Roundabout rules: was NTUC right?

[Elfenstar]

Too many people are fooled by this "roundabout". This was not a true roundabout to begin with, and it was completely converted to traffic light controlled junction about a year ago. Yes, it resembles a roundabout, but with the signalized implementation, it is not. It has to be assumed as normal road - i.e. left lane = can left turn or go straight, right lane = only straight (and cannot turn left) but can bear right.

 

Technically it's two controlled roundabouts with a cross junction separating both.

[Yeshe]

Not his wife lah. He just copied and pasted everything to discuss here

 

i dunno but have the feeling that there are people who drive with eyes closed

[Camrysfa]

your wife is wrong. no matter what, when u intend to exit a roundabout, u make sure u move to the left most lane before the exit. if that is not possible, then u have to ensure the vehicle on your left is definitely making the same exit.

Red car will be faulted. Blue car is not wrong in using the left lane to circle round. Red car should signal left and look out for vehicles on his left. That's what I see.....

[Elfenstar]

i dunno but have the feeling that there are people who drive with eyes closed

 

There are. Anyway NTUC isn't the one at fault even if Mr Han is right. They're simply following the GIA guidelines. He also has brought up some very valid points. For example if this had happened at the International Business Park roundabout, or the Suntec roundabout instead. Based on what NTUC said, Mr Han would have been at fault, though the fault should be the other driver's. He should write in to GIA, and if he wants to pursue it further he should go to the SCT where the people deciding read the rules, and are trained to interpret it instead of having someone clueless about road rules from Fidrec handing things.

 

I think I shall write in to GIA as well.

 

Actually I don't think I need to write in. The GIA site http://www.gia.org.sg/public_type_motor_caq1.php states "The BOLA is designed to speed up claims processing. It does not diminish your right to contest liability under the law". I figure in lay man terms it means "We're a bunch of dimwits who came up with BOLA to speed up claims based on what we think regardless of what the actual rules are. If you realise that the assessment in your accident is a bunch of bollocks, please take the incident to court to settle things."

Edited August 13, 2013 by Elfenstar

[Dafansu]

Think don't need to argue so hard. look from the other side of the road. near the traffic light. its pretty obvious although its a circle, the red car should not be turning to the other left.

 

from the traffic light shooting back

 

Based on this pic, this shouldn't be considered as roundabout and the highway code theory which i attached in the beginning of the post shouldn't apply.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Dafansu

[Suv8]

There are. Anyway NTUC isn't the one at fault even if Mr Han is right. They're simply following the GIA guidelines. He also has brought up some very valid points. For example if this had happened at the International Business Park roundabout, or the Suntec roundabout instead. Based on what NTUC said, Mr Han would have been at fault, though the fault should be the other driver's. He should write in to GIA, and if he wants to pursue it further he should go to the SCT where the people deciding read the rules, and are trained to interpret it instead of having someone clueless about road rules from Fidrec handing things.

 

I think I shall write in to GIA as well.

 

I think it is clear from the lay of the actual road, that using the red/blue car models, the red car is right on all counts. The blue car in reality swerve diagnoally across a lane from right to left to exit at 'exit 2 '. More ever the blue car was already in the wrong lane; it should have been on the blue car's lane .

[Elfenstar]

Red car will be faulted. Blue car is not wrong in using the left lane to circle round. Red car should signal left and look out for vehicles on his left. That's what I see.....

 

Let's assume that this is a normal looking uncontrolled roundabout. What does the highway code say? It puts the onus of care for any car turning out of a roundabout on the person who is in the outer most lane. i.e. the person going straight from the left lane must give way.

[Atonchia]

Skip through the rest of pages..

The Mr Han didn't say if the claimant also submitted video evidence....who know if the wife have signaled the intention to turn into Jurong Town Hall.

If never signal and just turn in confirm 100% at fault.

[Elfenstar]

I think it is clear from the lay of the actual road, that using the red/blue car models, the red car is right on all counts. The blue car in reality swerve diagnoally across a lane from right to left to exit at 'exit 2 '. More ever the blue car was already in the wrong lane; it should have been on the blue car's lane .

 

Another one. See the image below. This is taken directly from the Highway Code (R11) subsidiary legislation of the Road Traffic Act (Cap 279).

 

[Pisces69]

Its strange that NTUC n Fidrec found u in the wrong.

 

But then again NTUC is a Gharmen company n ty cant make mistakes.

 

Fr me I just try to b more alert to avoid these silly accidents.

 

Just now I was at a T junction with 3 lanes n turn right also 3 lanes n when the lights turned green fr us to proceed.

 

Common sense says car on left wil turn n keep left lane. I on center lane wil turn n keep in center lane n car on right wil turn n keep to the right lane.

 

But as I turned this Msian car on the left lane turned n slowly encroached into my center lane. I had to slow down n let the idiot enter my center lane n I end up follow behind him.

 

So u see, sometimes u might think u r right but its always better to b careful to avoid an accident then u r sure to b in the right.

 

But looking at yr diagram, its very strange u were found 100% to blame???????

[Nicholas]

Its strange that NTUC n Fidrec found u in the wrong.

 

But then again NTUC is a Gharmen company n ty cant make mistakes.

 

Fr me I just try to b more alert to avoid these silly accidents.

 

Just now I was at a T junction with 3 lanes n turn right also 3 lanes n when the lights turned green fr us to proceed.

 

Common sense says car on left wil turn n keep left lane. I on center lane wil turn n keep in center lane n car on right wil turn n keep to the right lane.

 

But as I turned this Msian car on the left lane turned n slowly encroached into my center lane. I had to slow down n let the idiot enter my center lane n I end up follow behind him.

 

So u see, sometimes u might think u r right but its always better to b careful to avoid an accident then u r sure to b in the right.

 

But looking at yr diagram, its very strange u were found 100% to blame???????

 

Thanks for your input, but it's not me. I quite agree with what you said but there are folks here that think otherwise.

I think Elfenstar got it right, it's LTA's fault! [laugh]

 

Also, from now on I will put quotes when I quote.

[Tcx607]

Let's me share my most recent filtering offence just like roundabout rules.

I signal and filter left to exist. However, the TP saw and penalize me as inconsiderate driving with 9 demerit pts & $170 fine.

My observation was the car on the left has slowed and gave way to my car to exist. However, the TP judgement is I have caused other to jam brake to avoid collision.

There was no horn from the other car or whatsoever during this incident. I appeal for this offence at TP HQ

Edited August 13, 2013 by Tcx607

[1fast1]

thank goodness we don't have this type of roundabout

 

 

[Pisces69]

 

 

 

Hahahahahah. This one really

 

But it works n I think the main reason is the pple there give way.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Pisces69

[1fast1]

Anyway, bottom line is that motor insurance in Sg is like an umbrella made of rice paper. Looks good at first, but wait for a rainy day and see what happens.

 

Just get the cheapest insurance you can get away with and drive defensively (this does not necessarily mean slowly - accelerating out of potential trouble is often just as helpful, if not more so).

 

And for the love of god - avoid Auntie Lucy like the plague. Haven't we heard enough horror stories about her?

[Unltd]

- article start -

 

 

 

"I found out that NTUC Income don't understand certain Highway Code rules during our exchange of emails regarding a disputed accident claim.

 

NTUC Income then put 100% liability on my side when infact the other driver was in the wrong.

 

This matter was then referred to Fidrec for adjudication which, to my surprise, also favoured NTUC Income's decision 100%

 

I checked with LTA regarding the Highway code rules and confirmed NTUC Income's interpretation was different.

 

NTUC Income said they will still stand firm on their assessment and had already compensated the other party and closed the case as it was already adjudicated by Fidrec.

 

 

 

This is what happened:

 

Last year, 7th Aug 2012, my wife was involved in a minor side-collision accident in Pandan Circle.

 

Ref to above diagram 3.18 as an illustration of the roundabout.

My car (shown in red) wanted to exit from the right-lane to the 2nd exit (Jurong Town Hall road). The other car (shown in blue) should also exit base on the general rule, but he (blue car) wanted to continue to the 3rd exit (West Coast road). Therefore this accident happened.

 

The other driver blames her for the accident and does not believe there are roundabout rules. Saying all vehicles must exit from the left lane, vehicles on the left lane can proceed all the way in the roundabout. I told him he needed to keep-right lane when approaching roundabout in order to turn right (3rd exit) base on general rules of roundabout.

 

As we could not agree, we decided to report to insurer for 3rd party claim. Both are insured with NTUC INCOME.

The whole incident was captured in my car's camera system. The dispute mainly boils down to the rules of the road. I submitted the footage to NTUC Income.

 

To my surprise, NTUC Income informed me liability at my side.

I then requested for their detail report as a claim was made into my policy. They rejected my request as I know they are wrong in their assessment.

I wrote to MAS and was told they cannot do anything as it was NTUC Income's commercial decision and Fidrec already gone through it.

 

This story is quite lengthy but I have uploaded more photos, letters and the video to my blog at: http://jkhan999.blogspot.sg/

 

My experience tells me this : "Never go to Fidrec for motor accident dispute. NTUC Income will tell them not to listen". Ntuc Income have changed some of our traffic rules.

 

 

 

Mr. Han JK"

 

Source: http://therealsingapore.com/content/ntuc-i...asic-road-rules

Blog with more explanations: http://jkhan999.blogspot.sg/

 

 

- article end -

 

 

Keeping left to go 3rd or 4th exit is just wrong isn't it? That means if NTUC is right, cars on the right lanes must filter left in round about to exit?

 

Hahahahaha, what a laugh, based on this theory, the car on the outer lane can exit any exit indiscriminately? Hahahahhaha

 

Allowed to exit if its safe and exit as you please is different. This is a roundabout, not a traffic light junction where there may be arrows indicating strict lefts and rights.

 

Also on the outer lane when transversing on the inner lane you cut across the broken lines, the vehicle cutting across broken lines need to make sure it is safe before moving over. This is very basic, unless it is like Newton circus type of roundabout where the broken lines indicate clearly it is supposed to be an exit when leading to orchard or towards novena. Or continue on right at the same exits.

 

Really what a joke....

[SGCMdodobird]

The other driver should be wrong if based on the basic theory of driving.

 

As attached, this is extracted directly from the 7th edition issued by Traffic Police. The diagram on the right is similar to this scenario.

 

 

Agree. The basic theory is simple enough to understand the general rule of roundabout.

 

If 2 lane roundabout

 

1. Keep left if you are turning at 9 o'clock. Keep left or right if you are turning to 12 o'clock. Keep right if you are turning to 3 o'clock.

2. Signal your intention clearly (Heck, you see drivers who still refuse to signal)

3. Check for traffic and ensure clear before proceeding the roundabout.

4. Keep in lane.

5. Signal when exiting.

 

 

In Aus, same theory like SG. About time LTA have arrows like the video before entering the roundabout for public awareness

 

Here so many theory if wanna exit must keep left etc etc.....if you follow the 5 simple steps as per video and basic theory diagram as posted by some bros here, plus common courtesy and patience, you can't go wrong. And yes, the video do show cars on the right cross lane to exit. BUT if everyone keep to step 1-5, you will never meet with such unpleasant scenario. That is how it is done in most countries.

 

But for some reason, there's too many cukoo drivers around. But cant blame them as the round abouts in SG are really weird, esp newton etc.

 

No wonder bolehland drivers always say sg drivers cannot make it at roundabouts.

 

Learn my lesson many years back in countries that had roundabouts aplenty, as i have the habit of always keeping left, even going at 3 o clock. Got e middle finger few times....

[Elfenstar]

Let's me share my most recent filtering offence just like roundabout rules.

I signal and filter left to exist. However, the TP saw and penalize me as inconsiderate driving with 9 demerit pts & $170 fine.

My observation was the car on the left has slowed and gave way to my car to exist. However, the TP judgement is I have caused other to jam brake to avoid collision.

There was no horn from the other car or whatsoever during this incident. I appeal for this offence at TP HQ

 

Print out my image in post #135 and show it to them It's taken directly from the statutory legislation!