Page 1 of 1
S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2016 5:51 pm
by Mochilli
I have a charge of Stop at through highway: 136. (1) Every driver or street car operator approaching a stop sign at an intersection,
(b) shall yield the right of way to traffic in the intersection or approaching the intersection on another highway so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard and, having so yielded the right of way, may proceed.
I was at a Stop Sign wanting to proceed straight, I looked both ways but there was very tall grass to my left (approx. 8-10 feet) so I could not see down the road. As I began to creep up to look, I got T-Boned in my front left quarter panel. The painted white line to stop was a good 4-6 feet before the tall grasses ended so it would be impossible to stop at the white line and proceed through without having to nudge up in order to properly see down the left side.
The house on the corner of the intersection said that accidents happen often at the Stop Sign. The person who got hit also told his insurance adjuster that he believes I could not see because of the tall grass.
Do I have a defence here?
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:25 pm
by ynotp
No defense, you did not yield the ROW after having stopped, the accident is irrefutable proof of this.
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2016 12:47 pm
by Mochilli
But you can't give the ROW if you have an obstruction blocking your view of the oncoming vehicle...
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2016 1:22 pm
by screeech
You still have a legal obligation to make sure any turn, or movement, can be done in safety...
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2016 3:06 pm
by bend
Agreed with the others. Blocked view is not a defense. If you can't see without pulling your vehicle into traffic, the next step would be to turn around and take a different route. Although, realistically I don't expect many to do this. However, now you're stuck at fault for the accident.
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2016 5:22 pm
by Mochilli
Does anyone know if this is an absolute or strict liability offence?
I find it concerning that one would be expected to turn around because there is a visual obstruction blocking a proper view of the street. IMO, it's the cities fault for not having a 4-way stop if there is a visual obstruction. That's the exact reason on some streets you cannot take a right hand turn on a Red, because it is too hard to see...
Re: S. 136(1)(b) Hta - Visual Obstruction
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2016 1:44 am
by argyll
I'm not convinced the visual obstruction is that bad. If you look at the picture unless the hood of the vehicle is25 feet long, there is still quite a lot of room to inch up to the edge of the through highway which would give more visibility.