Minor collision: Who's in the wrong?

[2long]

I was just riding my motorbike along a single-carriageway road, and I needed to turn right, across the oncoming traffic into my local Kerry Express.

The oncoming traffic had pretty much stopped, and an SUV had completely stopped, leaving a gap for me to go through. I'm pretty sure they actually let me across in front of them, as it appeared to be one of my neighbours. Of course, in the UK we flash our lights to give others way, but in Thailand they just sit there and do nothing, or wave their hands behind dark-tinted windows.

Anyway, I went across in front of the SUV and I was within about 3 metres of my destination and parking spot in front of Kerry.

However, overtaking on the inside/left side of the SUV and other slow-moving cars was a lady on a scooter. She was making all kinds of noises (from her mouth) before and after the very small collision between the front of her front tyre and the side of mine. She continued on her way shaking her head and making similar noises. No damage, and no injuries. We didn't need to exchange opinions or anything else. We both continued our journeys.

 

22 years ago I was once doing exactly what she did (pass/undertake on the left of traffic) and a car turned left into a soi, causing me to crash. Since then I have (almost) never passed on the inside, as it's just dangerous. I also feel that it's important to consider why the traffic is slow or stopped when over or undertaking it, and I try to be aware of things like this.

Would you guys and gals say this is a 50/50, or that she or I am in the wrong? For example if there had been damage or injury, this would need to be decided.

Thanks in advance. Stay safe! ????

[Dmaxdan]

This is actually a very common occurrence here because very few people on the roads read what is going on around them. 

It's that classic tunnel vision, zombie style of driving/riding that many seem to favor here.

So in circumstances like this you always have to stop and check what is coming up the inside before you proceed.

 

As to whether is is your fault or not I would say I'd say 50/50.

Her's for not being aware of why the SUV had stopped and why that may affect her and yours for not stopping and checking.

 

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, 2long said:

Would you guys and gals say this is a 50/50, or that she or I am in the wrong? For example if there had been damage or injury, this would need to be decided.

Thanks in advance. Stay safe!

You are in the wrong.

Vehicles travelling in a straight line have right of way in Thailand.

 

 

[androokery]

10 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

You are in the wrong.

Vehicles travelling in a straight line have right of way in Thailand.

 

 

And you can overtake another vehicle on any side?

[richard_smith237]

Legally, you were in the wrong.

In actuality, she is stupid !!!... 

 

When riding, if a car has stopped for no apparent reason, I also stop. 

meanwhile others scream through only to discover why the car has stopped - a pedestrian crossing or someone turning across them... I’ve seen numerous accidents this way. 

 

It seems to me that in Thailand more than any other places I’ve riden or driven that there is a huge reluctance to stop or slow for anything - this results in the inevitable. 

 

But.. ultimately, even IF the vehicle has allowed you to pass in front of them, and even IF when riding defensively it would be sensible for the other motorcyclist to stop the right of way remains theirs and in the event of an accident you would be at fault. 

 

Realistically - this lady would have had no idea that she was riding carelessly... she would think that the blame is 100% with you, the thought wouldn’t cross her mind for a millisecond that she could have avoided and accident by riding more carefully - thats just how many riders in Thailand are, everyone else has to watch out for them. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

3 minutes ago, androokery said:

And you can overtake another vehicle on any side?

Its not over taking... its lane splitting queuing traffic. 

 

In the middle of Bangkok, when in slow moving traffic and the middle lane moves faster than the right most lane its not considered ‘under-taking’ (overtaking)... its just moving traffic. 

[Myran]

You're in the wrong. The SUV is not a traffic light or a traffic police and cannot decide that it's your time to cross. You are responsible for making sure that the road is clear before crossing.

 

When coming from behind on a bike, you can't always see if a car has stopped to let someone through or if there's simply other vehicles standing still in front of it. You can never assume that all drivers will stop and let you through just because one did.

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, 2long said:

Would you guys and gals say this is a 50/50

I would say it's 50/50 in Thailand you didn't see her and she didn't see you so a mistake by both of you. 

 

In Thailand you were ambushed in UK it would be her fault. ????

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, Kwasaki said:

I would say it's 50/50 in Thailand you didn't see her and she didn't see you so a mistake by both of you. 

If I was driving or riding and going straight on and a car or motorcyclist turned across me, I would not accept 50/50 at all. 

A a car (SUV) stopping does not change traffic law, the SUV does not become a traffic light, a junction with an unbroken white line and a give way sign.

 

The motorcyclist is perfectly within her rights to be riding ’straight on’.... 

 

Yes, stupid of the motorcyclist not to ride defensively and consider why the SUV stopped, but that does not place the female at fault for not stopping, the OP should not have turned across traffic without first ensuring ALL traffic was giving way and had stopped.

 

1 minute ago, Kwasaki said:

In Thailand you were ambushed in UK it would be her fault. ????

How can you explain that in the UK he is at fault ? he has turned across traffic without knowing the road was clear.

 

[2long]

The trouble is, it's pretty much impossible to see what's coming up the inside of an SUV in such a tight and narrow space without at least sticking my front wheel past the corner of the SUV, which is what I did.
I'm certainly not claiming to be in the right, but nor am I taking all the blame.

 

It's not really 'lane splitting' because there is only one lane travelling in each direction. It's undertaking, past a market carpark.

[rumak]

55 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Legally, you were in the wrong.

In actuality, she is stupid !!!... 

 

When riding, if a car has stopped for no apparent reason, I also stop. 

meanwhile others scream through only to discover why the car has stopped - a pedestrian crossing or someone turning across them... I’ve seen numerous accidents this way. 

 

It seems to me that in Thailand more than any other places I’ve riden or driven that there is a huge reluctance to stop or slow for anything - this results in the inevitable. 

 

But.. ultimately, even IF the vehicle has allowed you to pass in front of them, and even IF when riding defensively it would be sensible for the other motorcyclist to stop the right of way remains theirs and in the event of an accident you would be at fault. 

 

Realistically - this lady would have had no idea that she was riding carelessly... she would think that the blame is 100% with you, the thought wouldn’t cross her mind for a millisecond that she could have avoided and accident by riding more carefully - thats just how many riders in Thailand are, everyone else has to watch out for them. 

 

 

agree with all that rs wrote.    except that "she is stupid".      we only have the OPs account of what taok place ,  so i can not speculate on the degrees of stupidity on each party.     

 

often one or both parties are rushing....   only give a quick glance at times (anyone who denies this is really lying) .        I am Much more careful to take a good look, or two..... after a few close calls.

Yes, SOME stupid drivers out there ...... sometimes foreigners and sometimes thais.

[Kwasaki]

22 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

If I was driving or riding and going straight on and a car or motorcyclist turned across me, I would not accept 50/50 at all. 

A a car (SUV) stopping does not change traffic law, the SUV does not become a traffic light, a junction with an unbroken white line and a give way sign.

 

The motorcyclist is perfectly within her rights to be riding ’straight on’.... 

 

Yes, stupid of the motorcyclist not to ride defensively and consider why the SUV stopped, but that does not place the female at fault for not stopping, the OP should not have turned across traffic without first ensuring ALL traffic was giving way and had stopped.

 

How can you explain that in the UK he is at fault ? he has turned across traffic without knowing the road was clear.

 

Disgree I think you are wrong in both sinario's they would be both accidents, how the fault and who would be to blame in Thailand if someone was hurt could be anyone's guess. 

 

In UK I believe as I said  she would be at fault not he. 

[richard_smith237]

35 minutes ago, 2long said:

The trouble is, it's pretty much impossible to see what's coming up the inside of an SUV in such a tight and narrow space without at least sticking my front wheel past the corner of the SUV, which is what I did.
I'm certainly not claiming to be in the right, but nor am I taking all the blame.

 

It's not really 'lane splitting' because there is only one lane travelling in each direction. It's undertaking, past a market carpark.

In that case (single lane road) then a motorbike cannot pass the vehicle in front up the inside (left side) - the female motorcyclist may be at fault. 

IF the SUV had slowed to turn left, the motorcycle would have hit the side of the SUV.

 

Thus, in this specific case, with it being a single lane road I believe the blame is now shifted to the female rider. 

 

[Kwasaki]

30 minutes ago, 2long said:

The trouble is, it's pretty much impossible to see what's coming up the inside of an SUV in such a tight and narrow space without at least sticking my front wheel past the corner of the SUV, which is what I did.
I'm certainly not claiming to be in the right, but nor am I taking all the blame.

 

It's not really 'lane splitting' because there is only one lane travelling in each direction. It's undertaking, past a market carpark.

The SUV stopped for you putting you in a situation where you are now aware that Thai motorbike riders will go on the inside of stopped SUV probably thinking it was going to turn right. 

I think you are fortunate she had probably slowed down at least and no-one was hurt. 

[cnx1204]

The key missing information is was she riding on the highway or was she illegally passing on the left.   Many shoulders are wide enough for cars but that does not make them a legal traffic lane.

[richard_smith237]

12 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Disgree I think you are wrong in both sinario's they would be both accidents, how the fault and who would be to blame in Thailand if someone was hurt could be anyone's guess. 

 

In UK I believe as I said  she would be at fault not he. 

There has been some more information ‘single lane road’ (single lane in each direction)... which I believe changes things. 

 

My initial response is considering a dual lane or more road (in each direction) in which case ‘he’ the motorcyclists crosses the paths of two lanes without making sure they are first clear - IMO he would be at fault in this scenario where it is acceptable for queueing but flowing traffic to pass on the left. 

 

On a single lane road one vehicle cannot pass up the inside (left side) undertaking another - thus doing so would place an undertaking motorcyclist at fault.

[The Hammer2021]

The OP was at fault - no doubt.

As for flashing headlights - it means different  things in different  countries.  Only in the  UK does it mean 'I'm yielding  to you'

In most countries its a warning 'I'm coming through'

 

[petermik]

A right turn across other vehicles is fine providing your exit path is clear...in this case it wasn`t someone rightly or wrongly was passing on the inside and they have right of way...luckily you slowed down and no damage done...your fault IMHO sorry.

[richard_smith237]

17 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Disgree I think you are wrong in both sinario's they would be both accidents, how the fault and who would be to blame in Thailand if someone was hurt could be anyone's guess. 

Knowing regulations and the law in Thailand can swing things in your favour before the Police make the decision to go with the path of least resistance (which is usually, wealthier person pays out (up to a point where a person has influence). 

 

Years ago (possibly 20 years ago) I was turning right on Petchaburi rd (in BKK), not at a junction, across traffic into an office building...

I was in the right hand lane (3 lanes in each direction), nothing coming in the opposite direction, as I made my turn across three lanes I was hit by a van trying to over take me. 

 

Police initially tried to blame me for making the turn. I managed to disperse the blame indicating that the van should never have been attempting to over take. I refused to accept any fault, but in the end accepted 50:50... the van was uninsured.

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

12 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

The OP was at fault - no doubt.

Given that the SUV stopped in their lane of a single lane road (single lane in each direction road) and the motorcyclist passed the SUV up the inside, which is not a permitted manoeuvre, theoretically, the Op is exonerated from blame, from a legal perspective. 

 

The lady on the motorcycle who undertook the SUV on the left side would be considered at fault (legally)...  

 

Realistically, the BiB in Thailand would follow the path of least resistance and just call it 50/50 because thats the easiest thing to do and they nearly always take the easiest path.

 

IF the lady was hurt and had no insurance or money for medical bills, they may try and pin something on the Op who they believe may be able to pay for the medical bills... (this is not a farang always to blame thing, just a perceived 'who can pay?’ thing... )

 

If he yields, then he takes the blame. If he sticks to his guns and maintains he is not at fault the police will likely yield and call it 50:50 !!!....  it all depends how the issue is negotiated and how confident, composed and firm the Op is in this situation. 

 

 

12 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

As for flashing headlights - it means different  things in different  countries.  Only in the  UK does it mean 'I'm yielding  to you'

In most countries its a warning 'I'm coming through'

 

In the UK Highway Code the flashing lights is a warning as it is in any other country.

 

BUT, it is more commonly used as a courteous  ‘you first’ signal....   but that does not hold any water from a legal perspective. 

 

 

 

 

[JaiMaai]

2 hours ago, 2long said:

Of course, in the UK we flash our lights to give others way, but in Thailand they just sit there and do nothing, or wave their hands behind dark-tinted windows.

Rule 110

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

Rule 111

Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/general-rules-techniques-and-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158#:~:text=Rule 110,or intimidate other road users.

[Kwasaki]

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Knowing regulations and the law in Thailand can swing things in your favour before the Police make the decision to go with the path of least resistance (which is usually, wealthier person pays out (up to a point where a person has influence). 

 

Years ago (possibly 20 years ago) I was turning right on Petchaburi rd (in BKK), not at a junction, across traffic into an office building...

I was in the right hand lane (3 lanes in each direction), nothing coming in the opposite direction, as I made my turn across three lanes I was hit by a van trying to over take me. 

 

Police initially tried to blame me for making the turn. I managed to disperse the blame indicating that the van should never have been attempting to over take. I refused to accept any fault, but in the end accepted 50:50... the van was uninsured.

 

Yeah the learning curve and 20 + years ago when I first started driving in Thailand I was given good advice by treating Thailand as learning to drive again because so many maneuvers are made by motorbike and cars/truck driver etc that I would be automatically thinking they wouldn't make but will do it. 

 

It makes the envasis of the boy scout moto a good one to remember all the time while driving /riding here. ????

[Parsve]

There are two rules about traffic here  or rather one rule and one (thai)-logic I think you have to now, and then you not have to ask the question. Thai thinks that the road is the part between the white or sometimes yellow lines on each side of the road. Of this follow that you can drive how ever you want on thhe parts outside those lines (you can see it daily). Then we have the thai logic left. It says, "I am a thai, I have to be in this country. You are a farrang so you not have to. If you know those two things, it is no doubt, what ever happen is your fault.

[xtrnuno41]

Technically, i think, you are to blame.

You make the turn, but still any traffic going straight you have to let them pass.

She was "overtaking" in wrong way, but you had to let her pass.

I learned, if a car or anything else stops, you approach while taking speed back,

an unusual  situation, keeping your eyes open to see what is happening.

Im still doing that ever since.

However the Thai woman did not and you didnt either.  Luckily "happy ending"

[krabi local]

3 hours ago, The Hammer2021 said:

The OP was at fault - no doubt.

As for flashing headlights - it means different  things in different  countries.  Only in the  UK does it mean 'I'm yielding  to you'

In most countries its a warning 'I'm coming through'

 

In the UK flashing your lights does not mean I am yielding to you it means “I am here” but many people use it incorrectly.

Rule 110 of the UK Highway Code states: “Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. “Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.”

[The Hammer2021]

12 minutes ago, krabi local said:

In the UK flashing your lights does not mean I am yielding to you it means “I am here” but many people use it incorrectly.

Rule 110 of the UK Highway Code states: “Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. “Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.”

Yes. How we use it and how the  highway code  describes  it are different. Many people in the UK use the the quick flash to mean - You can go ahead. It's not used like that  in other countries  but as warning - or to make one's presence  known.

[mrfill]

4 hours ago, The Hammer2021 said:

The OP was at fault - no doubt.

As for flashing headlights - it means different  things in different  countries.  Only in the  UK does it mean 'I'm yielding  to you'

In most countries its a warning 'I'm coming through'

 

It most certainly does not mean 'I'm yielding' in the UK - quite the opposite. The Highway Code is quite clear.

 

Rule 110

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

Rule 111

Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.

[The Hammer2021]

1 minute ago, mrfill said:

It most certainly does not mean 'I'm yielding' in the UK - quite the opposite. The Highway Code is quite clear.

 

Rule 110

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

Rule 111

Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.

I'm not quoting  the highway code. I'm quoting how drivers actually  use the headlight flash and  its commonly used to mean ' You go ahead'

I am aware it not how the Highway  code  defines its use. Not everyone  abides by the  Highway  code.  I have been  driving for about 50 years both large commercial vehicles and domestic  vehicles in numerous  countries. Can you say the same? I certainly  don't need you  quoting the Highway code at me.

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, mrfill said:

It most certainly does not mean 'I'm yielding' in the UK - quite the opposite. The Highway Code is quite clear.

 

Rule 110

Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

Rule 111

Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.

There is...  ‘what is means in the highway code’... vs ‘what is means on the roads of the UK’... 

Everyone is in fact correct on this one when arguing from there own specific point of view... 

 

- In the US highway code the flashing of lights are a warning. 

- In the real world in UK’s roads, the flashing of lights are a submission to yield.

 

Both are correct. 

 

 

[The Hammer2021]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

There is...  ‘what is means in the highway code’... vs ‘what is means on the roads of the UK’... 

Everyone is in fact correct on this one when arguing from there own specific point of view... 

 

- In the US highway code the flashing of lights are a warning. 

- In the real world in UK’s roads, the flashing of lights are a submission to yield.

 

Both are correct. 

 

 

I know. And I don't need to be told. But thanks for keeping people properly informed.