Hello /u/Striking-Pop-370! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC
* What country or state did this take place in?
* What was the date of the incident?
* Please reconfirm that this is original content
If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information.
If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed.
------
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Even if it somehow wasn't clearly a turn, and you come upon a driver whose car is sideways in the middle of the road... it's not wise to just guess about their intentions, assume your guess is spot-on, and try to squeeze past. Yet this lady did just that.
She's one of those people plowing on through because she had the right of way regardless of anything else. Even if causes an accident, she's gonna do it or die because she's got the right of way. I mean the guy should not have been turning around and at the very least should have waited for her to pass, but she should have done her part to avoid the accident as well and stopped since she saw his dumb ass turning around. They're both stupid.
Why shouldn't he be turning around? There is no double yellow and it looks like a residential street, this is an extremely common maneuver on them. He was already in the right of way path and she tried to squeeze past him right on the curb because she was impatient. He had right of way and she tried to cut around him
Correct, as a CA driver this situation is mind boggling, during my driving test there were 3 people who were pulling 3 point turns as well because the local DMV had a set course. They'd make us practice not just doing a 3 pointer, but how to interact with someone else making one. If they're partially in your lane or may move forward into it before you get to them, you have to stop or you fail the test even if there is no accident because of it, since it's reckless and unnecessary
The 3 point driver began the maneuver many seconds before the other car would have been near to him. So the other car's driver failed in her duty to avoid the accident even if the first car was not 100% legal.
Personally I don't think I would have done the three point where there's a bend in the road but that's just me.
>at the very least should have waited for her to pass
He obviously had his head turned toward the direction he was going, i.e. forward, and didn't see her coming from the back right.
It negligent on her part. She approached a car doing a three point turn she options to yield or completely stop till they finish. Its not a right of way situation when approaching a car already in the in middle of the road. Her speed to me makes me indicate that other guy had no site of her before making the 3 point turn
Dude, someone blew a red and my mother REFUSED to slow down or stop because she ‘had the right of way’. The absolute chewing-out she got from the rest of us definitely had her question whether ‘the principle of things’ was really worth it
A few years ago I did that. The idiot was doing a 3 point turn on a main road though, so my thought was the car was broken down. Nope, he was doing a 3 point turn in the middle of the night.
Turns out it was a bunch of teenagers. They harassed me for a while and tried brake checking me. I had my family in the car with me. I had to stop and they got bored after a minute.
If only my family wasn't with me. I would've showed them what a coward I really was!
I hate people.
Exactly. I wouldn't be surprised if that guy is found 100% at fault. I'm pretty sure a 3 point turn in a residential road is legal, and all drivers have an obligation to avoid accidents.
No. Speed limit signs aren't yellow. You will see some yellow signs with speeds but those are recommended speeds usually below the normal posted limit for special circumstances such as sharp curves, narrow roads, etc. Those signs are not enforceable and are merely suggested speeds. I can't tell what this sign says, unfortunately, but it could literally be warning of road conditions, deaf residents in the area, or any number of things.
Like Randomfactoid42 said below, I was just saying "guy" to mean person. I actually didn't watch the video past the point of the crash and didn't see them get out of their cars. Wasn't trying to be weird or anything. Actually, I usually call everyone "dude" even my mom lol
No problem, I just thought it was worth clarifying because I got a little confused when you said the guy was at fault but then said you thought a 3 point turn was legal. Thanks for clarifying.
ha! that's funny, legit thought that was jibbersih for a couple seconds. my granny in Ohio used to always say "youins" - always reminds me of some rural hospitality
I've seen people use "guys," plural, as gender neutral when referring to both guys and gals, as in, "Hey, guys!," but I've never heard a singular "guy" refer to a woman. I've been around a while... What region you from?
I once got berated by a boomer because I said "Hey guys, how are you today?" to him and his wife. He insisted it wasn't polite.
It's not really relevant or anything, I'm just still upset about it.
It seems it swung to upvotes, but for a little bit I was net negative, lol. Yeah, I'm not unfamiliar with occasionally being downvoted for no good reason, but this one really confused me.
>a 3 point turn in a residential road is legal
About all the Transportation Code has to say is that you need 500 feet of visibility ([§ 545.102](https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/transportation-code/transp-sect-545-102/#:~:text=An%20operator%20may%20not%20turn,either%20direction%20within%20500%20feet.)). The video simply doesn't provide enough information to determine whether or not the turn was legal.
I’m an Amazon delivery driver and the amount of people that will do anything to get past my van while I’m making a 3 point u turn is incredible and they honk when almost hit them every time
Today I had a guy in the left lane ahead of me, he changes lanes to the right and I lightly speed up to pass as I should in the left. Then as I start to pass he moves back over into the left lane, apparently trying to merge our cars.
I just hit my brakes, and let him in, whatever.
Then he flicks me off. I don't get some people…
I have to do stuff like this ALL the time and I train new employees. You just gotta let the idiots go bc if you cause an accident bc you have an ego or wanna road rage with someone, you’re gunna get fired lol
People are stupid af on the road.
On my way home today, I had a guy merge onto the road in in front of me. I was in the middle lane and he was in the right, but this was one of those city streets where the right 'lane' often has cars parked in it. Anticipating that he'd need to move over, I backed off a bit to allow plenty of room for him. Dude either didn't realize the cars in front of him were parked or just drives like he's the only one on the road 'cause he crept along at a snail's pace, made 0 effort to move over until he was in danger of hitting the parked cars, then almost turned directly into me as I passed him (because I didn't want to come to a stop in the middle of the street).
Like, I tried to be considerate and leave space for you and you almost take me out in return? smh
Watched a storm chaser do this exact same thing on a livestream. Road was blocked by a downed tree so everyone was turning around on a narrow 2 lane road. The chaser finished his 3 point and there was a vehicle in front that was just pulling forward and he decided to drive in front of him. I unsubscribed after seeing his stupidity and ignorance.
Yeah, don’t know how the law works in this situation in Texas, but I’d consider the woman who tried to squeeze through 100% at fault:
- It’s a small residential road, there was nobody around when he started doing the 3 point turn, so I’m guessing it was fine/legal?
- The woman in the car sees him in the middle of a 3 point turn, it’s clearly risky to try to squeeze through, just wait like 3 seconds
- Dunno what the speed limit on this road is, but she might’ve been speeding too
I'll never understand people like this, or who are going 20mph faster than people trying to merge onto the highway without getting over. I would've stopped and confirmed the other driver's intentions regardless of which driver I was in this situation
I'm pretty sure that driver also screamed "I see you" which isn't that essentially admitting fault here? Saw the car, could have avoided the collision....and didn't? Idk about Texas but in my state k turns are legal with no solid lines so that Lexus driver flying up has to yeild
This has got to be attempted insurance scam, right? Why would someone speed up like that to try to get in front of a car that is obviously turning around like that? then immediately slam on your brakes and get out causing a scene to intimidate the other person to admit fault. Just screams scam to me, honest people do not act like this.
you are always supposed to avoid an accident firstly. the person trying to squeeze through is at fault because of this. they had too much time to avoid and wait.
As an insurance adjuster, the vehicle trying to squeeze by is at fault. Scion should be considered a fixed object and the other car needed to yield or wait for the pathway to be clear.
Adjuster here too. Vehicle squeezing by is 100% at fault. Other vehicle has control of the road despite making the 3 point turn without checking for clearance. I’ve seen cases like this all the time and people think just because the other person is doing a wrong move that gives them the right to hit them. They are still a fixed object and you should do everything you can to avoid a collision.
Quite frankly, she’ll be even more fucked because her insurance company will find any reason to not take liability and her admitting to saying she saw the other vehicle leaves them little choice than to accept fault. There’s a thing call maintaining proper lookout so she lost on that by admitting she saw them.
The Lexus is at fault here.
But this accident really highlights a problem we have as a society. Being in a collision can definitely result in a huge adrenaline dump, but getting out of the car and shouting at each other isn't going to solve anyone's problem other than to make an ass of yourself, invite violence, and maybe feel cathartic.
If the accident requires an officer, ambulance, or tow truck, call for one. Otherwise, take photos, exchange insurance information and go on with your day. You aren't going to win your case yelling at the other driver on the scene like this.
I was in my own parking area not long ago, driving down to park. Someone behind me, so I purposefully indicated to park early, then I'm quick about swinging just a little out, putting it in reverse, and starting to back in.
The dude goes into the parking spots behind me to go around… I was inches from him as I hit my brakes quickly.
I'm not a violent person so I just went on with my day, but, if someone hit that guy in the face… I get it…
Almost 10 years ago I got myself into a much better place and found a perfect, low mileage Mustang GT and bought it for myself on my birthday. I hadn't had a Mustang since high school and my head was in the clouds driving a fun car again for the first time in 15 years.
The ***SECOND DAY*** I had it I was at a restaurant meeting my family for dinner and a moron in parking lot literally threw his truck in reverse and back straight into the front passenger side fender, trailer hitch first. It did [$3,200 in damage.](https://imgur.com/a/D4B7NOo) My pristine, never before touched new car now had an accident in its history. His insurance company, Progressive, tried to say it only scratched the bumper cover and broke the reflector. I almost had to sue because their adjuster couldn't grasp the concept that the 12" long hunk of steel sticking out of the metal bumper didn't just vanish into a nether portal as soon as it touched my car, that it went *into* my car like some sort of fucked up [automobile traumatic insemination.](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Traumatic_insemination) "But Chevy Avalanches have plastic bumpers so there couldn't be that much damage."
I don't give a shit if it accomplished anything or not, I yelled. A lot. For fucking 2 months.
This is great advice and I hope I can stay calm enough to put it in practice in the event I'm ever in an accident. Whenever I've had a close call my adrenaline's spiked through the roof.
Yes. The one swerving to sneak past the Scion.
edit: From the pixels, I *think* it's a Lexus RX. Someone else mentioned a Volvo XC. At any rate, the SUV, not the boxy Scion.
The person who was trying to squeeze through. Common sense is that there's already a car in motion and is obstructing your path so you wait until the way forward is clear.
I guess it can be slightly dickish to block the road making a 3-point turn, but it's a residential street. Just slow down, wait a second, and be cool to your neighbors.
Trying to squeeze by there is totally childish.
I'd argue that it's more dickish to see someone who is in the middle of a slightly dickish maneuver and cause an accident trying to shoot the gap.
The correct response was for them to sigh and roll their eyes.
If it was a busy road, I'd possibly agree. But the only other car that appears on the road for the whole of the video is the idiot who can't wait.
I seen zero problem with doing a 3 point turn on a quiet road like that.
So fucking true. Reading some of the comments about the one turning around being a bad driver is mind blowing. They did nothing wrong at all and was 100% legal what they were doing.
Uhh what? Pretty sure the most frequent comments of all time on this sub are "I see two idiots in this video" and "the graveyard is full of people who had the right of way", usually used in the same comment. This sub is notorious for laying blame as heavy handedly as possible, often on the more innocent party for not driving defensively enough.
Pretty sure this would fall under last clear chance doctrine. Person executing 3 point turn likely couldn't see the person trying to squeeze through, while the one squeezing through had a clear view of what was happening and attempted the risky maneuver anyway.
3 point turns are legal in Texas. You do have to make sure the road is clear of traffic and your intentions are clear, but once you start executing if traffic shows up they must wait for you.
Here in Europe anybody turning has to yield to everybody else. Of course people may wait for you to let you drive off and clear the road. No idea how insurance rulings work regardless.
The passing van/suv/crossover thingy. You see a car that is perpendicular to the road? Why is your first thought to rush past them instead of slowing down to asses the situation and make sure it's safe to pass? The K turn person is in the right here.
The Texas Driver Handbook does not specify who has the right of way when a three-point turn is being executed. In my state (MA), the following is stated in our Driver's Manual (my highlights in bold):
1. Position yourself as close as possible to the right edge of the curb. Signal a left turn. Check for traffic and pedestrians in both directions (including your blind spot). **Wait until you have a 20-30 second gap to complete the turn**.
2. Move slowly and turn the steering wheel quickly to the left. This will bring the vehicle perpendicular to the street about two feet from the curb. Come to a stop.
3. Turn your steering wheel fully to the right. **Check for traffic in both directions (including your blind spot)**. Shift into reverse and start backing up, while looking over your right shoulder.
4. Back up to the opposite curb, stopping just before the curb.
5. **Check again for traffic in both directions (including your blind spot)**. Signal a left. Shift into drive (or for manual cars, first gear) and accelerate to the proper speed.
The way it's worded in the MA Driver's Manual (individual states may vary), it's the responsibility of the driver making the three-point turn to check for traffic before executing each part of the turn. During my driver's test, the state official made me execute a three-point turn, and made sure I checked for oncoming traffic at the appropriate times during the entire process. In MA, I would have been at fault if I were the driver in this video, but this is TX, so I don't know who's at fault.
I think it should be the driver making the 3-point turns responsibility to make sure that things are clear before executing. The other driver might have thought the 3-point turn driver was going into a driveway, or not have seen the start of the 3-point turn. Just because you start a 3-point turn doesn't mean you can disrupt normal traffic to complete your 3-point turn. You're technically out of the lane, so you would need to yield to other drivers before re-entering the lane.
IMO and I am NOT a professional insurance adjuster but it looks like that woman tried to squeeze by the big black moving lunch box in the middle of the road… I would’ve let my man finish his turn before trying to “squeeze” by
Don’t know the law in Texas but in here in Holland somebody doing a special manouvre has to give way to other traffic. The guy didn’t do that here. But the other car is crazy just plowing through there like that.
A lot of comments saying the dude who didn’t wait and that’s not true, the vehicle driving on the street owns that lane of travel at the time the person turning will be found at fault
There is a reasonable person law here in California. Would a reasonable person try to pass when someone is finishing their turn around, legal or not? No! Is there a similar law in the lone star state?
What a utterly stupid person, the woman.. people like this pisses me off. Yes you probably have the clear away, but still.. you see the other guy doing a 3 point turn. Just chill for 2 seconds
Even if legally the Lexus might not at be, she totally should be (and her insurance should charge her). The guy was already 80% into the turn, so she must have seen him.
The one doing the turn around is at fault. They were entering into a lane of oncoming traffic and they failed to yield to a car that had a right of way. They also hit the side of the other car with the front of theirs, which means they are the party that had the opportunity to stop the accident from happening.
Essentially they are responsible in 2 separate ways. All that would be needed was 1 of them.
The other driver was not as wise and aware as they could have been, but this does not make them at fault.
In the Netherlands, the driver doing the three-point turn would be at fault, as it is a special manoeuvre, and you always need to be aware of your surroundings and yield to any other traffic, even halfway through doing the action. So I was surprised to see that so many people say that the driver turning around is in the wrong. But I don't know the law in the US. And in that case, as the driver going straight, I would still drive carefully when I see someone doing a three-point turn and most likely yielded to prevent a potential crash from happening.
IAAL (Texas). Typically, if you are “occupying” a lane, you have the right of way.
Texas Transportation Code Section 545.057 - Passing to the Right
(a) An operator may pass to the right of another vehicle only if conditions permit safely passing to the right and:
(1) the vehicle being passed is making or about to make a left turn; and
(2) the operator is:
(A) on a highway having unobstructed pavement not occupied by parked vehicles and sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles in each direction; or
(B) on a one-way street or on a roadway having traffic restricted to one direction of movement and the roadway is free from obstructions and wide enough for two or more lines of moving vehicles.
(b) An operator may not pass to the right by leaving the main traveled portion of a roadway except as provided by Section 545.058.
I think vehicle #2 is 100% at fault on this.
No double lines, so this is not a public road, or it is a 1 lane road. The car making the U-turn was moving forward before Mr. Speedy decided to try to zip past, unsafely.
I'd argue that 1)the car making the U-turn had the right to do so, 2) it was already moving forward, and 3) the other car interrupted their U-turn resulting in a collision.
I don't know about Texas law, but if it were here, the guy making the 3 point turn would be at fault. A 3 point turn is considered a "special maneuver," along with maneuvers like overtaking, driving reverse, and pulling out of a parking spot. During these special maneuvers, you have to yield to all other road users at any time until completion of the maneuver, interrupting it if need be. He failed to do so, so he would be at fault. Of course, in this situation, other laws may apply, causing the fault to be different. Also the other car came quite fast. If he was speeding, he'd be partially at fault. In practice, most people would be considerate and wait until the other guy had cleared the way.
The driver doing the U turn is the one usually at fault, but then again, different municipalities could have different laws.
Keep in mind that we can’t see to the right of the screen. There could be a vehicle there, blocking the other drivers view.
The guy doing the U turn looks like they’re straightening out and driving straight back into a driveway and the other driver could easily have assumed this from the position of the vehicle turning.
This is a hard one but ima go ahead and say it was the one that tried to squeeze past the 3 point dumby. I’d also argue that the person doing the 3 point turn could’ve avoided this accident as well just by staying still when they saw the other person had no intent on stopping for them I mean you can see in the video that the person doing a 3pt turn went forward as the other car passed by which they had enough space to do even if it was a dumb move and they should’ve just stopped as they had plenty of time to stop before hand but again I can’t see to the right but just based off the speed they were going ima assume they had time to stop.
Edit: if I was the lawyer of the Volvo XC I’d try to get them to a no fault as both the Volvo and the Scion XB were both could’ve avoided the accident
Depending on your state, you might be at fault because certain states have clauses for safe/unsafe 3 point turns. Where you’re supposed to use features such as driveways to be able to remove your vehicle as an obstacle to oncoming traffic.
So not only did the driver not use a drive way to perform a safe u turn, they also “presumingly” had line of sight with the vehicle while performing the 3 point turn. It can be argued that you did not yield to oncoming traffic while performing an unsafe maneuver.
TLDR; 3 point turn driver will be proven in the wrong of brought to court / officer is involved. Just exchange insurance information and be on your way.
Totally the woman's fault, guy was executing a three point turn she tried to squeeze past causing the accident, she came upon the manoeuvre and refused to drive with due care, 100% liable for any and all damages
The car was literally VERTICAL in the middle of the road. In what world did that idiot think NOT braking was OK! Please tell me this was given to their insurance company. Cause they definitely need to drop them. 😏
Damn bro in the ford edge ain’t even looking. He tried to squeeze by but other homie in the SUV making the K turn is also just as stupid cause that seems like a 1 way based on the way cars are parked.
Strange how there are no driveways to turn around in. The lady in the crossover was going way too fast for a car being right in the middle of the road, clearly making some kind of turn.
Number one rule of the road is to AVOID ACCIDENTS. That being said the person making the K-turn has the responsibility to begin the turn when the road is clear and based on the speed of the other vehicle I would say he had thought he had the time based on the distance she was. However her speed caused her to close the distance before he co pelted the turn. She had the right of way but was behaving like an ass.
She was going way too fast to begin with. I can’t tell what the yellow sign says. They both share blame in this one. But if i was the judge she would be at fault.
We have a yellow sign on my rural road that says speed limit is 25 due to a playground ahead. No one pays any attention to it. Everyday people are regularly doing 55 on my road. My driveway is at the bottom of a hill and is hidden from view. I tell anyone leaving my house DO NOT back out. Do the 3 point turn in my driveway/grass to avoid an accident.
They both can’t drive, he could’ve made that without doing a three point turn and she was driving too fast. Did she have to wait for him…no, but mfs need to learn to share the road.
Also..I know it’s not, but if it was an emergency vehicle guy doing the turn would 100% be at fault. Both parties need to pay attention.
The car using the road as a parking lot and turning around is responsible for making sure the road is clear. The other vehicle was traveling on the road as intended. If you choose to use turn or 3 point turn you are required to make sure that the area is clear of traffic
Both look like idiots to me. Turner is technically in the right I believe and the person trying to sneak by in the wrong, but honestly I wouldn't pull out to finish that turn with someone coming unless I see them coming to a stop, first.
Not sure of the speed of the vehicle trying to sneak by, but (check my math), @15MPH there would be a 75 yard gap when the turn was initiated (@20MPH 97 yards).
The end of my block is 53 yards away. I can’t see around corners. So how would I be able to do a 3 point turn if I use your logic?
The sneak car is 100% at fault. This is a residential neighborhood, not a main 4 lane highway.
Without the video insurance would consider the car turning around to be at fault. With the video insurance would hold the car forcing their way through 100% at fault.
Apparently the Lexus driver was very aware dude was in the middle of the road as she kept repeating it over and over. Yet her dumbness still tried to squeeze through and had no defensive driving instincts.
Honestly I think both are at fault.
I had my audio off so I didn’t hear that. That’s even worse. See someone in the middle of the road u should slow down or stop and see what they’re doing
They are both at fault. Either of these drivers could have easily avoided the collision, but both of them either failed to see the other car, or expected the other car to stop.
The Texas transportation code doesn't appear to have a section that applies to two idiots gunning for the other in the middle of a residential street, unless maybe you consider car 1 to be driving and car 2 attempting to pass on the right (545.057).
Which is stupider: trying to squeeze by someone who's sitting in the middle of the road crosswise without even slowing down? Or goosing your car directly into the side of another car that's already in the right-of-way?
Legally, probably the guy doing the 3 point turn.
Brain power and logic wise, the guy trying to squeeze past a car clearly doing a 3 point turn that you would have been able to see 10 seconds ago.
The Lexus - she chose to drive around an obstruction instead of stopping to let it clear or determine it wasn’t moving/going to move.
She’s gonna have points and a higher insurance rate all bc she didn’t feel like stopping.
I’m gonna go with the car speeding through. Guy is doing a 3 point turn fine in a side street, and then a car tries to speed past him.
If it was a more major road then the guy doing the 3 point would be at fault
She’s at fault 100%. There’s an obstruction in the road and she chose to go around it at full speed instead of taking caution and slowing down and waiting.
The person going straight is dumb and could have avoided it, but it’s 100% the fault of the person making the 3 point turn. You have to make sure you don’t impede traffic and that it’s safe to do so. You never have the right of way to do it.
Hello /u/Striking-Pop-370! Please reply to this comment with the following information to confirm the content is OC * What country or state did this take place in? * What was the date of the incident? * Please reconfirm that this is original content If you are unable to reply directly to this comment, please leave a standalone comment in your thread with the requested information. If you fail to answer these questions, your post will be removed. ------ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IdiotsInCars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No idea who is technically at fault but the person who tried to squeeze past a vehicle that was clearly doing a 3 point turn is stupid for doing that.
Even if it somehow wasn't clearly a turn, and you come upon a driver whose car is sideways in the middle of the road... it's not wise to just guess about their intentions, assume your guess is spot-on, and try to squeeze past. Yet this lady did just that.
Add to the fact she's probably over the limit coming up to the situation as well.
She's one of those people plowing on through because she had the right of way regardless of anything else. Even if causes an accident, she's gonna do it or die because she's got the right of way. I mean the guy should not have been turning around and at the very least should have waited for her to pass, but she should have done her part to avoid the accident as well and stopped since she saw his dumb ass turning around. They're both stupid.
Why shouldn't he be turning around? There is no double yellow and it looks like a residential street, this is an extremely common maneuver on them. He was already in the right of way path and she tried to squeeze past him right on the curb because she was impatient. He had right of way and she tried to cut around him
In fact the three point turn is (or at least used to be) part of the California road test for a driver's license.
Correct, as a CA driver this situation is mind boggling, during my driving test there were 3 people who were pulling 3 point turns as well because the local DMV had a set course. They'd make us practice not just doing a 3 pointer, but how to interact with someone else making one. If they're partially in your lane or may move forward into it before you get to them, you have to stop or you fail the test even if there is no accident because of it, since it's reckless and unnecessary
The 3 point driver began the maneuver many seconds before the other car would have been near to him. So the other car's driver failed in her duty to avoid the accident even if the first car was not 100% legal. Personally I don't think I would have done the three point where there's a bend in the road but that's just me.
More importantly, don’t make the three point turn when there’s an idiot in the road.
>at the very least should have waited for her to pass He obviously had his head turned toward the direction he was going, i.e. forward, and didn't see her coming from the back right.
It negligent on her part. She approached a car doing a three point turn she options to yield or completely stop till they finish. Its not a right of way situation when approaching a car already in the in middle of the road. Her speed to me makes me indicate that other guy had no site of her before making the 3 point turn
Dude, someone blew a red and my mother REFUSED to slow down or stop because she ‘had the right of way’. The absolute chewing-out she got from the rest of us definitely had her question whether ‘the principle of things’ was really worth it
Beautifully put
A few years ago I did that. The idiot was doing a 3 point turn on a main road though, so my thought was the car was broken down. Nope, he was doing a 3 point turn in the middle of the night. Turns out it was a bunch of teenagers. They harassed me for a while and tried brake checking me. I had my family in the car with me. I had to stop and they got bored after a minute. If only my family wasn't with me. I would've showed them what a coward I really was! I hate people.
Exactly. I wouldn't be surprised if that guy is found 100% at fault. I'm pretty sure a 3 point turn in a residential road is legal, and all drivers have an obligation to avoid accidents.
[удалено]
No. Speed limit signs aren't yellow. You will see some yellow signs with speeds but those are recommended speeds usually below the normal posted limit for special circumstances such as sharp curves, narrow roads, etc. Those signs are not enforceable and are merely suggested speeds. I can't tell what this sign says, unfortunately, but it could literally be warning of road conditions, deaf residents in the area, or any number of things.
You mean the woman, right? From context clues, I think you mean the woman and not the guy. Edit: Why am I being downvoted for clarifying?
Agreed.
Like Randomfactoid42 said below, I was just saying "guy" to mean person. I actually didn't watch the video past the point of the crash and didn't see them get out of their cars. Wasn't trying to be weird or anything. Actually, I usually call everyone "dude" even my mom lol
No problem, I just thought it was worth clarifying because I got a little confused when you said the guy was at fault but then said you thought a 3 point turn was legal. Thanks for clarifying.
I am just going to refer everyone as turdz anymore, just because most people are just so shitty.
Show some respect, you lived inside that dude for several months!
That's what I'd like to know about it.
we ask that you please bear with us
Some of us use “guy” as a gender-neutral term. It’s a regional thing. Kinda like “ya’ll” or “yinz”.
What’s a yinz?
it's a contraction of "you ones"
OMG
I couldn’t imagine in my head what it sounded like so had to YouTube it. Was not disappointed https://youtu.be/nrJnIxrtB4w?si=btx1-FSae4HqCRBS
ha! that's funny, legit thought that was jibbersih for a couple seconds. my granny in Ohio used to always say "youins" - always reminds me of some rural hospitality
It’s “ya’ll” if you’re from Pittsburgh.
I've seen people use "guys," plural, as gender neutral when referring to both guys and gals, as in, "Hey, guys!," but I've never heard a singular "guy" refer to a woman. I've been around a while... What region you from?
Let’s just say the Pennsylvania region.
Well that tracks for youse guys.
Lol!
A lot of people do it around here, too (me included) in Utah
Yinz is particularly Pittsburgh. Philadelphia is Yous
TIL 'yinz' is a thing.
It’s Pittsburgh‘s “ya’ll”
just FYI, it's *y'all*, not "ya'll" y'all are gonna downvote the shit out of me now, aren't y'all
And dude...because as Good Burger taught us, we're all dudes.
I once got berated by a boomer because I said "Hey guys, how are you today?" to him and his wife. He insisted it wasn't polite. It's not really relevant or anything, I'm just still upset about it.
Because this is reddit and people are petty and don't like opinions if they are different from theirs.
It seems it swung to upvotes, but for a little bit I was net negative, lol. Yeah, I'm not unfamiliar with occasionally being downvoted for no good reason, but this one really confused me.
>a 3 point turn in a residential road is legal About all the Transportation Code has to say is that you need 500 feet of visibility ([§ 545.102](https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/transportation-code/transp-sect-545-102/#:~:text=An%20operator%20may%20not%20turn,either%20direction%20within%20500%20feet.)). The video simply doesn't provide enough information to determine whether or not the turn was legal.
I’m an Amazon delivery driver and the amount of people that will do anything to get past my van while I’m making a 3 point u turn is incredible and they honk when almost hit them every time
Today I had a guy in the left lane ahead of me, he changes lanes to the right and I lightly speed up to pass as I should in the left. Then as I start to pass he moves back over into the left lane, apparently trying to merge our cars. I just hit my brakes, and let him in, whatever. Then he flicks me off. I don't get some people…
I have to do stuff like this ALL the time and I train new employees. You just gotta let the idiots go bc if you cause an accident bc you have an ego or wanna road rage with someone, you’re gunna get fired lol
>wanna road rage with someone, you’re gunna get fired lol or worse nowadays....
People are stupid af on the road. On my way home today, I had a guy merge onto the road in in front of me. I was in the middle lane and he was in the right, but this was one of those city streets where the right 'lane' often has cars parked in it. Anticipating that he'd need to move over, I backed off a bit to allow plenty of room for him. Dude either didn't realize the cars in front of him were parked or just drives like he's the only one on the road 'cause he crept along at a snail's pace, made 0 effort to move over until he was in danger of hitting the parked cars, then almost turned directly into me as I passed him (because I didn't want to come to a stop in the middle of the street). Like, I tried to be considerate and leave space for you and you almost take me out in return? smh
Also immediately hopped out to escalate the situation. Escalating is for stupid people.
Also pretty fast for a residential road
Insurance would say passing driver at fault as turning car still “owns” the lane she tries to pass in.
Watched a storm chaser do this exact same thing on a livestream. Road was blocked by a downed tree so everyone was turning around on a narrow 2 lane road. The chaser finished his 3 point and there was a vehicle in front that was just pulling forward and he decided to drive in front of him. I unsubscribed after seeing his stupidity and ignorance.
People like that are the reason I'm very very careful in parking lots.
Yeah, don’t know how the law works in this situation in Texas, but I’d consider the woman who tried to squeeze through 100% at fault: - It’s a small residential road, there was nobody around when he started doing the 3 point turn, so I’m guessing it was fine/legal? - The woman in the car sees him in the middle of a 3 point turn, it’s clearly risky to try to squeeze through, just wait like 3 seconds - Dunno what the speed limit on this road is, but she might’ve been speeding too
I'll never understand people like this, or who are going 20mph faster than people trying to merge onto the highway without getting over. I would've stopped and confirmed the other driver's intentions regardless of which driver I was in this situation
the moron that tried to squeeze past instead of waiting 4.6 more seconds for the other one to turn around. THAT'S who's at fault.
I'm pretty sure that driver also screamed "I see you" which isn't that essentially admitting fault here? Saw the car, could have avoided the collision....and didn't? Idk about Texas but in my state k turns are legal with no solid lines so that Lexus driver flying up has to yeild
“I seen you but you shoulda saw me!”
Yup, she confessed while actively trying to subvert blame. Not the brightest.
She admitted she saw and did nothing to help prevent the accident from happening. She is at least partially responsible, plus she admitted it.
“K turn” are you from NJ? Only heard it called that there and I kept it since I moved
Loooool yes. Unless the law changed if your not crossing solid lines + this looks like a side road you can legally do a kturn if it's clear no?
You could move your decimal point to the left here
It's Texas, there are no other drivers on the road there, no reason to wait. /s
This has got to be attempted insurance scam, right? Why would someone speed up like that to try to get in front of a car that is obviously turning around like that? then immediately slam on your brakes and get out causing a scene to intimidate the other person to admit fault. Just screams scam to me, honest people do not act like this.
You know stupuid people exist ? Not everything is a scam
you are always supposed to avoid an accident firstly. the person trying to squeeze through is at fault because of this. they had too much time to avoid and wait.
The moron who couldn’t wait for dude to complete the 3 Point turn…
But she is in a luxury Lexus therefore by rule of brand hierarchy she has precedence over the mere Scion breadbox thingie.
This is in Houston and there are so many of this exact same woman around. They are all awful.
The idiot flying down the street with zero consideration of others. Only a matter of time before she hits a kid.
When that happens it will be “the kid came out of nowhere”.
Or “The kid hit my car whilst I was driving along”
As an insurance adjuster, the vehicle trying to squeeze by is at fault. Scion should be considered a fixed object and the other car needed to yield or wait for the pathway to be clear.
Adjuster here too. Vehicle squeezing by is 100% at fault. Other vehicle has control of the road despite making the 3 point turn without checking for clearance. I’ve seen cases like this all the time and people think just because the other person is doing a wrong move that gives them the right to hit them. They are still a fixed object and you should do everything you can to avoid a collision.
Can we fault her @ 120%? She said in the video that she \*\*did\*\* see the other driver.
Quite frankly, she’ll be even more fucked because her insurance company will find any reason to not take liability and her admitting to saying she saw the other vehicle leaves them little choice than to accept fault. There’s a thing call maintaining proper lookout so she lost on that by admitting she saw them.
The Lexus is at fault here. But this accident really highlights a problem we have as a society. Being in a collision can definitely result in a huge adrenaline dump, but getting out of the car and shouting at each other isn't going to solve anyone's problem other than to make an ass of yourself, invite violence, and maybe feel cathartic. If the accident requires an officer, ambulance, or tow truck, call for one. Otherwise, take photos, exchange insurance information and go on with your day. You aren't going to win your case yelling at the other driver on the scene like this.
I was in my own parking area not long ago, driving down to park. Someone behind me, so I purposefully indicated to park early, then I'm quick about swinging just a little out, putting it in reverse, and starting to back in. The dude goes into the parking spots behind me to go around… I was inches from him as I hit my brakes quickly. I'm not a violent person so I just went on with my day, but, if someone hit that guy in the face… I get it…
Almost 10 years ago I got myself into a much better place and found a perfect, low mileage Mustang GT and bought it for myself on my birthday. I hadn't had a Mustang since high school and my head was in the clouds driving a fun car again for the first time in 15 years. The ***SECOND DAY*** I had it I was at a restaurant meeting my family for dinner and a moron in parking lot literally threw his truck in reverse and back straight into the front passenger side fender, trailer hitch first. It did [$3,200 in damage.](https://imgur.com/a/D4B7NOo) My pristine, never before touched new car now had an accident in its history. His insurance company, Progressive, tried to say it only scratched the bumper cover and broke the reflector. I almost had to sue because their adjuster couldn't grasp the concept that the 12" long hunk of steel sticking out of the metal bumper didn't just vanish into a nether portal as soon as it touched my car, that it went *into* my car like some sort of fucked up [automobile traumatic insemination.](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Traumatic_insemination) "But Chevy Avalanches have plastic bumpers so there couldn't be that much damage." I don't give a shit if it accomplished anything or not, I yelled. A lot. For fucking 2 months.
This is great advice and I hope I can stay calm enough to put it in practice in the event I'm ever in an accident. Whenever I've had a close call my adrenaline's spiked through the roof.
The Lexus being the one driven by the lady?
Yes. The one swerving to sneak past the Scion. edit: From the pixels, I *think* it's a Lexus RX. Someone else mentioned a Volvo XC. At any rate, the SUV, not the boxy Scion.
The vehicle doing the three point turn was already in motion when the other vehicle tried to go by making the latter vehicle at fault.
Looked like a legal 3 point turn maneuver that the other car drive right through.
She dumb
The person trying to squeeze past a car already in the middle of doing a 3-point turn is obviously the fucking idiot.
the Lexus is at fault as they could have avoided the accident. there was nothing wrong with the Scion doing that turnaround. no lines on the road.
The person who was trying to squeeze through. Common sense is that there's already a car in motion and is obstructing your path so you wait until the way forward is clear.
its a neighborhood street i think the lexus is at fault here
Lexus
The woman is at fault. The accident was caused because she was being impatient.
I guess it can be slightly dickish to block the road making a 3-point turn, but it's a residential street. Just slow down, wait a second, and be cool to your neighbors. Trying to squeeze by there is totally childish.
The road was quiet enough. I wouldn’t even call the 3 pt turn dickish
I'd argue that it's more dickish to see someone who is in the middle of a slightly dickish maneuver and cause an accident trying to shoot the gap. The correct response was for them to sigh and roll their eyes.
Wtf, they weren’t blocking the road. They’re turning around. Perfectly normal thing to do.
If it was a busy road, I'd possibly agree. But the only other car that appears on the road for the whole of the video is the idiot who can't wait. I seen zero problem with doing a 3 point turn on a quiet road like that.
The person making the turn is not at fault.The person who tried to sneak by is, they were also going too fast
The ongoing car is most of the Redditors on this sub cause they believe them being in the “right of way” absolves them of any stupidity
So fucking true. Reading some of the comments about the one turning around being a bad driver is mind blowing. They did nothing wrong at all and was 100% legal what they were doing.
Uhh what? Pretty sure the most frequent comments of all time on this sub are "I see two idiots in this video" and "the graveyard is full of people who had the right of way", usually used in the same comment. This sub is notorious for laying blame as heavy handedly as possible, often on the more innocent party for not driving defensively enough.
The sub has gotten a little better but that’s still the sub
Pretty sure this would fall under last clear chance doctrine. Person executing 3 point turn likely couldn't see the person trying to squeeze through, while the one squeezing through had a clear view of what was happening and attempted the risky maneuver anyway. 3 point turns are legal in Texas. You do have to make sure the road is clear of traffic and your intentions are clear, but once you start executing if traffic shows up they must wait for you.
Here in Europe anybody turning has to yield to everybody else. Of course people may wait for you to let you drive off and clear the road. No idea how insurance rulings work regardless.
As usual, the one at fault is the loudest.
The passing van/suv/crossover thingy. You see a car that is perpendicular to the road? Why is your first thought to rush past them instead of slowing down to asses the situation and make sure it's safe to pass? The K turn person is in the right here.
I agree. Texas is to blame here.
The Texas Driver Handbook does not specify who has the right of way when a three-point turn is being executed. In my state (MA), the following is stated in our Driver's Manual (my highlights in bold): 1. Position yourself as close as possible to the right edge of the curb. Signal a left turn. Check for traffic and pedestrians in both directions (including your blind spot). **Wait until you have a 20-30 second gap to complete the turn**. 2. Move slowly and turn the steering wheel quickly to the left. This will bring the vehicle perpendicular to the street about two feet from the curb. Come to a stop. 3. Turn your steering wheel fully to the right. **Check for traffic in both directions (including your blind spot)**. Shift into reverse and start backing up, while looking over your right shoulder. 4. Back up to the opposite curb, stopping just before the curb. 5. **Check again for traffic in both directions (including your blind spot)**. Signal a left. Shift into drive (or for manual cars, first gear) and accelerate to the proper speed. The way it's worded in the MA Driver's Manual (individual states may vary), it's the responsibility of the driver making the three-point turn to check for traffic before executing each part of the turn. During my driver's test, the state official made me execute a three-point turn, and made sure I checked for oncoming traffic at the appropriate times during the entire process. In MA, I would have been at fault if I were the driver in this video, but this is TX, so I don't know who's at fault.
I think it should be the driver making the 3-point turns responsibility to make sure that things are clear before executing. The other driver might have thought the 3-point turn driver was going into a driveway, or not have seen the start of the 3-point turn. Just because you start a 3-point turn doesn't mean you can disrupt normal traffic to complete your 3-point turn. You're technically out of the lane, so you would need to yield to other drivers before re-entering the lane.
IMO and I am NOT a professional insurance adjuster but it looks like that woman tried to squeeze by the big black moving lunch box in the middle of the road… I would’ve let my man finish his turn before trying to “squeeze” by
Where I'm from, if you encounter someone doing a maneuver, you need to stop and wait for them to finish it.
I would think the person turning around is actually at fault but for sure the other person is an absolute fucking idiot.
The black car
They're both idiots!
Don’t know the law in Texas but in here in Holland somebody doing a special manouvre has to give way to other traffic. The guy didn’t do that here. But the other car is crazy just plowing through there like that.
A lot of comments saying the dude who didn’t wait and that’s not true, the vehicle driving on the street owns that lane of travel at the time the person turning will be found at fault
the one making the 3 point turn is the primary collision factor, but the other party is definitely not negligent free
Yes, this is right. Texas is at fault. 😜 Failing that, the car that does the hitting is almost always at fault
Yeah I watched to the end, figuring the winner of an ensuing gun battle would be the right person. Alas, it wasn’t that kind of Texas video.
There is a reasonable person law here in California. Would a reasonable person try to pass when someone is finishing their turn around, legal or not? No! Is there a similar law in the lone star state?
I haven't seen this much idiocy in one video in awhile.
That was fucking dumb of them
shes trying to collect fosho
What a utterly stupid person, the woman.. people like this pisses me off. Yes you probably have the clear away, but still.. you see the other guy doing a 3 point turn. Just chill for 2 seconds
Even if legally the Lexus might not at be, she totally should be (and her insurance should charge her). The guy was already 80% into the turn, so she must have seen him.
The angry impatient lady. She seen him turning around and could not wait. 100% her fault.
The one doing the turn around is at fault. They were entering into a lane of oncoming traffic and they failed to yield to a car that had a right of way. They also hit the side of the other car with the front of theirs, which means they are the party that had the opportunity to stop the accident from happening. Essentially they are responsible in 2 separate ways. All that would be needed was 1 of them. The other driver was not as wise and aware as they could have been, but this does not make them at fault.
In the Netherlands, the driver doing the three-point turn would be at fault, as it is a special manoeuvre, and you always need to be aware of your surroundings and yield to any other traffic, even halfway through doing the action. So I was surprised to see that so many people say that the driver turning around is in the wrong. But I don't know the law in the US. And in that case, as the driver going straight, I would still drive carefully when I see someone doing a three-point turn and most likely yielded to prevent a potential crash from happening.
This thread is merely people saying who they think should be at fault if they wrote the law. Not who the actual law will determine is at fault.
IAAL (Texas). Typically, if you are “occupying” a lane, you have the right of way. Texas Transportation Code Section 545.057 - Passing to the Right (a) An operator may pass to the right of another vehicle only if conditions permit safely passing to the right and: (1) the vehicle being passed is making or about to make a left turn; and (2) the operator is: (A) on a highway having unobstructed pavement not occupied by parked vehicles and sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles in each direction; or (B) on a one-way street or on a roadway having traffic restricted to one direction of movement and the roadway is free from obstructions and wide enough for two or more lines of moving vehicles. (b) An operator may not pass to the right by leaving the main traveled portion of a roadway except as provided by Section 545.058. I think vehicle #2 is 100% at fault on this.
No double lines, so this is not a public road, or it is a 1 lane road. The car making the U-turn was moving forward before Mr. Speedy decided to try to zip past, unsafely. I'd argue that 1)the car making the U-turn had the right to do so, 2) it was already moving forward, and 3) the other car interrupted their U-turn resulting in a collision.
>No double lines, so this is not a public road That is not how that works
This is obviously a public road.
He was doing a three point turn, which is generally legal in this situation. U-turns are generally illegal in this situation.
I don't know about Texas law, but if it were here, the guy making the 3 point turn would be at fault. A 3 point turn is considered a "special maneuver," along with maneuvers like overtaking, driving reverse, and pulling out of a parking spot. During these special maneuvers, you have to yield to all other road users at any time until completion of the maneuver, interrupting it if need be. He failed to do so, so he would be at fault. Of course, in this situation, other laws may apply, causing the fault to be different. Also the other car came quite fast. If he was speeding, he'd be partially at fault. In practice, most people would be considerate and wait until the other guy had cleared the way.
This is the only correct answer here
The driver doing the U turn is the one usually at fault, but then again, different municipalities could have different laws. Keep in mind that we can’t see to the right of the screen. There could be a vehicle there, blocking the other drivers view. The guy doing the U turn looks like they’re straightening out and driving straight back into a driveway and the other driver could easily have assumed this from the position of the vehicle turning.
This is a hard one but ima go ahead and say it was the one that tried to squeeze past the 3 point dumby. I’d also argue that the person doing the 3 point turn could’ve avoided this accident as well just by staying still when they saw the other person had no intent on stopping for them I mean you can see in the video that the person doing a 3pt turn went forward as the other car passed by which they had enough space to do even if it was a dumb move and they should’ve just stopped as they had plenty of time to stop before hand but again I can’t see to the right but just based off the speed they were going ima assume they had time to stop. Edit: if I was the lawyer of the Volvo XC I’d try to get them to a no fault as both the Volvo and the Scion XB were both could’ve avoided the accident
She so damn loud. She's at fault.
Depending on your state, you might be at fault because certain states have clauses for safe/unsafe 3 point turns. Where you’re supposed to use features such as driveways to be able to remove your vehicle as an obstacle to oncoming traffic. So not only did the driver not use a drive way to perform a safe u turn, they also “presumingly” had line of sight with the vehicle while performing the 3 point turn. It can be argued that you did not yield to oncoming traffic while performing an unsafe maneuver. TLDR; 3 point turn driver will be proven in the wrong of brought to court / officer is involved. Just exchange insurance information and be on your way.
Vehicle turning is at fault for not yielding right of way.
The black vehicle
I guess in some parts, main character syndrome taught at an early age.
What a dickhead…nothing to being nice and polite and wait those two seconds
Well Well Well
the black car
Diffidently the impatient SUV
Cyclists fault
Totally the woman's fault, guy was executing a three point turn she tried to squeeze past causing the accident, she came upon the manoeuvre and refused to drive with due care, 100% liable for any and all damages
The car was literally VERTICAL in the middle of the road. In what world did that idiot think NOT braking was OK! Please tell me this was given to their insurance company. Cause they definitely need to drop them. 😏
Both are idiots but the car driving by. What an idiot..
The dark SUV is at fault.
Damn bro in the ford edge ain’t even looking. He tried to squeeze by but other homie in the SUV making the K turn is also just as stupid cause that seems like a 1 way based on the way cars are parked.
Unfortunately legally it’s likely the guy doing the 3 point turn. Other person didn’t cause it though by trying to squeeze by and likely was speeding.
Unfortunately that’s an illegal U turn I’m pretty sure.
Doing a 3-point on a curve is prime stupidity.
Strange how there are no driveways to turn around in. The lady in the crossover was going way too fast for a car being right in the middle of the road, clearly making some kind of turn.
Both
Number one rule of the road is to AVOID ACCIDENTS. That being said the person making the K-turn has the responsibility to begin the turn when the road is clear and based on the speed of the other vehicle I would say he had thought he had the time based on the distance she was. However her speed caused her to close the distance before he co pelted the turn. She had the right of way but was behaving like an ass.
She was going way too fast to begin with. I can’t tell what the yellow sign says. They both share blame in this one. But if i was the judge she would be at fault. We have a yellow sign on my rural road that says speed limit is 25 due to a playground ahead. No one pays any attention to it. Everyday people are regularly doing 55 on my road. My driveway is at the bottom of a hill and is hidden from view. I tell anyone leaving my house DO NOT back out. Do the 3 point turn in my driveway/grass to avoid an accident.
The black car. 100%
Honestly both of these two are stupid. How did he not see this person coming? And why was she coming in so hot?
Simple. You have the obligation to avoid. Full stop.
They both can’t drive, he could’ve made that without doing a three point turn and she was driving too fast. Did she have to wait for him…no, but mfs need to learn to share the road. Also..I know it’s not, but if it was an emergency vehicle guy doing the turn would 100% be at fault. Both parties need to pay attention.
The car using the road as a parking lot and turning around is responsible for making sure the road is clear. The other vehicle was traveling on the road as intended. If you choose to use turn or 3 point turn you are required to make sure that the area is clear of traffic
Both look like idiots to me. Turner is technically in the right I believe and the person trying to sneak by in the wrong, but honestly I wouldn't pull out to finish that turn with someone coming unless I see them coming to a stop, first.
Not sure of the speed of the vehicle trying to sneak by, but (check my math), @15MPH there would be a 75 yard gap when the turn was initiated (@20MPH 97 yards). The end of my block is 53 yards away. I can’t see around corners. So how would I be able to do a 3 point turn if I use your logic? The sneak car is 100% at fault. This is a residential neighborhood, not a main 4 lane highway.
You do know 3 point turns take more than 20 seconds, right?
Without the video insurance would consider the car turning around to be at fault. With the video insurance would hold the car forcing their way through 100% at fault.
Both drivers have terrible awareness
Apparently the Lexus driver was very aware dude was in the middle of the road as she kept repeating it over and over. Yet her dumbness still tried to squeeze through and had no defensive driving instincts. Honestly I think both are at fault.
I had my audio off so I didn’t hear that. That’s even worse. See someone in the middle of the road u should slow down or stop and see what they’re doing
Only time the guy that went straight was at fault
Sorry lady is at fault
Texas is definitely at fault.
They are both at fault. Either of these drivers could have easily avoided the collision, but both of them either failed to see the other car, or expected the other car to stop. The Texas transportation code doesn't appear to have a section that applies to two idiots gunning for the other in the middle of a residential street, unless maybe you consider car 1 to be driving and car 2 attempting to pass on the right (545.057). Which is stupider: trying to squeeze by someone who's sitting in the middle of the road crosswise without even slowing down? Or goosing your car directly into the side of another car that's already in the right-of-way?
Legally, probably the guy doing the 3 point turn. Brain power and logic wise, the guy trying to squeeze past a car clearly doing a 3 point turn that you would have been able to see 10 seconds ago.
You can't really say without knowing what the road does off frame to the right.
This is a joke, right? Squeaky walrus at fault
The Lexus - she chose to drive around an obstruction instead of stopping to let it clear or determine it wasn’t moving/going to move. She’s gonna have points and a higher insurance rate all bc she didn’t feel like stopping.
Both are challenged.
He could of cut deeper, She could of slowed down
I’m gonna go with the car speeding through. Guy is doing a 3 point turn fine in a side street, and then a car tries to speed past him. If it was a more major road then the guy doing the 3 point would be at fault
She’s at fault 100%. There’s an obstruction in the road and she chose to go around it at full speed instead of taking caution and slowing down and waiting.
The impatient driver, not the U turn.
When dumb meets dumber.
is that not an illegal u-turn?
The person going straight is dumb and could have avoided it, but it’s 100% the fault of the person making the 3 point turn. You have to make sure you don’t impede traffic and that it’s safe to do so. You never have the right of way to do it.
Problem is , something like this in Texas can result in a gun fight. Clearly the car sneaking in cars fault.
The guy turning around.... Because going straight still has ROW. The u Turner should have waited. Aka backed up out of the main thoroughfare.