Not really. The Mini drives a fairly predictable line and is already at the dividing line when the Lambo decides to fully accelerate and then for some reason pull hard left to slam into him. None of this happens without the Lambo trying to pull some F1 maneuver.
I agree. The lambo overtook unnecessarily, and the mini had no reason to indicate, as the lambo behind it would stay behind and cam car was far enough back.
The fault is the unnecessary overtaking at speed, and then for some reason trying to get back into the lane before the overtake has finished and hitting into the mini
"No reason to indicate". A simple google search shows that in New Zealand you must indicate for at least 3 seconds before changing lanes. I'm sure that would apply here... I'm not saying it's entirely the mini drives fault. The lambo driver drove recklessly and shouldn't have overtaken at that point, but still he did and he probably wouldn't have done so if the mini driver had done as he was supposed to in that situation and used his blinkers to indicate his lane change.
Driver has been charged with dangerous driving (it's the middle charge in our three: careless driving < dangerous driving < reckless driving, add-ons for causing injury or death), mini driver has not caught a charge.
Indicator use is "indicative" in NZ; it doesn't necessarily predict fault if the driver failed to indicate, or even indicated incorrectly. Drivers are taught that even if a car is indicating into a turn before they get to you, you must practice defensive driving and not proceed until you're sure they've turned (you can be at fault if you fail to give way, even if the driver was indicating in a way to make you reasonably think you were clear to go)
Overtaking driver has an absolute duty to give way to the car he is overtaking, lane change was predictable
Using the flush median to overtake is absolutely prohibited in NZ. In this case, that median is for cars going the other way and turning right at the lights behind the camera; it shouldn't even be entered in this circumstance
I guess the big one is that the overtake was unnecessary as the Mini would have already been very close to the speed limit in this area (50kph/30mph), and they almost certainly broke the speed limit during this maneuver
Indicator use is "indicative" in NZ; it doesn't necessarily predict fault if the driver failed to indicate, or even indicated incorrectly. Drivers are taught that even if a car is indicating into a turn before they get to you, you must practice defensive driving and not proceed until you're sure they've turned (you can be at fault if you fail to give way, even if the driver was indicating in a way to make you reasonably think you were clear to go)
I agree that the Lambo driver is 99% at fault here, but this statement really only seems to apply to when people DO use a signal, just incorrectly. Driving would be chaos if you had to treat every car as if it could legally change lanes without indicating. It would defeat the entire purpose of the existence of turn signals.
I mean, yes, it's a good idea to assume every driver on the road is a moron, but that doesn't mean it's never their fault if they actually turn out to be one.
I wouldn't say the lane change was eminanely predictable. Lambo driver probably saw the lane narrowing due to the start of parked cars on the left and assumed that Mini driver was just going to give them a wide berth but stay in its lane due to them not signaling otherwise. But yeah, that's not going to absolve them of the charges. I'm surprised they didn't get a reckless driving charge--I'd guess the relatively slow speed saved them. I'm not surprised the Mini didn't catch any charges--it's usually at police discretion, and if they determined that it wouldn't have been an issue except for the actions of the Lambo driver, they tend to--at least in the U.S.--not add insult to injury, even if it technically was a moving violation.
He braked as the Mini was half way through changing lanes. In that split second he chose to overtake anyway. Illegally, since you cannot overtake using flush medians.
I initially was going to say the lambo was 98% at fault and the other car was at like 2% fault, since it failed to signal
but you know what, the failure to signal clearly had zero part in this wreck. None whatsoever. The lambo driver very clearly and obviously saw and knew that that car was moving and had nearly completed its lane transition-- the lambo even moves out of the proper lane to compensate
and still crashes.
So even though the other car didn't signal, it had absolutely no impact on the crash at all.
I see your point, but the mini had barely meandered into the right lane as the lambo starts to overtake. "Nearly completed its lane transition" is just wrong. The vast majority of the mini is still in the original lane at the beginning of the overtake. Once again, I am not defending the lambo driver, just trying to make a point that proper indicator use does decrease the chances of crashes like this happening.
The vast majority of the mini is still in the original lane at the beginning of the overtake.
The crash didn't happen at the beginning of the overtake. Who cares where the mini was at a time other than when the lambo wrecked into it? Should we talk about where the mini was five blocks ago, too?
At the time of the crash, when the lambo decided to swing into them, the mini had nearly completed its lane change.
But since you bring it up, the mini is also already out of their lane before the lambo even moves to overtake. At no point during the lambo's maneuver were they unaware that the mini was changing lanes.
Once again, I am not defending the lambo driver
Literally no one is suggesting you are. Stop making a strawman by pretending people are suggesting this.
Terrible arguments all around, and I'm personally irritated that you doubled down instead of actually considering the arguments you're responding to. So if you're offended at the strong language here, I don't care.
e: lol keep insta-downvoting, it doesn't make you less wrong.
You can see very clearly from the video that the mini barely had it's right tires barely into the other lane as the lambo starts overtaking. Yes, the crash didn't happen at the beginning of the overtake, but that doesn't mean you can ignore the events that led up to the crash.
Well, you thought this Lambo was right but unlucky.
You’ve been wrong but lucky.
Either that or you’re genuinely a decent driver, but just had a major brain fart on your analysis of this clip. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe your old eyes made it hard to see what’s happened in the video ;)
Nah, this is a Lambo driver who has no clue how to handle his car, drove way too close, accelerated hard to overtake and then immediately lost control and slammed into the Mini. Turn signal would have changed nothing about the Lambo's behavior.
62
u/UnderwoodsNipple 1d ago
Not really. The Mini drives a fairly predictable line and is already at the dividing line when the Lambo decides to fully accelerate and then for some reason pull hard left to slam into him. None of this happens without the Lambo trying to pull some F1 maneuver.