ADUK Archive

I was always told that those decending shill have priority?

You are coming down a hill were the road narrows. A vehicle at the bottom has come from a junction on the left if your the person decending. They pause and so you continue into the narrow section but then they start to ascend into the narrowing road.

This happened to partner today and one car now has a damaged wing mirror lense.

I would suggest knock for knock.

Although I repeat that I believe the decending vehicle hand priority?

Vehicle going uphill has priority because, on an especially steep hill, some with a low power to weight ratio may not be able to get going again.

If you stop on the way down, all you need to do is release the brakes to start moving. There should never be an issue where a road-worthy vehicle is unable to stop when heading down a hill.

There is argument either as that makes sense. I know the driver and they position into the gap. Like i said the car at the bottom paused so the driver decending carried on. It might be worth mentioning that it's flat at the bottom and the driver at the bottom would of been on almost flat road before moving into the gap for one car.

Rule 155 states

155
Single-track roads. These are only wide enough for one vehicle. They may have special passing places. If you see a vehicle coming towards you, or the driver behind wants to overtake, pull into a passing place on your left, or wait opposite a passing place on your right. Give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can. If necessary, reverse until you reach a passing place to let the other vehicle pass. Slow down when passing pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.

Gareth wrote:Vehicle going uphill has priority because, on an especially steep hill, some with a low power to weight ratio may not be able to get going again.

If you stop on the way down, all you need to do is release the brakes to start moving. There should never be an issue where a road-worthy vehicle is unable to stop when heading down a hill.

DITTO

Especially done where two LGVs are involved but the same principal applies across the board

IIRC a paragraph in Driving the Essential Skills advises that if safe, a driver should give priority to a vehicle ascending a hill, especially if it's an LGV. As I read this, I would say that priority would be given to the ascending vehicle, although it is a rather grey area.

ROG wrote:

Gareth wrote:Vehicle going uphill has priority because, on an especially steep hill, some with a low power to weight ratio may not be able to get going again.

If you stop on the way down, all you need to do is release the brakes to start moving. There should never be an issue where a road-worthy vehicle is unable to stop when heading down a hill.

DITTO

Especially done where two LGVs are involved but the same principal applies across the board

I understand the rational. In this case you would need to wait until the road is clear as the decending driver saw the driver at the bottom emerge from the junction and pull to a stop by which time decending driver has taken control of the gap, when the golf driver decides to move off and start ascension of the hill. Then meets decending driver in the gap and wing mirrors touch.

The decinding drivers fiesta is unscathed. The ascending drivers mk4 golf had a shattered lense. Sounds like the golf driver showed signs of waiting for the fiesta which which had taken control of the gap. The fiesta also hand a car behind so it wasn't possible for her now committed to give way to the indecisive golf driver.

While the highway code advises giving way to vehicles coming up the hill in my view neither vehicle has strict priority, and thus neither driver should have assumed priority. One could argue that both drivers should have realised there was insufficient space and both stopped before the collision, which would incline me to a knock for knock (or if one stopped and the other kept going I would err towards them taking the rap).

There are two caveats in my mind. Firstly he fact that the third party paused might reasonably have been taken to mean that they were giving way. The other remaining question in my mind is the suggestion in the account that they had just emerged from a road junction. Did they emerge when it was not possible for them to do so without causing your partner to change speed or direction? If so did the junction have a give way or stop marking?

The question in my mind is did either of these factors significantly impact the time and space that the descender had in which to react properly to the imminent collision?

I've always worked on the rule Daz mentioned from the highway code. Aside from legislation the highway code would be held above other books or training documents as the driving theory test includes questions on it and it is supposed to be common knowledge to all drivers (I know not true).

Was the road simply not wide enough for two vehicles or was the restriction caused by parked vehicles, a skip, trees/ bushes ?

michael769 wrote:While the highway code advises giving way to vehicles coming up the hill in my view neither vehicle has strict priority, and thus neither driver should have assumed priority. One could argue that both drivers should have realised there was insufficient space and both stopped before the collision, which would incline me to a knock for knock (or if one stopped and the other kept going I would err towards them taking the rap).

There are two caveats in my mind. Firstly he fact that the third party paused might reasonably have been taken to mean that they were giving way. The other remaining question in my mind is the suggestion in the account that they had just emerged from a road junction. Did they emerge when it was not possible for them to do so without causing your partner to change speed or direction? If so did the junction have a give way or stop marking?

The question in my mind is did either of these factors significantly impact the time and space that the descender had in which to react properly to the imminent collision?

It's quite normal having driven this road for 4 years that most drivers emerge and wait at the flat bottom before moving into the gap. I can't remember this scenario ever happening to me as most wait at the bottom. However I would of probably stopped in th gap having committed myself and waited for aforementioned golf driver to reserve back out of the gap. However I wasn't driving in this case.

The golf driver wants a new wing mirror lense but only swapped phone numbers so I Am tempted to sa it's knock for knock and she will have to pay fever her lense.

Standard Dave wrote:I've always worked on the rule Daz mentioned from the highway code. Aside from legislation the highway code would be held above other books or training documents as the driving theory test includes questions on it and it is supposed to be common knowledge to all drivers (I know not true).

Was the road simply not wide enough for two vehicles or was the restriction caused by parked vehicles, a skip, trees/ bushes ?

No parked cars road narrows at the bottom just as the hil begins.

Excuse the night camera pics but here>

Golf drivers view whilst stopped at junction


Decending drivers view at point of commitment signified by he finger posts.



Were the golf driver roughly paused still on flat. Again figure show the narrowing .

From the photos you've posted, it looks as if the driver emerging into the narrow road had vision, whereas the driver on the narrow road could not see the junction. Therefore, maybe the emerging driver could have waited.

On the basis of the pictures, while the emerging driver would have been able to see the oncoming but due to the distances and speeds (assuming your partner was within an appropriate range) it was not inappropriate for the driver to emerge when they did as it would clearly be possible for them to get into a position where they woudl not impede the oncoming vehicle.

It looks like the third party paused earlier than strictly necessary but I would be inclined to say that it still would be reasonable for a driver in the position of your partner to conclude that they were giving way to her and to for her to react accordingly. The only remaining question is how quickly it should have been apparent to her that they had (presumably) changed their mind, but I would note that from the photographs it would appear that the third party would have more time and space to react than your partner did.

I am in no doubt that she is aware that her insurance contract requires that she reports this incident to her insurers even if she choose to meet the claim out of her own pocket.

EDIT: But I would reiterate that the law requires that the third party did not emerge from the give way in such a manner as to endanger traffic on the main road or to cause them to change speed or direction.

fungus wrote:From the photos you've posted, it looks as if the driver emerging into the narrow road had vision, whereas the driver on the narrow road could not see the junction. Therefore, maybe the emerging driver could have waited.

Yes common sense wold predict, however I think impatience n the golf drivers part and the mindset that ascending drivers have priority ment she proceed even after pausing and giving the impression of giving way.

Like I said in 4/5 years most drivers even impatient ones wait somewhere at the bottom even if closing up slightly as its not a scenario I have come across.

In fact as I decending the hill even after pausing to take my snap some body with common sense gave way to me tonight.