Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/13/2005 5:16:21 PM EDT
Alright traffic gurus... whatcha think?

Major roadway with six lanes of traffic (3 north, 3 south and a LHTL).

1545 HRS in crawling bumper-to bumper traffic. A minivan going southbound pulls into the LHTL and signals to make a left turn (E) into a private drive.

Traffic in the #1 northbound lane stops and yields to the van to make the turn, as do the vehicles in the #2 and #3 NB lanes. The distance between the yielding vehicles and the traffic in front of them is about two vehicle lengths.

A motorcycle is coming northbound splitting the lanes (100% legal here) between NB #1 and #2 lanes. He is doing well under the speed limit and traffic is stopped on both sides of him.

The turning van and MC impact at almost a perfect 45% angle in front of the three yielding vehicles. Major injuries to MC guy but van driver is unhurt.

Van states he did not see MC and vice-versa.



1. Who's at fault?

2. Primary collision factor?

Use your state laws as applicable.



Link Posted: 9/13/2005 5:25:49 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 6:04:46 PM EDT
I would call a CHP buddy.
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 8:06:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/13/2005 8:33:41 PM EDT by jadams951]
In TX the through traffic has the right of way and here the driver of the van would be cited for fail to yield right of way-left turn.

Just to add that you must maintain a single lane of traffic so the MC could be cited for that or shown on the accident report to be a contributing factor for the accident.

Link Posted: 9/13/2005 8:13:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jadams951:
In TX the through traffic has the right of way and here the driver of the van would be cited for fail to yield right of way-left turn.






Sounds right to me in IL, although up here the motorcycle splitting the lanes is a no no. They have to wait just like everyone else, but if its legal there OK.
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 10:05:55 PM EDT
spiltting lanes in GA is illegal so in this case the MC would be at fault. What we have most is the three lanes stop in traffic wave the guy across and a car comes up in the turn lane and smacks them, then they are at fault for failure to yield while turning
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:23:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jadams951:
In TX the through traffic has the right of way and here the driver of the van would be cited for fail to yield right of way-left turn.

Just to add that you must maintain a single lane of traffic so the MC could be cited for that or shown on the accident report to be a contributing factor for the accident.




Ditto.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:31:43 AM EDT
Elementary, NorCal...

First of all, NONE of the northbound vehicles yielded to the turning van. It would have to have the right of way in order for them to have yielded. The driver of the van had a duty of care to ensure that he could safely make the turn out of his LHTL into the driveway. If he cannot see a n/b motorcycle legally splitting lanes and turns anyway, thereby failing to Yield to the n/b motorcycle, the crash is his fault, and he should be cited for failing to yield turning left.

There should be a vehicle law that makes it illegal for a driver to stop and wave through drivers who are either trying to exit to, or enter from, private drives. They're not doing anyone any favors.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:50:10 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 5:14:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bucky145:

Originally Posted By jadams951:
In TX the through traffic has the right of way and here the driver of the van would be cited for fail to yield right of way-left turn.






Sounds right to me in IL, although up here the motorcycle splitting the lanes is a no no. They have to wait just like everyone else, but if its legal there OK.



Same answer here.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 6:15:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By npd233:
Elementary, NorCal...

First of all, NONE of the northbound vehicles yielded to the turning van. It would have to have the right of way in order for them to have yielded. The driver of the van had a duty of care to ensure that he could safely make the turn out of his LHTL into the driveway. If he cannot see a n/b motorcycle legally splitting lanes and turns anyway, thereby failing to Yield to the n/b motorcycle, the crash is his fault, and he should be cited for failing to yield turning left.

There should be a vehicle law that makes it illegal for a driver to stop and wave through drivers who are either trying to exit to, or enter from, private drives. They're not doing anyone any favors.




correcto!


Lane splitting is a dangerous practice. glad it's not legal here.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 8:03:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By npd233:
Elementary, NorCal...

First of all, NONE of the northbound vehicles yielded to the turning van. It would have to have the right of way in order for them to have yielded. The driver of the van had a duty of care to ensure that he could safely make the turn out of his LHTL into the driveway. If he cannot see a n/b motorcycle legally splitting lanes and turns anyway, thereby failing to Yield to the n/b motorcycle, the crash is his fault, and he should be cited for failing to yield turning left.

There should be a vehicle law that makes it illegal for a driver to stop and wave through drivers who are either trying to exit to, or enter from, private drives. They're not doing anyone any favors.



That's what I came up with. Kind of a bad situation for the van driver... I think anyone would reasonably assume that 3 cars stopped equals three lanes clear, but the MC had ROW and was legal. Both drivers were nice people.

I also agree with the waving stuff. I NEVER cross like that. I go to the next intersection and U turn. Here, it is really bad when people do this within 200 ft of an intersection when the lane widens up. Never fails, all lanes stop and some guy is whizzing up the side into the turn pocket and BAM, broadside.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 11:49:08 AM EDT
If splitting lanes were legal here in FL, the van would get a failure to yield because he entered the MC's lane. The stopped cars were just being courteous, the MC had the right to continue his direction of travel. We arent required to write citations at crashes but if I wanted to I would probably have done the above.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 12:09:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/14/2005 12:11:15 PM EDT by SheepDog_556]

Originally Posted By NorCal_LEO:
Alright traffic gurus... whatcha think?

Major roadway with six lanes of traffic (3 north, 3 south and a LHTL).

1545 HRS in crawling bumper-to bumper traffic. A minivan going southbound pulls into the LHTL and signals to make a left turn (E) into a private drive.

Traffic in the #1 northbound lane stops and yields to the van to make the turn, as do the vehicles in the #2 and #3 NB lanes. The distance between the yielding vehicles and the traffic in front of them is about two vehicle lengths.

A motorcycle is coming northbound splitting the lanes (100% legal here) between NB #1 and #2 lanes. He is doing well under the speed limit and traffic is stopped on both sides of him.

The turning van and MC impact at almost a perfect 45% angle in front of the three yielding vehicles. Major injuries to MC guy but van driver is unhurt.

Van states he did not see MC and vice-versa.



*Traffic Crash Reconstruction Specialist Hat On

1. Who's at fault?
Idiot van driver.

2. Primary collision factor?
Stupidity. (Failure to yield ROW - through traffic).

*Edit: For Illinois, bike rider would be at fault, as lane splitting is illegal.


Use your state laws as applicable.







Sheep
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 2:32:44 PM EDT
Rookie police officer hat on - learned something new today. I would have called our traffic guys

Veteran m/c rider (and lane splitter) hat on - m/c rider is a dumbass and although not legally responsible he better not be bitching about the idiotic cage driver. M/C rider had his head up his ass, thus reducing his high visual horizon.

Brian
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:47:58 PM EDT
Sorry, I work Transit. If you get a question about jumping a turnstyle or selling swipes, then I'm your man.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 6:10:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By brian4wd:
Rookie police officer hat on - learned something new today. I would have called our traffic guys

Veteran m/c rider (and lane splitter) hat on - m/c rider is a dumbass and although not legally responsible he better not be bitching about the idiotic cage driver. M/C rider had his head up his ass, thus reducing his high visual horizon.

Brian



Come to think of it, you could argue the case that the restricted field of view of the motorcyclist while splitting lanes would necessitate that he went pretty damn slow while doing so. Did the cycle hit the side of the van or the van hit the side of the cycle? Either way, van is still at fault for not yielding to oncoming traffic, but cyclist could theoretically be cited with driving too fast for conditions, given his limited field of view.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 7:28:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/14/2005 7:29:54 PM EDT by KnobCreek]
It seems that allowing for lane splitting is a pretty stupid idea nowadays. I say that because in the past cars predominated. Rather low to the ground which would allow for a driver to see a person driving a motorcyle between vehicles. However, nowadays with the predominance of SUVs, Minivans, Picku-truck and other much high profile vehicles, the possiblilty of the driver not being able to see a motorcyle splitting lanes is virtually guaranteed.

Times have changed and it seems the lane splitting right is negliently in existance. How can one yield to something they can't see until it's already upon them.
Link Posted: 9/15/2005 6:23:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NorCal_LEO:

tenninetyseven.homestead.com/files/traffic.gif

1. Who's at fault? The van

2. Primary collision factor? It was the responsability of the van's driver to yield to the traffic that he was crossing. Even though the motorcycle was lane splitting, which is not legal here in VA, it still had the right of way.

Use your state laws as applicable.




Link Posted: 9/16/2005 9:50:59 PM EDT
k9dpd has my opinion according to ND statute and my own areas policy.

Coudl technically cite both drivers since we only cite moving violations, we don't select a driver specifically for fault.
Link Posted: 9/17/2005 8:31:24 AM EDT
I would also have to say that if it is legal for the motorcycle to ride in the lane like it did then the fault would be with the driver of the van for making an improper/unsafe turn. It is up to the driver trying to turn to make sure traffic is clear all the way around. Just like the person that flags someone onto the raodway thinking all oncomming traffic is clear and gets the other driver hit.
Link Posted: 9/17/2005 2:11:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/17/2005 2:15:13 PM EDT by cmoth]
I'm beginning to hate LHTLs. While they are convenient and assist in keeping traffic flowing when they are used appropriately, they are being used more and more inappropriately.

Oh well, cite em' all and let the judge sort em' out...

I don't want to imply that we should be citing everything that moves. My PD's policy is to cite ALL moving violations commited by either driver involved. Our area has snow and ice problems during the winter (understatement). One year the icing on the roads and alleys was so bad that it was impossible to stop, just moving at all was dangerous and technically anyone operating on the roadways (including us) could have been negligent. We must have worked around 10 accidents each due to people sliding into things. I witnessed three of them. All of the vehicles I watched were barely moving yet started sliding as soon as they touched their brakes. I tried to be nice that day and write written warnings, EHHH, wrong answer. My Lt made me go to all if the people I had issued warnings and re-issue citations. That SUCKED. I talked to the judge and the fines were all dismissed even though they were found guilty for the violations. Bummer.
Link Posted: 9/18/2005 6:52:31 AM EDT
Although I'm in IL (lane split illegal, as previously posted), I'll chime in too.

Admittedly, while the van that was crossing is "at fault" (Left turn loses) I thought (due to a piece in Rider magazine several years ago) there was a caveat in CA traffic law that any accident was fault of MC that was lane splitting... maybe there isn't.

We've got a similar "killer" intersection just down the road from our FD #2. 45 mph State Highway meets US highway at a light... the EB SH goes from 2 lanes each way to LHT/STR/STR/RHT about 200' before the US highway... and right before the USH is a SB frontage road; many WB folks will try to turn onto the frontage road... traffic EB will be stopped at the light, the stopped EB drivers will wave a car through the two stopped lanes, only for the (now SB) driver to discover some guy in a hurry to turn R (S) on the USH clipping along at 40 or so.
Link Posted: 9/18/2005 7:29:14 AM EDT
In California, the van driver should be cited for failure to yield the right of way to the motorcycle. The motorcycle has the right of way and legally lane splitting.

The van driver had the responsibility to be more careful when crossing lanes of traffic.

Sucks for both the drivers. The van driver for being at fault and the motorcycle rider for getting injured.
Top Top