@IronGiant Looking at google maps it appears there are no road markings indicating its a left turn only lane.
No such road markings in this case though.
The road markings end before the dual carriageway splits into three, so it's not unreasonable to assume left hand lane at the roundabout is for left and straight on.
https://www.avforums.com/attachments/1574111729412-png.1221486/
I've looked into Traffic signs Manual Chapter 5 Section 13 on Arrows and Lane destinations and if turns are of statutory prohibition in nature, they'll need to have arrow and a word painted either of direction or destination. I looked into footage approaching roundabout and didn't see any left turn only arrow. So still believe technically can use left lane for 2nd exit unless there's some other newer guidance from Dft to say otherwise.
Didn't notice about it but headlights is from third party car. Well that's how I'm seeing watching footage.
I need votes on poll as views for and against are on discussion here . Only option as claimant was advised first to make complaint through her insurance who should send acknowledgment letter within 5 working days and decision within 8 weeks. After that to file complaint with Ombudsman (FOS). Vote here will give an idea if worth chasing.
From the approach road markings, it seems that it is the righthand lane which splits to the middle and right lanes, so the lefthand lane which is for left-turn and straight-on continues to be at the three-lane section.
There are no contradictory arrows in the three-lane section - should follow the same arrows as led up to it.
If the white Nissan Juke approached on Bugsby's way but was on the right of the dashcam car, it should not have been turning left.
No indication that the left lane was for left turn only so third party is to blame.
Thank you very very much sir . Superbly explained and don't think anyone will have an argument against Left lane for 2nd exit anymore.
My comment that it was left turn only was based on the OP where the insurers stated that was the case. The maps etc suggest otherwise. In which case it looks to me that the third party should have gone straight on or right. Not left. It looks like they assumed the claimant was going to turn left and thought they could sneak round them from the wrong lane. Looking at the dashcam with that in mind seems to confirm it.
Thanks for reply as was waiting on your thoughts which seems similar to insurer's ie left turn only. Not sure why insurers thought so as all photos, maps and description of the layout were provided to them.
1 vote on 50/50 so would be good to know why pls.
Was typing!
My 2p worth and I'm not an expert in any way.
I think their point #1 is debatable based on the road markings, but if you're going to claim that the Claimant is in the wrong lane to go straight on you have to concede that the 3rd party is also in the wrong lane to turn left.
3 lanes and 3 exits - either you accept that you can take multiple routes from all 3 or you accept that both parties were in the wrong lanes for their chosen exit.
#2It seems clear to me from the video that the 3rd party wasn't going for the 2nd exit, they had their left hand indicator on before the 1st exit and cut hard across the other car's path and ended up in the first exit.I can't see how anyone can argue otherwise.
#3 Not from my viewing, quite the reverse with the 3rd party cutting left across in front of the dashcam car. Again can't see how you can interpret that any other way.
However I voted for 50/50 because whatever the circumstances were, the dashcam car hit the passenger door of the Juke.The Juke having gained half a car length at the point of impact.The Juke is clearly failing to check that the exit is clear having incorrectly assumed the dashcam car is going left. But the claimant doesn't appear to be braking at the time of the collision which suggests they weren't looking to the right as I would expect when joining a roundabout.I would have hoped in the same circumstances I would have seen the Juke and hit the brakes before we collided.
I know it's tough to accept fault but I think as @IronGiant suggests the Juke was trying to sneak around and has some significant share of the blame but the dashcam car had enough time to react and prevent the accident too so 50/50 would be a fair outcome.
As I said I'm not an expert it's just my take on what I can see here.
I was under the impression that insurance companies assumed equal blame for most roundabout accidents, may be the advent of dashcams has changed that?