-
Ah, I've only just spotted an unusual complication here, which is that on the approach that Nigel used there are give-way markings, whereas the other two entries to the roundabout don't have give-way markings. Apologies, I didn't notice that earlier. I expect that it is because this kind of conflict has been experienced there before and engineers decided to add the give-way markings.
So, Nigel should have give way to the driver there, and he was at fault, but not because he has to give way to vehicles approaching from the right at a roundabout, but because of the give-way markings (which basically represent a failure of the roundabout design here). You are not obliged to give way to a vehicle coming from the right at a roundabout, but to a vehicle already in the circulatory carriageway, which obviously will be approaching from your right. This is one of the most frequently misunderstood things about roundabouts (the Highway Code's advice is simplified and doesn't explain this properly).
1.3 Roundabouts are junctions with a one-way circulatory carriageway around a central island. Vehicles on the circulatory carriageway have priority over those approaching the roundabout.
http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol6/section2/td1607.pdf
Oliver Schick-
Ummm, but the markings (single, white, dashed line) that the driver crossed to enter the roundabout are still classified as give way markings and indicate that they should give way to traffic already circulating the roundabout (which can be to their left). I don't think that there is any substantial regulatory difference between the two forms. The double give way line is often used to provide visual reinforcement where the need to cede priority may be confused by sightlines, layout, historic use etc.
benborp
How do you come to that conclusion given that he apparently describes failing to give way to a vehicle coming from the right at a roundabout?
[disagrees with Oliver, cancels obligations for the rest of the day]