Who's in the wrong? 18 wheeler crushes car as both try to make u-turn

[sandemara]

If the truck driver doesn't use indicators to signal his intentions to other road-users in his vicinity how would others know what the truck will do next? I've almost been trapped myself by bus drivers who stay in the middle lane when getting ready to "swing"their long vehicles left across the lane nearest the footpath to enter a hotel parking area or some other facility. Often drivers forget to have their indicators going or bother with any slowing or "checking" manouvres to avoid inconveniencing traffic already in the left-hand lane.

[KhunBENQ]

19 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Don't agree! This is where road etiquette ( not law) should be taught. Rightly or wrongly it was clear that the truck was going to turn so why not let him go? As I have said before, I would rather be cautious and safe than proclaim 'right of way' and be sorry. 

Yes, turn (further ahead) as the lane he uses would indicate.

And not U-turn.

[kkerry]

If the truck had kept in its lane there wouldn't have been an accident, so ultimately it has to be the truck drivers fault. I'm always cautious here so I wouldn't have sped up the side at the last moment.

 

Having never driven anything longer than a 4 tonne truck, 6-7 metres, I don't know how hard it is to keep 100% in your lane driving something much longer, but I suppose if you're trained properly it's what you do.

[NoshowJones]

1 hour ago, otherstuff1957 said:

I watched the video 3 times to check this...   The truck driver is clearly in the wrong.  Not because he was turning from the middle lane, that long a vehicle would need that much room to turn, but because he did not use his turn signals at all.  The light that some posters cite as a late turn signal is more likely a brake light as it comes on when he realizes that he has hit the car and stays on, rather than blinks.  The left side brake light is probably burned out.

Yes, I think you are right, when a brake light comes on it should be bright red, and indicator yellow, the light that came on was white.

So it would seem that the indicator was not used at all.

[bazza73]

15 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Not sure what video you watched.

The truck was on a lane that is not for doing the U-turn, does not use indicator.

That's because it needed the extra space to make the turn, could not have made it from the correct lane.

You wouldn't expect an aircraft carrier to stop in the water like a jetski, would you?

Poor risk assessment by the sedan driver.

[Thaidream]

As a former auto accident claims investigator in the US for 15 years- this accident is settled on the principle of what would a reasonable person expect to do in a similar situation.

1.  the truck had no turn signal on and thus the car had no expectation that the truck would make a U turn.

2.  The truck was in the turn lane for the next cross road not the U turn Lane so the car driver would have thought the truck driver was making a turn ahead not a U Turn.

3.  The driver approached normally in the U Turn lane and was not darting forward to beat the truck. The car driver once realizing what was happening was too far forward to avoid the collision .

100% Truck at fault. No reasonable person moving forward in their car in the proper lane would expect a truck with no turn signal in a lane which is a turning right lane to then decide it was a U Turn instead. In addition, the truck should have been aware of his mirrors as he was making an illegal U Turn.  Case closed- Trucker Pays.

[daveAustin]

Truck's fault but car driver also a complete spaz.  Least no-one got killed.

[bazza73]

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

As a former auto accident claims investigator in the US for 15 years- this accident is settled on the principle of what would a reasonable person expect to do in a similar situation.

1.  the truck had no turn signal on and thus the car had o expectation that the truck would make a U turn.

2.  The truck was in the turn lane for the next cross road not the U turn Lane so the car driver would have thought the truck driver waas making a turn ahead not a U Turn.

3.  The driver approached normally in the U Turn lane and was not arting forward to beat the truck. The car driver once realizing what was happening was too far forward to avoid the collision .

100% Truck at fault. No reasonable person moving forward in their car in the proper lane would expect a truck with no turn signal in a lane which is a turning right lane to then decide it was a U Turn instead. In addition, the truck should have been aware of his mirrors as he was making an illegal U Turn.  Case closed- Trucker Pays.

That was the US - this is Thailand. A reasonable person here would assess the risk of the truck turning and react accordingly by staying back.

If you are driving here as if you are still in the USA, I suggest you maximize your life insurance.

[F4UCorsair]

18 hours ago, Piifo said:

The bigger has the priority.

 

Might is RIGHT!!!    In 'developing' countries anyway.

[lvr181]

18 hours ago, janclaes47 said:

In traffic rules the weaker ( smaller) has always priority

Is this enshrined in law somewhere?

[transam]

4 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

That was the US - this is Thailand. A reasonable person here would assess the risk of the truck turning and react accordingly by staying back.

If you are driving here as if you are still in the USA, I suggest you maximize your life insurance.

NOOOOOO....The trailer truck is a commercial vehicle that does NOT behave like ma & pa's saloon...Ma & Pa do NOT understand how this type of vehicle works. The commercial driver does and it is HIS job to treat all saloon drivers with respect as they don't know how his vehicle works...

I passed my HGV test 46 years back and it was instilled in me...mirror, mirror, mirror....Cos Mr & Mrs average to NOT know how things work with heavy vehicles...

[Thaidream]

This has nothing to do with the way I drive- but after 50 years of driving in Thailand Without an accident- I must be doing something right.

 

Normally, when doing an insurance investigation- one does not have any video- only a police report. Insurance companies either in America or Thailand or anywhere else would have looked at this case exactly like I described it and found the truck at fault. If I was driving like a Thai -which I never do- I would have driven in my own lane as the driver did without any expectation that the truck would make an illegal U Turn. Thais do not drive defensively- they drive aggressively. Had I been the car driver I would not have been driving at the speed indicated and I would be wary of the truck- but Westerners are taught to drive defensively.  It doesn't matter- the truck driver was breaking the law and the police would have found him at fault and the insurance company most likely the same.  I rest my case.

[thedemon]

The car driver should have been going faster then would have squeezed through in time.

 

100% the car drivers fault.

[transam]

1 minute ago, thedemon said:

The car driver should have been going faster then would have squeezed through in time.

 

100% the card drivers fault.

Not Bridge I hope.............

[thedemon]

1 minute ago, transam said:

Not Bridge I hope.............

No. Playing Bridge in Thailand is far too dangerous.

 

..........................you just beat my edit by a millisecond

[gemguy]

22 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Indicators seen anyone?

I didn't.

 

The truck is on the right-turn lane, car on the U-turn lane.

Truck uses the U-turn instead of the normal turn a bit ahead.

 

It's not unusual that a truck needs two lanes for a U-turn.

(assuming there is no rule/sign that would forbid U-turns for such long vehicle)

 

BUT in this case at least have working indicators (turned on) AND look into the mirror thoroughly.

The car driver would have needed superstitious foreshadow.

9x% responsibility of the truck driver.

 

 

 

Agreed...it is the responsibility and accountability of the truck driver more so than the car.

[Thaidream]

What is interesting is that the truck driver can file his own claim with his insurance company and get his truck repaired if damaged and based on his statement could be found not at fault by his own insurance company. Then the car driver files a claim with her insurance company and she is found not at fault.  If the police report is non conclusive- and both insurance companies are at odds- it would go to an arbitrator to settle the case. It is amazing how long some of these cases take to resolve in the West.  In Thailand, I doubt these type of safeguards exist.

[gemguy]

15 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Not sure what video you watched.

The truck was on a lane that is not for doing the U-turn, does not use indicator.

The trucker was in a turning lane as you can see the painted on the asphalt right hand turn arrow / emblem 2 times in the video.

But still the accountability and responsibility to drive with caution and practice defensive driving would be more so upon the truck driver.

This is common sense anyhow and basically practiced by most heavy equipment operators ( of course not much here in Thailand ) knowing that the much larger vehicle and larger piece equipment is far more life threating and capable of more damage so the drivers should always be, let us say, more professional...but they are not here in Thailand while  all too many drive like they are on holidays...lol

Cheers  

[elgordo38]

16 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Not sure what video you watched.

The truck was on a lane that is not for doing the U-turn, does not use indicator.

He is pulling the old wink wink trick. Some commentors have still not  had their coffee yet.

[tomwct]

It looks like the car sped up to try and beat the truck in the turn. He didn't make it. I would say both at fault, but Thai's

drive in this manner. They aren't careful drivers because they never had a any driver training and don't know any better.

In Thailand, I was drive with caution because you never know what can happen.

[hotchilli]

16 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

Not sure what video you watched.

The truck was on a lane that is not for doing the U-turn, does not use indicator.

In a normal country I would agree with you,

however the length of the truck dictates that he needs more turning area than the "U turn lane" width allows,

yes he should be using his indicators etc, but then again, how many people leave their indicators on one direction while doing the opposite... I never believe anyone's indicators in Thailand, least of all with my life!!

The truck should have taken more care, the car should have shown more observation and a little less haste.

conclusion... both idiots,

an accident waiting to happen if the twain should ever meet on the same stretch of road.. and they did!!

Am I surprised by the outcome.. NO !!

[Andrew Dwyer]

I think we all agree now that the truck was in the right turn lane .

But as the traffic moves forward he has no intention of turning right ! , he is trying to make a u-turn !

If you watch the video to the end you will see the right turn is further forward and you can follow the traffic turning right up ahead.

 

So, back on topic, the truck driver made a u-turn with no signal and without checking for other cars!!

Therefore guilty !

[thedemon]

39 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

What is interesting is that the truck driver can file his own claim with his insurance company and get his truck repaired if damaged and based on his statement could be found not at fault by his own insurance company. Then the car driver files a claim with her insurance company and she is found not at fault.  If the police report is non conclusive- and both insurance companies are at odds- it would go to an arbitrator to settle the case. It is amazing how long some of these cases take to resolve in the West.  In Thailand, I doubt these type of safeguards exist.

All the major vehicle insurance companies in Thailand have a multilateral knock for knock agreement. So irrespective of fault, each insurer will pay the claim of their policy holder.

 

My experience is that motor vehicle insurance companies in Thailand are much easier to deal with than in the west. Surprising perhaps but it's true.

[JGV]

Both drivers should be banned from driving for a few years as they haven't the maturity to be responsible for driving a vehicle that is potentially dangerous

JGV

[balo]

The truck driver was wrong of course, he was in the wrong lane for doing a U-turn .  

The car driver did not expect that to happen at all , but he could have slowed down and maybe he would have noticed the truck had different plans. 

 

 

 

[hobz]

Both in the wrong, mostly the car i think.

Both failing to signal, car recklessly changing lanes without signaling.

Car driving like a race car driver.

Truck driver have no reactions lol, must be on heroin or sleep deprived.

[mettech]

See the truck was in his right with the tractorr but with the 40 ft trailer well this is how it goes and the lunatic car driver should of drive defensively by staying behind the trailer. 

But what to expect when no long ago they where using buffalo's.

[yardrunner]

6 hours ago, possum1931 said:

Yes, truck was using indicators, though maybe not before until just before the car drove up his near side, the blame lies with them both, from the truck drivers side, this situation needs more than just a quick glance in the mirror, if he did that at all. Even if the truck was late in indicating, the car should have held back as it is very common in Thailand for drivers not to use indicators.

or one quick flash of the indicators and if you miss it tough

[NoshowJones]

16 minutes ago, yardrunner said:

or one quick flash of the indicators and if you miss it tough

What I thought was the indicator was actually the brake light, the other brake light wasn't working, and it was white not red.

[NoshowJones]

3 hours ago, thedemon said:

The car driver should have been going faster then would have squeezed through in time.

 

100% the car drivers fault.

Are you saying the truck driver has no blame in this???? Like Transam, I had an HGV licence too, and I know exactly what he was saying,

and as a previous poster said, the car driver should have been driving more defensively.