I hope you are a Forum member because you really need to read this

Attachment 445794

To the gentleman who almost sideswiped my vehicle when he failed to give way when changing lanes on the Dandenong-Frankston Rd this morning then followed me for about 2 Km before following me into Hare And Forbes Car Park with his horn blaring at me and driving erratically in and out of the traffic and making rude gestures, then got out of his car and approached my vehicle and spit-shouted all over me telling me that I was in the wrong. You refused to listen to me when I tried to explain to you in a calm and rational manner that you should go and read the road rules as you are obviously mistaken in their application to the situation you were in.

You later accosted me and made a scene by shouting abuse at me again when I walked past you in the store, making derogatory remarks about your erroneous misperception of my heritage. Your comments would have been been extremely hurtful had your presumptions been correct. I was still offended that you would make such comments about anyone.

This gentleman should make himself aware that these days many people, myself included run dash-cams when we drive. My dash cam footage of him is rather incriminating and because my dash-cam records audio too and it was still running when he accosted me while I was still in my vehicle I have also captured his oratory performance in its entirety.

Now I could make some very derogatory remarks about this gentleman's driving and general behavior but I choose not to as he is probably a really nice guy who genuinely does not understand the rules he seems to be able to quote so emphatically and erroneously. My whole point in posting this is that the gentleman would not listen to my explanation of how the appropriate road rule works and I hope that since he was going to the same place as I was and therefore shares a common interest, that he may be a member here and will be able to read the information below explaining the rule which he was unwittingly in breach of so that he can continue to drive around but without endangering his own safety and the safety of others.

If he is not a member here, there is a chance that another member may know him and may be able to direct him to the educational information below. I fear that if he continues to drive around without a proper understanding of the rules he may seriously hurt himself or someone else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWi3979SfgI

https://www.racv.com.au/membership/m...jor-roads.html
(While this one is specifically about major onramps, the rule about how the right of way is determined by the presence or absence of a line on the road are applicable to the situation under discussion as explained in the text. If you have to cross a dotted white line to merge you have to give way regardless of whether you nose is in front and you are driving a BMW)

Melbourne roads are dangerous enough without people threatening others on the roads and in shops when they are the ones who have it wrong.

Not being too picky, but how is the situation between 0:45 and 0:55 different to that from 1:03 onwards?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

Not being too picky, but how is the situation between 0:45 and 0:55 different to that from 1:03 onwards?

---

up to 045 it is showing that the vehicle which has to cross a line to enter another lane must give way regardless of who is in front. From 103 onwards it shows what happens when the white line stops and the two lanes merge without having to cross a line, when the vehicle in front has right of way regardless of whether it is on the left or right. the difference is if you have to cross the line you give way.

Ian, although it is a bad example within the video, lane blockages occur for any number of reasons. Think of buses stopping to pick up people, they block the lanes for agggggeeeess!!!! Or fallen trees. A blocked lane doesn't give the poor bugger behind the bus or tree right of way to merge right at will. He just has to sit and wait until it's clear to merge.

Zip merging on the other hand is designed into the roads, usually well signed, and both the right and left lanes are well aware that they have to merge into one. The guy in front gets right of way every time.

So the two situations are completely different because one is random, and the other is planned.

Yes, that's right Doug, in the circumstances you have described he was clearly in the wrong. The other all too common experience is the driver who thinks that you have to give way to him at a roundabout because he is on your right even if you enter the roundabout before him. They seem to think that you are not allowed to impede their progress to the point that they have to slow to less than 50kmh through the roundabout.

What I'm seeing from 1:03 onwards is the situation where the road is marked with two travel lanes, then the lane marking ceases meaning, according to the video, that the precedence for merging is accorded to the "vehicle in the lead". The vehicle not in the lead is obliged to slow to allow the leading vehicle to merge right. I acknowledge that the situation is most common where a two lane road narrows to a single lane.

What I'm seeing between 0:45 and 0:55 is a single lane that is wide enough for two vehicles to travel side by side. There are no marked lanes. In the video, faster vehicles are overtaking a slower one. The video implies that when, because of parked cars or a stopped bus, the slower vehicle needs to move to the right to continue, it must give way to the faster ones, stopping till it is "safe" to merge right. How is that different to the situation at the end of an overtaking lane where two marked lanes become one wide unmarked lane that then narrows?
BTW, in this situation, if you substitute a bicycle for the slower car the "metre matters" rule would kick-in allowing the bicycle to move right without slowing down or giving way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

What I'm seeing between 0:45 and 0:55 is a single lane that is wide enough for two vehicles to travel side by side. There are no marked lanes. In the video, faster vehicles are overtaking a slower one. The video implies that when, because of parked cars or a stopped bus, the slower vehicle needs to move to the right to continue, it must give way to the faster ones, stopping till it is "safe" to merge right. How is that different to the situation at the end of an overtaking lane where two marked lanes become one wide unmarked lane that then narrows?

---

That is not a situation where the roadway merges from two to one lane. Of course a courteous driver to the right would assist the vehicle to the left to safely merge in the interests of safe and effective traffic flow. Of course it would be illegal for the driver on the left to have passed the driver on the right.

[QUOTE=ian;2115715]What I'm seeing from 1:03 onwards is the situation where the road is marked with two travel lanes, then the lane marking ceases meaning, according to the video, that the precedence for merging is accorded to the "vehicle in the lead". The vehicle not in the lead is obliged to slow to allow the leading vehicle to merge right. I acknowledge that the situation is most common where a two lane road narrows to a single lane.

What I'm seeing between 0:45 and 0:55 is a single lane that is wide enough for two vehicles to travel side by side. There are no marked lanes./QUOTE]

Here is an excerpt from theactual legislation: http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/Domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/LTObject_Store/LTObjSt5.nsf/DDE300B846EED9C7CA257616000A3571/ED29BBF48CD0DAF3CA2577C8001AA53F/$FILE/09-94sr004.pdf

"147 Moving from one marked lane to another markedlane across a continuous line separating the lanes
A driver on a multi-lane road must not move fromone marked lane to another marked lane bycrossing a continuous line separating the lanesunless—
(a) the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(b) the driver is obeying a traffic control deviceapplying to the first marked lane; or
(c) the driver is permitted to drive in bothmarked lanes under another provision ofthese Rules; or
(d) either of the marked lanes is a specialpurpose lane in which the driver is permittedto drive under these Rules and the driver ismoving to or from the special purpose lane.
Penalty: 3 penalty units.
Notes1 Marked lane, multi-lane road, obstruction, specialpurpose lane and traffic control device are defined inthe dictionary.2 An overhead lane control device may require a driverto leave a marked lane—see rule 152.3 Drivers of certain long vehicles are permitted to use2 marked lanes when turning at an intersection—seerule 28 (left turns) and rule 32 (right turns).4 Rule 95 deals with driving in emergency stoppinglanes, and Division 6 of this Part deals with driving inother special purpose lanes.

148 Giving way when moving from one marked lane orline of traffic to another marked lane or line oftraffic
(1) A driver who is moving from one marked lane(whether or not the lane is ending) to anothermarked lane must give way to any vehicletravelling in the same direction as the driver in themarked lane to which the driver is moving.Penalty: 5 penalty units.
Notes
1 Marked lane and multi-lane road are defined in thedictionary.
2 For this rule, give way means the driver must slowdown and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision—seethe definition in the dictionary.
ExamplesGiving way when moving from one marked lane to anothermarked lane
Example 1 (Ex 1 and 2 were images that did not copy over - you can find them in the link above under the appropriate paragraph)
Example 2
In these examples, vehicle B must give way to vehicle A.
(2) A driver on a road with 2 or more lines of traffictravelling in the same direction as the driver, andwho is moving from one line of traffic to anotherline of traffic, must give way to any vehicle travelling in the same direction as the driver in theline of traffic to which the driver is moving.Penalty: 5 penalty units.
(3) Subrule (2) does not apply to a driver if the line oftraffic in which the driver is driving is mergingwith the line of traffic to which the driver ismoving.
NoteRule 149 deals with giving way when lines of traffic merge.
ExampleGiving way when moving from one line of traffic to anotherline of traffic when the lines are not mergingIn this example, vehicle B must give way to vehicle A.
148A Giving way when moving within a single markedlaneIf a driver diverges to the left or right within amarked lane, the driver must give way to anyvehicle that is in the lane.Penalty: 5 penalty units.NoteMarked lane is defined in the dictionary."


Ian look at 148A which I bolded above for your convenience. This part of the rules had nothing to do with the incident under discussion but there you go. Clearly even without marked lanes you do not have right of way if your path is blocked.

I'm not entirely sure about Victoria, but in NSW and QLD, where there are no lanes are marked, a driver must stay as close as practical to the left side of the road -- of course common sense says that you shouldn't zig-zag from side to side when keeping as close as practical to the left side of the road.
and where the number of UNMARKED lanes is reduced -- whether through an "obstruction" or the road narrowing, it's the vehicle in front that has precedence. The text I found reads: "When a driver is travelling on a road without lane markings and the number of lanes is reduced, they must merge by giving way to any vehicle that is ahead of them."
Technically, where the road is wide enough for two lanes, BUT THERE ARE NO LANE MARKINGS, the right hand vehicle is overtaking the left hand one and has an obligation to only overtake when it's safe to do so and to keep clear of the vehicle being overtaken.

Of course, the situation is as you describe when there are marked lanes, and the merging vehicle has to cross a lane line.

I was typing my post #9 while you were posting your post #8

The QLD road rules talk about where there are no lane markings and lines of traffic moving in the same direction merge. In the Vic roads video, the narrator clearly states the vehicle in the blocked line must indicate and give way. The description on the QLD webpage says any vehicle not in front in the outside lane must give way. If the vehicle in the inside lane had not been indicating for long enough to warn other drivers (5 seconds?) and/or came to a complete stop I guess they would be classed as entering a lane of traffic from the shoulder and not just changing lanes, in which case they wouldn't have right of way and the road rule to give right of way to buses entering the traffic wouldn't be needed either.

I think we may be discussing different sections of the road rules.

You have been talking about Sections 147 and 148 which -- as I read the rules -- apply when there are more than one MARKED lane for the direction of travel.
And, as I read the rule, Section 148A applies to vehicles moving left or right (e.g. weaving) within a single wide lane.
As I interpret the video, the segment between 0:45 and 0:55 more closely resembles the situation provided for by Section 149 of the rules.

Section 149 Giving way when lines of traffic merge into a single line of traffic
A driver in a line of traffic that is merging with one or more lines of traffic travelling in the same direction as the driver must give way to a vehicle in another line of traffic if any part of the vehicle is ahead of the driver's vehicle.

which needs to be read in conjunction with section 129
129 Keeping to the far left side of a road
(1) A driver on a road (except a multi-lane road) must drive as near as practicable to the far left side of the road.
(2) This rule does not apply to the rider of a motorbike.

and the dictionary
multi-lane road, for a driver, means a one-way road, or a two-way road, with 2 or more marked lanes (except bicycle lanes) that are—
(a) on the side of the dividing line or median strip where the driver is driving; and
(b) for the use of vehicles travelling in the same direction;


I suggest that when read together, calling a row of parked vehicles a "line of traffic travelling in the same direction" is drawing a very very long bow. However, I'll readily agree that a bus picking up or setting down passengers might be classified as being part of a "line of traffic".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

I think we may be discussing different sections of the road rules.

You have been talking about Sections 147 and 148 which -- as I read the rules -- apply when there are more than one MARKED lane for the direction of travel.
And, as I read the rule, Section 148A applies to vehicles moving left or right (e.g. weaving) within a single wide lane.
As I interpret the video, the segment between 0:45 and 0:55 more closely resembles the situation provided for by Section 149 of the rules.

Section 149 Giving way when lines of traffic merge into a single line of traffic
A driver in a line of traffic that is merging with one or more lines of traffic travelling in the same direction as the driver must give way to a vehicle in another line of traffic if any part of the vehicle is ahead of the driver's vehicle.

---

Ian Read 188 (1):
148 Giving way when moving from one marked lane or line of traffic to another marked lane or line oftraffic
(1) A driver who is moving from one marked lane(whether or not the lane is ending) to another marked lane must give way to any vehicle travelling in the same direction as the driver in themarked lane to which the driver is moving.

If you have to cross a line you are clearly not merging. Under the legislation you are changing lanes.

The fact that there is so much consternation over this really shows that the laws are poorly written and probably too complicated for many to understand.

Ian, can I respectfully request that if you wish to discuss this matter, which is of no consequence to the issue I started the thread for, that you start a thread of your own. Continuing to run it here is watering down the particular safety issue I am trying to highlight from the incident this morning. I am really hoping that this message will get back to the guy who caused the problem before he hurts himself or someone else. If he continues to be as aggressive as he was to me, confronting me in the car-park and again in the store, it is only a matter of time until he picks on the wrong person and gets beaten up or worse.

Post the dashcam video!

:B:B:B:D:D:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by woodPixel

Post the dashcam video!

:B:B:B:D:D:D

---

Evan, I keep saying that I am trying to get an important message to a person who needs to know it for his and everyone else's safety.

I am not trying to belittle him or ridicule him in any way or provide mindless entertainment for the masses at his expense. If you want to see a funny video of bad driving check youtube.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Ian Read 188 (1):
148 Giving way when moving from one marked lane or line of traffic to another marked lane or line of traffic
(1) A driver who is moving from one marked lane(whether or not the lane is ending) to another marked lane must give way to any vehicle travelling in the same direction as the driver in the marked lane to which the driver is moving.

---

But how is the phrase "must give way" interpreted?
Is it adjust your speed by just enough to avoid a collision? Even if that means the distance between the merged vehicles is less than 3 m.
Is it merge in a way that the distance between the merged vehicles corresponds to a gap of around 2 seconds -- which at 70 km/h corresponds to a nearly 40 m gap.
Note that at the observed maximum capacity for free flowing traffic (at 50 km/h), the gap between vehicles is in the order of 15 m, and on the Sydney Harbour Bridge during peak periods, gaps less than 15 m are quite common.

Quote:

---

Ian, can I respectfully request that if you wish to discuss this matter, which is of no consequence to the issue I started the thread for, that you start a thread of your own. Continuing to run it here is watering down the particular safety issue I am trying to highlight from the incident this morning.

---

noted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

But how is the phrase "must give way" interpreted?

---

From https://www.racv.com.au/on-the-road/...iving-way.html

Quote:

---

Give way in the road rules means a driver or pedestrian who is stopped must “remain stationary until it is safe to proceed”, or otherwise “slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision”.

---

I see this as meaning that the vehicle which does not have right of way is th eone who is responsible to ensure that the it does not attempt to occupy the same physical space as the vehicle with right of way.

Also note that they are given the options of:
- remaining stationery
- slowing down
- stopping

this rules out the usual favorite around here of speeding up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

From https://www.racv.com.au/on-the-road/...iving-way.html

I see this as meaning that the vehicle which does not have right of way is the one who is responsible to ensure that the it does not attempt to occupy the same physical space as the vehicle with right of way.

---

I don't want to be picky about your use of "right of way", it is, after all, your thread, but the reference material is pretty careful about referring to one vehicle "giving way" to the other. I haven't seen were the material refers to one vehicle having a "right of way" over the other.


In the situation that prompted this thread, was the "other vehicle" travelling more quickly or more slowly than you? i.e. was one vehicle passing the other when the event occurred?
or were both vehicles travelling at the same speed and could you have been in the other driver's blind spot?


Your description of the event implies that it was the other vehicle which needed to brake to avoid a collision.
However, the reaction from the other driver -- following you for some distance and being abusive -- implies you did something unexpected.

Quote:

---

note they are given the options of:
- remaining stationery
- slowing down
- stopping

this rules out the usual favorite around here of speeding up.

---

which is interesting given that the other advice, especially when entering a motorway or similar, is to "match speed" and find a suitable gap. Matching the speed of vehicles on a freeway will most often involve speeding up !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Ian, can I respectfully request that if you wish to discuss this matter, which is of no consequence to the issue I started the thread for, that you start a thread of your own. Continuing to run it here is watering down the particular safety issue I am trying to highlight from the incident this morning. I am really hoping that this message will get back to the guy who caused the problem before he hurts himself or someone else. If he continues to be as aggressive as he was to me, confronting me in the car-park and again in the store, it is only a matter of time until he picks on the wrong person and gets beaten up or worse.

---

noted

---

And ignored apparently.

Ian - all the answers I have given are easily found on a google search - work it out for yourself.

And for the sake of all potential victims please sort it out in your mind before you venture out on the roads again - particularly if you come to Victoria.

The difficulty with these discussions is that Vic road laws are actually quite different in a number of aspects then other states. As far as I can see you are right Doug.

Peter.

In the case of a fatal accident it makes little difference what the road rules say. When you're dead you're dead. Drive defensively. As for taking offence at the fellows tirade. As I recall, you are just as capable of dishing it out yourself.

Not knowing what took place apart from you being adamant you were in the right which you may well have been
But is there a chance that you were driving in a manor where you thought you were in the right and just held your line to a point where the other driver had to take radical action to avoid an accident ?
The fact he went to the measures he did to abuse you must mean he was pretty upset with the situation and it was more than the usual typical daily encounters on the road.

I don't know what happens with motor vehicle accidents, but at a Marine Court of Inquiry into a collision, almost the first question that each master will be asked, regardless of the circumstances, is "What did you do to avoid a collision?" In the absence of any reference to "right of way" in the road regulations, I suspect that road rules are the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

I don't know what happens with motor vehicle accidents, but at a Marine Court of Inquiry into a collision, almost the first question that each master will be asked, regardless of the circumstances, is "What did you do to avoid a collision?" In the absence of any reference to "right of way" in the road regulations, I suspect that road rules are the same.

---

Road rules serve three broad purposes
1. a guide to how our roads should be used.
2. a means to legally assign blame when a crash occurs.
3. a way to apportion civil responsibility when, as a result of a crash, damage (to persons or property) occurs.

unfortunately purposes 2 and 3 are too often confused, which is one reason why the rules are typically written as which vehicle should "give way", rather than which vehicle has "right of way". A "right of way" implies a right to continue unobstructed without the need to take evasive action, which is not the intent of the road rules.

A relatively simple example,
at the end of a slow vehicle or overtaking lane the vehicle in the left hand lane (which is normally travelling well below the speed limit) has to give way to a vehicle in the right hand lane (which is normally travelling at the speed limit), if the left hand vehicle is crossing a lane line (Rule 148, see post #8). However, that rule would only be applied when the distance between vehicles is so short that failing to "obey" it results in a collision. If the distance between vehicles is such that the faster vehicle can brake to avoid a collision when they see the slower vehicle starting to change lanes, then that is what the faster vehicle is expected to do. (Alex's "what did you do to avoid a collision?")