Giving way to buses.

Taxis, trams, buses etc
Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:52 am

HI !
If a bus waiting in an intersection, on middle and far right marked as 'Strait only and right only', and turning on the 'left' indicator (not to the right), until, the trafic signal turn 'green'.

Is it possible for a bus to turn left at an intersection using the road rule 77 along with 143, regardless of the RR 147, and the vehicles on left side of the bus which were in a line of trafic to turn left, on only left turning 'marked lane', must give way to the bus to turn left before they make their left turn?

Or the bus must enter to the left only lane using RR 77 with respect to the RR147 before the green light turned on, and maintain a sufficient enough distance to make a left without colliding into the left corner using RR 143.

What is the specific Victorian Road Rule for the justification?
Thanks
Kapila

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Hardy » Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:55 pm

What you describe might be common-place in Madurai or Nairobi, but in Victoria a bus has to make a left hand turn from the left lane. None of the rules you refer to apply to a driver of a bus turning left.

Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:13 pm

Thanks for the post, but in my case, even my insure also back the bus driver in saying that I should give way to buses under RR77. I disputed my insurer's decision but I can't find any road rule to back my point. I know RR77 is to give the busses priority to change the lanes but not to make a left turn. I have the video footage, which I received from the bus company. Are there any authorised body who could specially investigate this accident in VicRoads or some where else?

Gravy
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:25 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Gravy » Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:36 pm

The answer to your initial question appears to be 'no', but I think that's because you've framed it too narrowly.

Rule 77 is about drivers giving way to buses that are re-entering the flow of traffic. It specifically requires the bus to be operating its right indicator (not left). You're insurance company is correct to say you should give way to buses under rule 77, but that has nothing to do with the scenario or collision you describe. Also, it doesn't give buses priority to change lanes as such; it gives them priority to re-join traffic without having to wait for a gap that may take hours to come. For rule 77 to apply, the bus must be stopped or moving slowly.

Rule 143 is about drivers not overtaking turning vehicles that display the relevant sign. It doesn't permit buses to do anything in particular - it prevents other drivers from doing a certain thing.

Rule 147(c) provides an exemption from complying with rule 147 if the driver is complying with another rule. So you perhaps consider Rule 28(2), which might answer your last question (in the original post).

Your second post muddies the waters a bit, though. Road rules have almost nothing to do with civil liability (i.e. apportioning fault/blame in a collision). Police investigate collisions (not VicRoads), but not in the way you are thinking. What you want is a lawyer.

Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Thu Jun 04, 2020 1:50 pm

Thanks! all

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Hardy » Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:57 pm

What Road Rule does the insurer say you breached? Insurance companies love to point to a section of the road rules you have breached and then pretend you are fully liable for the loss suffered by their insured. Even though they know full well this is illogical and quite simply wrong. That is because liability for losses in a civil court is not determined by who has committed a criminal offence. In many cases both parties have committed a criminal offence. For example, a drunk driver is driving through an intersection whilst on the phone, with no seat belt or headlights, and collides with a car that has entered against a red light. Liability is apportioned according each person's failure to take reasonable steps to avoid causing harm to the other.

Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:18 pm

My Insurer said that I have breached road rule 77 (1) specified under (c). Here is the justification of my insurer

"In relation to the road rule 77, the onus was on you to give the right of way to the bus, as the bus was about to enter or proceed in the line of traffic in which you were driving (Point C). It can be established that you were aware that the intention of the bus was to turn left upon your approach to the bus as the bus was ahead of you, you were not ahead of the bus. Even if you were beside the back of the bus, the front side indicator alerted you to the intention of the bus which was in front of you. At no time were you in front of the bus and at the very least you were parallel with the back
end of the bus as evident by the CCTV footage. There was a black vehicle ahead of you, in line with the front of the bus, then you left a safe following distance meaning you vehicle was more to the back of the bus than the front. Based on the above road rule you had to give way to the bus as it was turning left, which you were aware of, however you proceeded with the vehicle in front of you and the bus and only seemed to stop just before turning as the bus was manoeuvring into the lane you intended to turn into, however you were far enough forward that the bus hit you as it turned the corner.
Road Rules allow for larger vehicles to be able to turn from other lanes other than the actual turning lane, as they have to take wide turns to enable them to complete the turn into the intended lane. You should have allowed the bus to move forward and complete their left turn before you proceeded to move all the way forward and turned left."

They assumed that I should be aware that the bus intending to turn left at the intersection, simply because I could possibly see the bus's left indicator turned on from the side of the bus regardless of its position. I have the video footage, and it's clarify that the bus was far right side of the middle lane and moved over the left marking of the right lane. So it appeared too me like he meant to turn right then he must have changed him mind to turn left.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Hardy » Fri Jun 05, 2020 1:33 pm

Sounds like you should pay the excess so your insurer can go ahead with your claim. Might be easier and cheaper than suing the bus company and your insurance company. Maybe the bus company uses the same insurer, so your insurer is not interested in litigating? Your other option is to sue the bus company and your insurer to prove that you were not negligent at all and your insurer has to cover 100% of your losses. But if the court finds you are even 1% liable, then the insurer will justify charging the excess to cover your liability. I take it you are quibbling about $600 or so?
Did the bus have a r.143 sign on the back?

Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:17 pm

But my insurer paid the full cost of the damages of my car to my repairer. However, this came out in couple of months later the incident. Pretty weird, har? I have lost my income approximately $ 3000 because I didn't have a vehicle which acceptable for my work.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8349
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Hardy » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:33 pm

Your insurer was never going to cover you for your lost income under a motor vehicle insurance policy. They might have covered a replacement vehicle though, so you should have hired a vehicle and put in a claim for that. To recover your lost income you would need to look to the bus company to compensate you, and they will say you should have hired a vehicle to mitigate your loss. If your vehicle was a mobile mechanic van or mobile crane or a taxi etc then it is usually not possible to hire a replacement vehicle that can keep you working, so your income loss should be claimed against the other driver if you are not insured for that.

Kapila
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2020 10:04 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Kapila » Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:36 pm

Are there any good lawyers for this kind of matters you recon? My sensors don't let me go away this injustice.

Gravy
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:25 am

Re: Giving way to buses.

Postby Gravy » Fri Jun 05, 2020 3:52 pm

Kapila wrote:Here is the justification of my insurer
"In relation to the road rule 77, the onus was on you to give the right of way to the bus, as the bus was about to enter or proceed in the line of traffic in which you were driving (Point C)."
OMFG, that's so wrong that it hurts. Talk about cherry picking... 77(1)(a) and (b) both end with the conjunction 'and', which means (Sean will correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm rather confident on this) they must all apply for a driver to be required to comply with any of rule 77. It would be different if they ended with 'or', but they don't.
Kapila wrote:Road Rules allow for larger vehicles to be able to turn from other lanes other than the actual turning lane, as they have to take wide turns to enable them to complete the turn into the intended lane. You should have allowed the bus to move forward and complete their left turn before you proceeded to move all the way forward and turned left.
This bit is correct (provided the appropriate sign appears on the rear of the bus, plus a few other qualifying criteria that seem to be met), but it has nothing to do with rule 77. This is rule 28(2), to which I alluded earlier.

Kapila wrote:Are there any good lawyers for this kind of matters you recon? My sensors don't let me go away this injustice.
Your insurance company covered your loss minus the excess. If it were me, I'd take that as a win and let sleeping dogs lie. Just because your insurer is wrong about rule 77 does not mean they are wrong that you should have given way to the bus or, more specifically, contributed to the cause of the collision. I'm not suggesting you are entirely to blame, but it seems that you should accept at least some responsibility for the collision. That's enough to trigger your excess payment.


Return to “Public Transport”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest