Who's responsible legally?

[martine]

So I did a road safety seminar for a bunch of drivers today who drive as part of their job. During the session I show this video:


...which you may have seen before as there is was discussed on a thread elsewhere.

One of the participants asked me which driver would be responsible legally? (one driving too fast, the other pulling out when it's not safe). I wasn't sure.

Of course, that's the point really, both are responsible morally...but...

How would the police view the driver's actions? Would an insurance company view it differently? Any thoughts?

[TheInsanity1234]

Holy... That does hit you hard!

I would've thought that maybe the car pulling out would be seen as being at fault if he was pulling out from a side road into a main road. Having said that, he could defend it as thinking he had enough time because he wasn't expecting the other driver to be speeding.
That's not to say the other driver will get off for speeding. One suspects if the speeding driver survives, and the other driver dies, then the court would prosecute him for manslaughter due to reckless speed.

[vonhosen]

So I did a road safety seminar for a bunch of drivers today who drive as part of their job. During the session I show this video:


...which you may have seen before as there is was discussed on a thread elsewhere.

One of the participants asked me which driver would be responsible legally? (one driving too fast, the other pulling out when it's not safe). I wasn't sure.

Of course, that's the point really, both are responsible morally...but...

How would the police view the driver's actions? Would an insurance company view it differently? Any thoughts?

In all likelihood both are legally responsible. Many things would have to be considered to determine to what degree each individually is liable.

[martine]

In all likelihood both are legally responsible. Many things would have to be considered to determine to what degree each individually is liable.

Like what?

[sussex2]

Quite often when things come to court (at the moment) responsibility is shared; unless total lack of care or consideration can be proved.
In a criminal court it must be beyond reasonable doubt; in a civil court there are less clear distinctions.

[sussex2]

The video is from New Zealand I believe? A country that has a higher rate of road deaths per 1000 than the UK. In my brief glance they have a higher rate than most EU countries.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

But I did not troll through every country.

[trashbat]

It might be obvious, but it's only in awarding damages that one need decide the balance of responsibility, i.e. to apportion blame between the two parties.

In any other context, both drivers can be innocent or guilty to whatever degree, and the sum of that doesn't need to add up to any figure.

We often confuse insurance settlements with absolute blame, whereas of course it's merely relative.

[martine]

The video is from New Zealand I believe? A country that has a higher rate of road deaths per 1000 than the UK. In my brief glance they have a higher rate than most EU countries.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

But I did not troll through every country.

Indeed it is...and why do you mention this?

[vonhosen]

In all likelihood both are legally responsible. Many things would have to be considered to determine to what degree each individually is liable.

Like what?

Speed, sight lines, length of time car would have been visible at speed it was travelling etc etc.

[ROG]

I go along with the DSA test examiners on this .....

See another and do not pull out until you KNOW it is safe NO MATTER WHAT THE SPEED of the other vehicle

Pull out with no other in sight then its the fault of the speeder

[sussex2]

The video is from New Zealand I believe? A country that has a higher rate of road deaths per 1000 than the UK. In my brief glance they have a higher rate than most EU countries.

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... death_rate

But I did not troll through every country.

Indeed it is...and why do you mention this?

They obviously feel they have a need to make such a video; and it seems that indeed they do.
I have heard from relations that the standard of driving in NZ is not too bright and also that it is often aggressive.

[martine]

They obviously feel they have a need to make such a video; and it seems that indeed they do.
I have heard from relations that the standard of driving in NZ is not too bright and also that it is often aggressive.

Do you not think the UK would benefit from such a video? Personally I think it's one of the best road safety videos I've seen...it make the point about multiple errors and how seemingly simple slips can have disastrous consequences. It's believable and not 'preachy' and quite shocking - which is powerful.

[sussex2]

They obviously feel they have a need to make such a video; and it seems that indeed they do.
I have heard from relations that the standard of driving in NZ is not too bright and also that it is often aggressive.

Do you not think the UK would benefit from such a video? Personally I think it's one of the best road safety videos I've seen...it make the point about multiple errors and how seemingly simple slips can have disastrous consequences. It's believable and not 'preachy' and quite shocking - which is powerful.

We seem to have almost given up on such things but if we did I would prefer to see one which had the topic of our frankly appalling treatment of pedestrians; those footed road users not on one of the very few recognised crossings.
We really are so poor at that.
As to your initial question I believe we could but we don't like to show nasty things on TV these days; unless it is happening in somebody else's country.

[Ancient]

We seem to have almost given up on such things but if we did I would prefer to see one which had the topic of our frankly appalling treatment of pedestrians; those footed road users not on one of the very few recognised crossings.
We really are so poor at that.
As to your initial question I believe we could but we don't like to show nasty things on TV these days; unless it is happening in somebody else's country.

Indeed, or perhaps something to convince people that careful driving is not unachievable, that driving when you cannot see clearly where you are going is reckless and that low sun occurs regularly and fog, shade and blind bends - are predictable.

[martine]

So if you were in charge of the budget for public education at the DfT - what would you spend your money on? What would be top of your list...pedestrians casualties, young drivers, cyclists, HGV, bikers - they are all 'deserving' causes but money is limited.