a "Liberace", which was caused by the driver in front braking savagely to avoid hitting a dog. The law states you are not permitted to brake to avoid hitting an animal.

I argued that driver in front broke the law which caused the accident ie had he not braked our Rep wouldn't have given him a "Rock Hudson".

The bloke from the Insurance Company of the car in front as good as laughed at me and told me that the car in the rear in accident is always at fault. I rang the Old Man (he was a lawyer) to get an opinion. He said give up, your Rep is 100% in the wrong.

So I guess it comes down to which law is "sacrosanct". My totally uneducated guess is that Car A would be deemed to be doing a U Turn and is at fault regardless of what the other car has done.

Jim.

AnswerID: 394720

Sponsored Links