Another traffic conundrum

So, my ASSumption on the last one was incorrect.

Let's see if I'm correct here:

Picture a typical intersection where "Street A" intersects "Street B." A + shaped intersection basically. "Street A" has a flashing red light AND a stop sign. "Street B" has a flashing yellow. Speed limit on "Street B" is 35mph.

90% of people on "Street A" ASSume (I HAVE NO BERKING CLUE WHY - maybe they assume that the light is red in all 4 directions???) that this is a 4-way stop. It is not.

Therefore, people on "Street A" either nudge into the intersection and jam the brakes, then blow their horn at the guy who they THINK just ran a stop sign, OR, they roll up to the sign, and when they see no one else stopped, blow through it.

SO:

If car on "Street B" (no stop sign, but flashing yellow,) going the posted speed limit, tees up on a car on "Street A" rolling through the intersection, Car on "Street A" is at fault, right?

Poopy, You are absolutely correct.

Technically yes. But if insurance gets involved they would probably just agree to screw both of you and make it a no fault and make both pay.

The flashing yellow street has "right of way", but it can be argued that you don't have the "right of way" until it is given to you.

The intersection should be labeled as a two-way stop so that the vehicles that have to stop know that the other thruway doesn't stop.

Yes, failure to yield.

It really depends on the opposing lawyers.

Yellow means "Proceed ONLY with caution" With the right lawyer, that could wind up meaning that the car with the flashing yellow should have known that the car was going to blow through the stop sign. The very same lawyer would also get the exact same conviction if the driver of the car stopped at the yellow to avoid the car that ran the stop sign and got rear ended.

Sarcasm aside, it really depends on the no-fault laws in your state.

Mmm, nice and murky.

The flashing yellow is a cautionary warning. Exact language varies with the state. But, it means the driver should be extra cautious. Driving through at the maximum posted speed could very easily be argued as lack of proper caution indicated by the flashing yellow light.

Cross traffic has a very confusing setup with both flashing red lights and a stop sign. If it was just flashing red, many people do understand that it typically flashes red one way, and amber (yellow) the other. But, with a stop sign present, this would cause many people to believe it is a full four way stop. Especially if the roads are of comparable size.

Sounds like an intersection that should be petitioned for revision and clarification.

You are correct.

Source: T-boned a 2000 Cavalier who did this exact thing with my 90 Accord at 40mph. He received a ticket for failure to yield right of way. Both cars were totaled and his insurance payed. I saw him start to come out, had time to utter "oh sh*&" and close my eyes. When I opened them his car was in a ditch across the street and I was facing the wrong way with small fire peaking out from under the mangled hood. I guess I had just enough time to hit the brakes, dipping the front end of the car down enough to act as a scoop and throw his car off the road. I was uninjured, he had airbag burns and a few cuts.

Why would you have a stop sign and a flashing red?

Stop at the sign, creep forward to do as the red flasher asks?

It took me a second, but then I realized we have one of these on the way to my wife's job. Trust me, in my commute NO ONE runs the stop sign/red light.

The red light/sign combo means STOP. Either would work, but at this one we have both. Yellow means "You must slow down and exercise caution", according to the latest MS Driving manual. Ugh. I'm not you'd be safe in MS. If the guy on Street A had come to a stop first, the guy on Street B is still under obligation to "exercise caution".

This is why Rule #1 to my son is "Assume everyone is out to get you."

Poorly designed signage there, I'm afraid. Stop means stop. No question, you blow the sign, you are at fault, but the other flashing light does imply something...

In PA, nobody is EVER given the right of way. It can only be taken away.

It was a trick question used on the drivers test. They stated a situation and asked Who has the right of way... The answer was none of the above.

We have an intersection like the one described above. if you are ignorant to the little sign under the stop sign that says 2 way stop, it may be confusing. I have seen plenty of people almost get hit there.

Poorly designed intersection, IMHO. Take out the flashing yellow; they will always have right of way... right?

Most of those types of intersections here have a sign stating "cross traffic does not stop" basically saying if you get t boned you're hosed.

All I have to add is that it sounds like the auto body repairmen and insurance companies of America are teaming up and designing intersections.

I teach my students that stop signs are TWO colors: red on the front and silver on the back. When you roll up to the legal stop and you have a stop sign look for the opposing signs perpendicular to your direction to be sure the traffic coming from the right or left has to stop or not. Look for the SILVER octagon. That being said the flashing yellow means approach with caution and yield as necessary. The flashing red with the stop sign may simply be an attempt by the local municipality to bring greater attention to the stop sign. (A few around here that way.) In any case the driver with the stop sign may not proceed unless the way is clear. It is incumbent upon them to yield the right of way completely. For the driver on street B to be at fault it would have to be shown that driver on street A had the right of way to proceed across the intersection which they clearly do not in this case regardless of what the speed limit is. You do not have the right to pull out if the way is not clear just because you cannot judge the speed of an oncoming car. /thread

The flashing yellow means to proceed with caution. We are taught to cover our brakes and be prepared to stop.

How the DMV determines who is at fault is not always cut and dry. At work a lot of our accidents get rated by the DMV and we base our discipline on that. I have gotten a few where I can't for the life of me figure out how they reached their conclusion. I recently had to go to an arbitration hearing where a pedestrian was injured. He tripped and hit his head on the right side mirror of a bus curbed in a bus stop. They determined that the bus was too close to the curb.

Not a black and white answer here. In the situation you describe above, the driver on street A is likely to hold majority liability, but may not have all of it. Other factors come into play. For example, did the driver on street B have a clear view of the car coming on street A? Other factors can be width of intersection, speed (car damage can help with this), point of impact. By typically, yes, the driver on street A is going to be majority at fault.

State laws vary on how much could be collected. If you're in CA, you'd collect the exact amount the other driver is at fault (and the other driver could collect the amount you're at fault, even if it's 1%). In PA, only driver B can collect, again based on driver A liability. In MD, if B has any contributory negligence, they're completely banned from any recovery. In MI, each driver has to go to their own carrier, regardless. Those aren't insurance company rules, they're state negligence laws.