Apportion blame for this roundabout crash?

[trashbat]

This is actually a thread about me on my mountain bike, but I think it would be broadly the same on a PTW, so I've posted it here. I'm interested in exploring this to work out how to adapt my riding (and driving) style.

I crashed my bike yesterday when a car to my left pulled out on me at a roundabout (here - imagine the van pulled out). Not misinterpreted or anything, just a classic SMIDSY.

I don't know how fast I was going, except that from experience you can't go round it quicker than about 25mph. Anyway thanks to disc brakes, I did a super cool but inadvertent endo and went into their bonnet at a thankfully reduced speed. No obvious injury bar a few aches and pains, and no obvious damage to the bike.

All this left me wondering a few things about this and traffic accidents in general.

• Can I be held at all responsible for taking a legal route around a roundabout at a legal speed, with no traffic to my right? e.g. could anyone say "you were going too fast for the conditions and poor visibility here''? [I suspect I can]
  
  
• If it's said that I should have slowed for increased visibility, or been able to emergency stop in time, where do you draw the line? At some point it becomes physically impossible to still make progress.
  
  
• If I hadn't hit the offending car but swerved and hit either another vehicle or someone's property, how would liability be affected?
  
  
• If I hadn't hit the offending car but swerved and crashed doing no damage to anyone but myself, how would liability be affected?

I ask the last two because it applies everywhere - e.g. the moral and pragmatic question of do you avoid a worse head on collision by hitting someone blameless? It certainly seems more straightforward to hit the car to me, if perhaps not the most comfortable option.

I have a picture of the junction from their perspective somewhere, and I can understand how it happened - from behind the give way markings, there's no view. From a little further forward before getting into the path of traffic, there's a view of the last bit of that approach.

One thing I found interesting was this: under normal circumstances, my line means that the van driver has to get quite a lot further forward to get in the way. However if they move far enough forward, I 'decide' I'm going to crash. This means that half way through my turn before the roundabout centre, I instinctively brake in a straight line - it's not really consciously avoidable. This may be part of something called target fixation but either way any chance of that line goes out the window and we are definitely going to collide - whereas it's possible I could still have got around.

Thoughts?

[gannet]

first of all, great that you are ok.

You don't say (unless I missed it) what your approach line is to the roundabout? I would be on the right towards the small island. That way you enhance your view as well as making yourself more visible to vehicles looking to come out on the left.

Also what do you wear - bright clothing or ?

as for blame... it's a roundabout, you had right of way regardless of your mode of transport.

If I'm about to have a crash, primary goal is to avoid injury as much as possible, worry about the consequences about who was hit etc after the event.

oh and I agree disc brakes on bikes are great

[trashbat]

This is a rough approximation of my line:



Unlike a PTW, I can't effectively brake and signal so I rely on my position to make it clear what I'm going to do - not that it made any difference here. The position does significantly improve my sightline there. As I go around, I then move left a touch to get a better line around the roundabout, and come out of it on the left so that traffic can pass me again.

Clothing - always bright colours, often high vis but not on this occasion.

Edit: here's their PoV:

[IVORTHE DRIVER]

Hi

Good you are ok but it can be hard to be in the "correct" place on a r/bout on a bike due to its small size.

My wife had a very near miss on her bike last week on a bigger 4 junction r/bout.

She was going straight across (2nd exit) using what would have been the near side of lane 2 (ie nearest the centre) which I would consider to be correct (2nd exit is approx 1 oclock position) and certainly where I would have been, when a car squeezed up to her right then cut across her nose to turn left (into 1st exit) !!

All roads into this r/bout are single carriegway but r/bout is large enough for 2 lanes unfortunately with no markings which makes for some interesting lines, but given that there was over 12ft to her left and only about 6ft to her right it does make you wonder what on earth the car driver was looking at.

If I was clever I would add the google map pic of this r/bout

Ivor

[gannet]

that would be my line too

brake and signal at the same time - back brake ?

I think you afford the other person too much empathy saying that they couldn't see because of the angle, doesn't look that bad to me, they just didn't see you or weren't looking

[IVORTHE DRIVER]

Hi again,

"trashbat", having just read your other post might I suggest you might like to avoid r/bouts as they seem to cause you a problem or two

Ivor

[trashbat]

Heh - this crash just made me assess a lot of things and that happened to be one of them

[IVORTHE DRIVER]

I also like the van in the picture "confidential destruction" does that mean they can kill you and no-one would ever know

[brianhaddon]

First of all, and most importantly, just to echo the others - it is good you are ok.
Now, I am not interested in blame but you asked what you could different and this is my take.
The roundabout reminds me of a roundabout in my village where the view from 'your' perspective for where you are going and from your right is fine, so approaches may be quicker. But for the van (in the picture) the view for the immediate right is restricted. The second photo doesn't quite show the view from the van's perspective as it is beyond the line. From my village point of view it has meant a number of near misses as someone pulls out into, what initially is, a clear road but then rapidly changes to a vehicle approaching quickly. My approach in the village is to approach slowly (much slower than 25mph), even though the view to right and ahead is clear to allow for someone pulling out in front of me. Think about where the (van) driver is looking and the time he has to respond as you approach. So regardless of whether the driver should have seen you I would approach from the direction you did very slowly, especially on a bike.

Regards
Brian Haddon

[martine]

Ditto: I guess it could easily have been a lot worse - glad you're OK.

I'm sure as a general rule liability can be apportioned even if someone was legally correct. Don't know about this specific incident but if I were judge I think I would like to know how fast you approached and therefore how long someone waiting at the 2nd exit had to decide and react.

If I was devil's advocate I would say you know the junction and therefore you have a responsiblity to slow enough to give other road users a chance to react...even if it's only for your own self preservation . In advanced driving we make allowance for others, not just keep to the letter of the law.

[Gareth]

My view is that you need to consider the perception of other road users. You may be travelling below the speed limit yet still arrive at a point of possible conflict much faster and more quickly than other road users may expect. Knowing this, it would be wise to adjust your approach speed accordingly.

[trashbat]

Three good points, thanks for responding. I must have been around this roundabout up to a thousand times - every working day for four years - and I only recollect a couple of near misses in this fashion, but there's no doubt I could have mitigated it by slowing down.

My own observation and reaction was definitely slowed by heavily focusing on potential danger to the right, with some assumption that there would be nothing to the left - not usually the case in simpler scenarios like approaching a side road - which left me with limited time to brake. I probably collided at about 5-10mph in the end, hard to say.

I did get a bit lucky - hit the driver's side wing and splatted into, not over, the bonnet. If I'd gone in front of a moving car (I think she stopped because I shouted, pre-collision) or e.g. into the window, or in any way properly come off the bike rather than getting stuck with it up in the air (classy), it'd have been worse for me.

[martine]

Your crash description reminds me of a line from the wonderful (and wise) film: Toy Story...

[ROG]

My guess would be that the door pillar blocked the drivers view of you

Nearly got caught by that damn pillar a few weeks ago in a similar situation when at a junction - my speed and that of the cycle were in unison with the door pillar on my N/S
Head rocking cured it

New rhyme - don't be a knocker, be a rocker

[MGF]

...Can I be held at all responsible for taking a legal route around a roundabout at a legal speed, with no traffic to my right? e.g. could anyone say "you were going too fast for the conditions and poor visibility here''?

If you were injured and made a personal injury claim then not slowing sufficiently for the roundabout might constitute 'contributory' negligence which might reduce the driver's liability. We are expected to drive/ride in a manner that allows for other's mistakes.

It is quite common for PI claims to be reduced by 10-20% because the claimant could've mitigated the severity of the accident even where they obviously had priority.

If it's said that I should have slowed for increased visibility, or been able to emergency stop in time, where do you draw the line? At some point it becomes physically impossible to still make progress.

How long is a piece of string? I would suggest that, bearing in mind the lack of view you should reduce your speed significantly. I am impressed you could negotiate this RAB on a mountain bike at 25mph. What is a PTW? powered two wheeler?