I had a bit of a tussle with another driver recently and reflecting on it just want to know who was at fault, or more at fault.

Basically cruising at 65 on a clear and dead straight dual carriageway witha very long sliproad merging to the left. A car comes into view and starts to accelarate up to motorway speed until he is almost exactly parallel to me. The car then starts to drift out to merge, the other driver doesn't look like he is taking any notice I'm there so I honk my horn. For some reason I did not pull out into lane 2 to help him merge despite it being clear to do so as I guess I felt that he has had plenty of time to either accelarate slower to merge behind me or give it some beans and pull in front (it was quite a reasonably powered car). Also it felt like one of those situations where if I'd pulled into lane 2 he would effectively have undertaken me.

Anyway he pulls in right up my arse, pulls alongside then does the whole childish pull in front and brake for a split second manouvre before heading off. I just gestured to him to use his eyes and shook my head.

But anyway, it is merging cars responsibility to merge safely isn't it? Its not up to cars already on the carriageway to change their course, I know 90% of the time we all do. I felt a bit bad about it as I usually drive on the over-courteous side I think and I could've taken action not to cause a conflict. but also I think sometimes people should be made aware that they don't own the road and can do everything exactly as they arrogantly want.

Whilst I believe it is the responsibility of the merging driver to ensure it is safe to enter, I always try to move over, even if I believe they will undertake me. If its clear, thats the way i go.

ta

PL

I think you've answered your own question in your 3rd paragraph. Regardless of who was in the right legally, what was the safest course of action in the circumstances, given you can't mind-read the other driver? Adjust your speed to allow him to pull in safely in front or behind, or move over to lane 2. Either way, problem solved...

Legally cars on the slip road have to give way to cars already on the main carriageway. Although as my Dad always says "you should never insist on a right of way". Just chalk it up to experience. We all do things like that from time to time, or I know I do!

Edited 17 July, 201015 yr by Schern

I can see your point, but I always move over

Edited 17 July, 201015 yr by bluvrs2

Bah when i'm prime minister all the repliers so far will have their licences revoked

In all seriousness, yeah in the OP's position (noone about to overtake the OP, noone next to the OP) i would move out and i think the unwritten rules of the road 100% support that.

What really gets my goat is when folks move out to give way to someone joining, and blocking my overtake of them. E.g. 2 lane dual carriageway, numpty in lane 1, merger on the on ramp and me about to commit to the overtake in lane 2. Lane 1 either brakes, which is always well intentioned but makes Mr Merger's job of judging speed harder, instead of merging around steady speed traffic, lane 1 is varying speed, which leaves mr merger wondering will he speed up again right now because he thinks im taking too long to merge ? Then what happens is lane 1 brakes again whilst mr merger hesitates some more, by which time lane 1's impacting all the traffic behind.

What would otherwise have been a non event on the dual carriageway (one car driving along, one car overtaking it, one merger adapting his speed to merge in front of or behind lane 1) now turns into a tailback, all because of numpty heid in lane 1 either braking, or pulling into lane 2 when someone's about to overtake them

Now what happens is lane 1 jumps in front of lane 2 who was overtaking, lane 2 gets on the brakes, all the traffic behind lane 2 now has to brake, now they probably weren't leaving a safe distance between themselves so 4 or 5 cars back some other numpty's doing an emergency stop (entirely his own fault, but still caused by numpty in lane 1 so there's at least some karma points taken off lane 1 here), meanwhile mr merger happily merges but the flow of traffic is disrupted by lane 1, who will now want to return to lane 1 where there is no space for him currently so more shuffling required and an impact to the traffic behind in lane 1, lane 2's dusting itself off and can restore some normality until mr merger decides all this faffing about is holding him up so straight into lane 2 and the net result is everyone is now travelling 15mph slower than before the on ramp.

All could have been avoided if lane 1 stayed where he was, at a constant speed, no brakes, no moving out, just stay where you are if someone's about to overtake you. Main road has priority for more reasons than just this right enough

Edited 18 July, 201015 yr by Mute

I never pull out when someones overtaking, I hate British motorways though , the M62 is the worst with the M6 the best. French drivers pull out at the last minute but all lanes are used as they move back in, no lane hoggers there

I had a bit of a tussle with another driver recently and reflecting on it just want to know who was at fault, or more at fault.

Blame has to be split equally imho. Legally, the line between the slip road and the carriageway is a give way, however, it is recommended to allow them to blend as joining the carriageway from a standstill is potentially dangerous. Not accommodating a driver wanting to join where you had plenty of time and space to do so could fall under "inconsiderate driving".

I think sometimes people should be made aware that they don't own the road and can do everything exactly as they arrogantly want.

I'm sure causing unnecessary conflict on an empty road by not accommodating the one car you encounter will have taught him he doesn't own the road and can't do what he arrogantly wants

Chris

Blame has to be split equally imho. Legally, the line between the slip road and the carriageway is a give way, however, it is recommended to allow them to blend as joining the carriageway from a standstill is potentially dangerous. Not accommodating a driver wanting to join where you had plenty of time and space to do so could fall under "inconsiderate driving".

I'm sure causing unnecessary conflict on an empty road by not accommodating the one car you encounter will have taught him he doesn't own the road and can't do what he arrogantly wants

Chris

Point taken Chris Bit of bad stubborn driving on both sides methinks.

I pretty much agree with most of this except for Chris!! The whole situation was created by the driver joining the dual carriageway, so he was wholely at fault. That said, if the road was that quiet, there's a good chance I'd not have been in lane 1 passing a slip road that I could see traffic on.

I have to come down on the side of TeebsVRS being entirely right here, and the other driver being a total c*ck. I see this a *lot* given that I do a lot of motorway miles.

If it's a clear, straight road, with a long slip-lane then the other driver had NO EXCUSE for a dangerous, aggressive maneuver. How hard is it to match speed and merge sensibly? He obviously just expected the entire world to simply get out of his way. It sounds like there wasn't anything particularly close either ahead or behind of TeebsVRS, so why should anyone have to change lane?

In my view, someone keeping straight on at a constant speed is doing the safe and predictable thing, I know people generally move over at slip lanes, but I've seen lots of near misses by people doing that. It just takes someone to be in your blind spot, or another car coming up behind way too fast and you've got a potential accident. As was mentioned already - one car merging badly can cause all three lanes to veer over, slow down, bunch up and take a mile or so to get flowing smoothly again.

If safe to do so I move to lane 2 to allow the other car to join the carriageway, if the road is busy and it's not possible to move over I judge the speed of the car on the slip road and back off or speed up slightly to let them join in front or behind.

When I 'm on the slip road again I will speed up or back off to merge with the speed of the traffic on the carriageway.

I pretty much agree with most of this except for Chris!! The whole situation was created by the driver joining the dual carriageway, so he was wholely at fault. That said, if the road was that quiet, there's a good chance I'd not have been in lane 1 passing a slip road that I could see traffic on.

The thing is while it may well be his fault if a car clips you at these speeds its little concillation. Sensible thing is to minimise your risk to the other driver.

If safe to do so I move to lane 2 to allow the other car to join the carriageway, if the road is busy and it's not possible to move over I judge the speed of the car on the slip road and back off or speed up slightly to let them join in front or behind.

When I 'm on the slip road again I will speed up or back off to merge with the speed of the traffic on the carriageway.

Wrong - the 'merger' should judge the speed of the traffic on the road to be joined and adjust speed accordingly. That way the traffic on the carriageway should 'not' be affected (if everyone could drive properly!)

As you have said though I will speed up or slow down on the slip to the speed of traffic or in fact to get a gap in the traffic to nip into. I never slow down or speed up on the actual carriageway to let someone in - this is just dangerous. Best to just move over or teach the merger how to join a carriageway correctly Another bug bear of mine is people not indicating onto motorways (i never move over in this case!) and lorries thinking that give way markings on slip roads do not apply to them :(

joining motorist is 100% at fault.

You're on the m/way and it's not your duty to move over.

If he impacts you or makes you have to change lanes, brake or accelerate to miss him, then it's his fault.

End of.

It *really* annoys me how many people think they have right of way on a slip road, especially when there is nowhere for you to go as the other lanes are in use.

The post started off asking about "who was at fault, or more at fault?". However, as has been well illustrated by the various replies, who is "at fault" isn't really the key issue here, so much as "how could we have managed the situation better?".

While the line at the end of a slip road is indeed a give-way line, it is generally recognised that it is neither safe nor desirable for traffic to have to stop on the slip road, so there is an implicit suggestion that traffic on the DC / motorway should help those joining somewhat, if it is in their power. The Highway Code makes no explicit reference to this, it rightly places all the onus on the joining traffic. So in strict HC terms (none of this is law apart from the give-way line at the end of the slip road), the joiner was "at fault".

That said, it's a good time to remind ourselves of, (or introduce) Stephen Haley's contention that "driving is a team sport", meaning that if we all cooperate with each other, we can all arrive safely and in good time at our destinations, with less conflict and stress to ourselves. Buying a copy of his book "Mind Driving" might be a good next step for the OP, in that it might make you think slightly differently about your driving. There are other similar principles in there, such as "being predictable", which help to improve your safety and that of those around you.

Well done for posting the question - it shows you care about your driving, and devote thought to it, which makes you fairly unusual among drivers.

I had a similar experince a while ago. Travelling back home (can't remember where I was now) and pootling along at 60 on a VERY quiet motorway still day light.

As I approached a slip road I looked on the slip road- couldn't see anything then as I passed looked again and in my mirror- nothing there.

The suddenly a white felicia estate beeping at me and cutting in front of me! He must have been in my blind spot and just acted like he should have had right of way and never considered to get his foot down a bit more or pull in behind and overtake or that I hadn't even seen him!

I think people take it on to be their responsibility too much sometimes and pull over when it really isn't necessary causing lane two to jam up.

What really annoys me is when I pull over to let someone join... they're not accelerating that fast then indicate to pull back in and they're trying to accelerate past... no let me in first then OVERtake me! lol

Phil

I was joining the dual carriageway as part of my test.

long slip road, so I was at least at 60 when it came to joining. indicating from halfway down the slip)

As I got to the join, I could see person already in lane 1, back a bit, indicated to go into lane 2.

I joined at the same time as he moved into the other lane (trusitng that he was moving out)

Seeing as we moved at the same time, the examiner said he would give me the benefit of the doubt that I was joining into a space, but if he had felt that I had been forcing the other driver into moving into lane 2 then that would have been a D = Fail

I never pull out when someones overtaking, I hate British motorways though , the M62 is the worst with the M6 the best. French drivers pull out at the last minute but all lanes are used as they move back in, no lane hoggers there

I know what you mean about French motorway drivers. They never seem to bother checking mirrors, wait until you're on top of them, and then just pull out. I soon got on to it after a couple of hard braking incidents and remained very wary from then on. Generally though, like you say, the motorways run very smoothly. Probably because they've got about five times the land area of the UK and about a fifth of our population so there's never anyone on them.

As for the OP's question, it is a bit of a 50:50. It's usually well sign-posted that there's a merging road ahead so drivers can prepare for merging traffic. In this case the OP should have been thinking about the possibility of traffic merging into inside lane and planned ahead for the eventuality, i.e. prepared to change lanes if necessary.

However, this doesn't excuse Mr Merger from not preparing himself to merge, i.e. getting ready to slow/accelerate as required to merge into traffic, or even stop if needs be, as is his legal obligation.

A bit of forethought and less aggression makes for safe and happy motoring kids

if it was me i would of simply moved into lane two if it was clear like it was then he can enter as fast or as slow as he wants.

then when he's gone past or you've gone past move back into lane 1.... Easy!

its not about him thinking he owns the road its about doing the best safest thing and imo that would be it!

It takes two people to have a collision, why would you want to be one of them? The whole point of good driving is to identify the risks and to minimise your exposure to them. If you are in lane 1 approaching an on slip you need to consider the possibility that somebody will come down that slip road and not give you your priority. If you see them coming and one way or another you give them space then you have removed yourself from the risk equation.

In a similar way if you are in lane 2 approaching an on slip with a slower vehicle in lane 1 what you need to do is understand that you are approaching a location with the potential for conflict. You need either to get your overtake done before you get to the slip road or to hold back until you have passed the slip road before commiting to the overtake. That way if the vehicle in lane 1 moves out you have got it covered.

Priority doesn't actually mean a thing unless you get it. In the same way it doesn't matter who caused the collision, if you are involved you still have the pain and the aggrevation. Let the idiots get on with it, secure in the knowledge that because you are a better driver you have stopped them having the crash.

Edited 27 October, 201114 yr by keystonedriving

Although technically it would have been the other guys fault you're still an idiot for creating the problem. It suggests in highway code etc that you should pull into the second lane if clear to allow cars to merge.

I would say 6 of one and half a dozen of the other!

Although technically it would have been the other guys fault you're still an idiot for creating the problem. It suggests in highway code etc that you should pull into the second lane if clear to allow cars to merge.

I would say 6 of one and half a dozen of the other!

+1 sounds like you were both being a bit pig headed about it TBH. :wonder:

This subject has been done to death recently. It is the responsibity of the car joining the M.way to join safely without causing other M.way users to avoid you, the car joining should wait for a decent gap in lane 1 and if necessary carry on onto the hard shoulder until safe to join lane 1. Of course if you are already in lane 1 on the M.way then it would courtesy to slow down, speed up or move to lane 2 to help a car joining from the slipway.

Like the OP said "reflecting on it" which means that the OP knows there was a better way to deal with it, not the legal way or the right/wrong way but a better way. Advanced Driving can be likened to martial arts and one of the old sayings "the best way to defend against a punch or kick is to not be there when they are thrown" So from my point of view (self preservation) I would have moved over to lane 2. Although it would have been nice if the OP was an unmarked police car that the d1ckhead had done that to (not much chance of them being on the inside lane though )