unsafe lane change?

[9ivdld]

What is the name of your state? California

I got on a freeway (speed limit 65mph) when there was a huge traffic and all lanes (except the HOV lane) were fully packed and all cars were moving very slowly at less than 10mph. I checked my rear-view mirror and looked over my shoulder and didn't find any car behind me on the HOV lane, so I flipped on my left turn signal and changed into the HOV lane. At that time, I found a police car parked on the road shoulder to my left. Without realizing anything wrong, I continued to follow the traffic on the HOV lane in front of me (which was also moving slowly) for another 10 seconds, when the police car started to follow me and signaled me to pull over. When the officer talked to me, he stated that he was moving on the HOV lane behind me and my changing lane almost made him crash into my car and he had to swerve into the road shoulder to avoid running into me. He said if the driver behind me had not been him but another regular driver, there could have been a crash accident. I asked how fast he was driving and was told probably 30-40mph, I then asked how fast I was driving and he said I was probably 10mph. I got a ticket for "unsafe lane change". However, I found that there is an inconsistency on the ticket, where it states my approximate speed was 40mph. Is there any chance I can win the case in court? Thanks.

[The Occultist]

The officer made a clerical error. It is irrelevant, however, since your speed has absolutely nothing to do with making an unsafe lane change. Allow me to illustrate this: if somebody is driving at an illegal speed of 20+ mph over the speed limit, and you, going the legal limit, cuts him off, YOU are still responsible for having made an unsafe lane change. And if a collision had resulted from that, you would be held at fault; once again, that is regardless of whether or not the other guy was driving the speed limit.

[cepe10]

Go to court in person and explain he mitigationg factors - very slow speed, signal was made.

Also if the vehicle claiming to be cut off saw you signal your intent and did not sound their horn then they are partly and fault so that could be a question to ask.

27001. (a) The driver of a motor vehicle when reasonably necessary to insure safe operation shall give audible warning with his horn.

[CdwJava]

Being "partly at fault" would not invalidate the offense. Plus, there is no legal obligation to hit one's horn. And, quite frankly, very often these things happen so quickly that there is no time but to react - offering a warning is not high on the list.

- Carl

[cepe10]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Being "partly at fault" would not invalidate the offense. Plus, there is no legal obligation to hit one's horn. And, quite frankly, very often these things happen so quickly that there is no time but to react - offering a warning is not high on the list.

- Carl

So you are saying that 27001 is not a law... or are you saying it doesn't have to be followed? i.e. one can make an excuse not to follow it if desired. can you give us the list of which articles in the cal vehicle code are optional and which hav higher priority to be followed? lol I think per the law hitting the horn is required when one see someone signaling to make a trafffic move in which their is not proper room to do so.


and for the record mainly the person who hits the other vehicle from behind will be at least partially at fault - i.e. unable to stop/control their vehicle.

In the case in my opinion the HOV lane user should be ready (and if traveling 20-30 mph faster than the rest of traffic without siren and flashing lights) be anticipating the potential for vehicles to merge over and thus be ready with both the horn and brakes to be a safe driver.

[justalayman]

Here you are cepe trying to cite a law that may not have been able to be followed due to the situation whil I still wait for the cite of the law that requires a driver yield to a driver that had thier turn signal on for 1 second or more.

since the 27001 statute is so defined, how do you read it that it is not applied to the driver changing lanes to use the horn as a warning of (get the F outta my way) rather than a defensive use by the officer?

Now, if OP wants to argue the situation, IF this post is true:

At that time, I found a police car parked on the road shoulder to my left. Without realizing anything wrong, I continued to follow the traffic on the HOV lane in front of me (which was also moving slowly) for another 10 seconds, when the police car started to follow me and signaled me to pull over. When the officer talked to me, he stated that he was moving on the HOV lane behind me and my changing lane almost made him crash into my car and he had to swerve into the road shoulder to avoid running into me.

there could have been no chance of the officers claim of a near collision.

It should be obvious if the cop was parked or simply forced onto the shoulder where he would most likely still be moving if he was avoiding a collision.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by cepe10

So you are saying that 27001 is not a law... or are you saying it doesn't have to be followed?

It permits the use of the horn when it is otherwise not permitted to be used.

One can also argue that the merging driver should have used it.

Sorry, but when someone is merging into you and your choices are (1) hit the horn, or, (2) dodge the impact , which do you think the driver should do?

I think per the law hitting the horn is required when one see someone signaling to make a trafffic move in which their is not proper room to do so.

Then you would think wrong. It is NOT required, but it is permitted if used to enhance safety.

and for the record mainly the person who hits the other vehicle from behind will be at least partially at fault - i.e. unable to stop/control their vehicle.

Unless someone cuts right in front of them.

In the case in my opinion the HOV lane user should be ready (and if traveling 20-30 mph faster than the rest of traffic without siren and flashing lights) be anticipating the potential for vehicles to merge over and thus be ready with both the horn and brakes to be a safe driver.

Under CA law the driver merging into traffic is the one that is required to yield and make the movement only when safe.

- Carl

[JIMinCA]

If you intend to fight this ticket, just as with most other tickets, you should file a discovery request so you can see the officer's notes. The things he told you may not be the same as the notes he took, and the notes will likely reflect his testimony.