I see these close calls all the time

[OneRedLT4]

First let me say, that metering lights in the northbay are a pretty recent thing and people just can't figure them out. So many people will get in the left lane of two lane on ramp and sit and stare at the light on the right (with no one there) and wait it out. Or people just blow threw like they are exempt.

Anyway, along with the lights, many on ramps have been redone and are now sporting a nice new 24 hour carpool lane. Again, most think it's not real or doesn't apply to them. Lot of revenue being missed there.

Anyway, I see many times someone changing lanes from the non-carpool lane of the on ramp while they are expectantly stuck in a metering light line. Then these cars which usually have two or more people in them, nearly hit or are hit by someone driving fast in the carpool lane with only one person in the vehicle.

My curious question is, if there is a collision, who's at fault? The car changing lanes I'd imagine is guilty for unsafe lane change but the other vehicle is there illegally.

Just curious.

 

[limey]

My :2c - Unsafe lane change. You can't go pulling into someone's path and causing a collision (failure to yield) regardless of whether the other car should be in that lane or not.

 

[TheRiddler]

My :2c - Unsafe lane change. You can't go pulling into someone's path and causing a collision (failure to yield) regardless of whether the other car should be in that lane or not.

Yep.

Lots of unlicensed/suspended drivers on the road. If there's a crash, the person without a license isn't automatically at fault simply for being there when they shouldn't have been. Same idea if you're in the carpool lane when you shouldn't be.

 

[OneRedLT4]

I guess I've always been told, regardless who did what, if a driver is impaired, it's his/her fault. In that line of thinking, I was going for what irritates me a lot, illegal use of carpool lane.

 

[bojangle]

I guess I've always been told, regardless who did what, if a driver is impaired, it's his/her fault. In that line of thinking, I was going for what irritates me a lot, illegal use of carpool lane.

In California, according to CHP guidelines which almost all agencies follow for traffic collisions, DUI is only the primary collision factor if the impaired driver caused the collision. If the DUI driver was sitting in stopped traffic at a light and was rear ended by a sober driver, a speed violation, and not DUI, would be the primary collision factor and the sober driver would be at fault.

 

[OneRedLT4]

that makes more sense.

 

[Sidesaddle]

In California, according to CHP guidelines which almost all agencies follow for traffic collisions, DUI is only the primary collision factor if the impaired driver caused the collision. If the DUI driver was sitting in stopped traffic at a light and was rear ended by a sober driver, a speed violation, and not DUI, would be the primary collision factor and the sober driver would be at fault.

The impaired driver would be arrested for 23152(a) V.C. and would also be listed as an associated factor in the collision.

 

[bojangle]

The impaired driver would be arrested for 23152(a) V.C. and would also be listed as an associated factor in the collision.

Well, yeah, there's that.

They'd also be charged with 20002 (a) V.C. and 12500/14601.5(a) V.C. too...cuz most of the time those charges also seem to apply.

 

[NorCalBusa]

The impaired driver would be arrested for 23152(a) V.C. and would also be listed as an associated factor in the collision.

Hey, I know I'm sitting in it and all- but this ain't my car!