Advocacy & Safety - Right Hook when Filtering: Legally, who's at fault?

So yesterday, on my second-to-last day of commuting no less (temp job), I escaped a right hook by mere inches thanks to a quick swerve on my part and prompt braking on the driver's part. I typically watch the drivers' front wheels in case they decide to pop a quick signal-less right turn, but was caught off guard because the road itself curves to the right. Anyways, IF I were to have been hit, who would have been at fault?

Location: http://goo.gl/maps/j4M0b (Intersection between Wendy's driveway and South Tacoma Way)

State = Washington (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61)
In my defense:
-Driver didn't signal (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.305).
In my offense:
-I'm passing on the right (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.61.115) without a shoulder or bike lane.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axed3MesSQA

I missed it? Didn't see anything.

Common sense wise it was your fault, legally it probably would be the truck drivers fault as he didn't signal... I wonder if this thread will end up like the other-one...? ;)

Camera doesn't capture it that well, but it happens at 0:40.

Are you talking about the incident at the end when the red truck appeared to move to turn into the driveway? It had passed you a while back and most likely did not realize that you were there. There is the blind spot thing and then the expectation that no-one should be passing on the right. A turn signal would have been nice, though.

I tend not to filter up unless there is a wide bike lane, but when I do I try to watch for unexpected RTs whenever there is an opportunity ahead for a motorist to do one. I can see why you are filtering with all of that traffic.

All in all, I think you could have done more to anticipate and prevent the incident. It turned out ok and gave you an opportunity to reflect. Not a week goes by that I don't have to reflect on how my own actions may have contributed to an incident. Experience is a wonderful thing.

-G

If I was the driver in that case, I would completely blame you. You shouldn't pass on the right because drivers aren't expecting it and, at least here in PA, it's illegal. You don't know why the truck is stopping, so you stay behind it.

A right hook is when a car passes you from behind, then cuts you off and turns right.

In this case, the vehicle was already in front of you. Yes, the car should have signaled first, but I have to put more blame on you for trying to pass on the right near an intersection.

Common sense wise it was your fault, legally it probably would be the truck drivers fault as he didn't signal...



Under the "Urban Cyclist Survival Skills™" the OP definitely made a judgement error, but his state allows for passing on the right on the paved section of roadway when it can be done safely. The motorist failed to signal at a appropriate distance, would be at fault, and would be cited for making an unsafe turning movement.

Legally at fault=motorist

and then the expectation that no-one should be passing on the right.

I tend not to filter up unless there is a wide bike lane,

I know camera angles distort distances in videos like this, in my opinion you didn't have near enough room (compared to earlier when you had a bike lane) to be filtering at that point. I personally wouldn't ride up alongside of traffic in that situation, and even if I did, I'd very much expect someone to turn into the driveway. Plus, it does look like you were pretty much in a blind spot.

I'd blame you, personally. Passing on the right != safe.

Left is pass side......Right is suicide......

If it's legal, then the driver has the responsibility to look out for it.

At first glance the truck driver didn't signal and could have beet ticketed (with the vidio, w/o it Good Luck).
Fla has a "Due Care" law that say in part. 'before turning from a direct course on the road way, driver must exercize due care that he is not being passed ' ect ect. So he might have been ticketed for that also,If your state also has that law. Bikes passing on the right. I'm not sure.
What if this had been a person walking facing the traffic legaly on the roadway and the truck turned and hit him.. Trucks in trouble . Right?
I'm leaning toward If you had been killed or seriously infured the truck driver is ,at least partially, at fault.
I used to line up behind the cars just like I was a car. I guess for this reason. I try to stay out of traffic as much as possible now.
Be safe
Dave.

Certainly was a close call. If it were me I would probably have waited until the shoulder opened up just passed the driveway where it was more clear and less likely a driver would pull into you.

Who is legally at fault? I would have to say the driver if passing on the right is legal but I would hate to be dead right in that situation.

This is another example of why I love my camera. It allows me to look back and share rides and circumstances so we can learn from them.

I see why people call this situation a right hook, but calling it a right hook dilutes the meaning of the term. A classic right hook is where someone passes you and while you are still to their right, turns right. If you come up from behind, you have volunteered to get cut off.

Obviously, considering the fact that I was nearly hit, passing in that situation was a poor idea. That said:


Left is pass side......Right is suicide......

Is this really a much better idea? How exactly does this make a difference?

I don't blame you. I pass on the right like this all the time - commuting during rush hour creates these scenarios constantly - and recognize the risk.

I find it very helpful when cars use turn signals. The benefit of knowing what a car intends to do can't be overstated. In this case a signal from the truck would have avoided the close call. However, there are times a driver decides at the last minute to make and turn and does not signal. Other drives habitually make turns without signaling. Regardless, you have to constantly expect this to happen and try to gauge your speed and distance to leave time and space to react in case it does.

I don't blame you. I pass on the right like this all the time - commuting during rush hour creates these scenarios constantly - and recognize the risk.

I find it very helpful when cars use turn signals. The benefit of knowing what a car intends to do can't be overstated. In this case a signal from the truck would have avoided the close call. However, there are times a driver decides at the last minute to make and turn and does not signal. Other drives habitually make turns without signaling. Regardless, you have to constantly expect this to happen and try to gauge your speed and distance to leave time and space to react in case it does.

or her could have waited behind the truck until the driveway was passed then he could have proceeded on the shoulder safely. There is no law that says we have to go faster than traffic if it is backed up. There would have been no harm in waiting a few seconds to clear the driveway. We as cyclists always complain that drivers are too impatient in waiting for us yet we, sometimes, forget that we should also have a little patience and wait for them. Waiting in that scenario would not have killed anyone but filtering almost did kill someone, the rider.

Is this really a much better idea? How exactly does this make a difference?

People are more commonly passed on the left; they are used to looking in that blind spot. Also, left side mirrors are flatter with less distortion. right side mirrors are usually convex (objects in mirror are closer than they appear), and make the objects (such as bicycles) smaller and harder to see.


I don't blame you. I pass on the right like this all the time - commuting during rush hour creates these scenarios constantly - and recognize the risk.

I find it very helpful when cars use turn signals. The benefit of knowing what a car intends to do can't be overstated. In this case a signal from the truck would have avoided the close call. However, there are times a driver decides at the last minute to make and turn and does not signal. Other drives habitually make turns without signaling. Regardless, you have to constantly expect this to happen and try to gauge your speed and distance to leave time and space to react in case it does.

Unfortunately, you can't depend on drivers to use turn signals. I think a lot of drivers are don't bother to use them for turning into driveways.

or her could have waited behind the truck until the driveway was passed then he could have proceeded on the shoulder safely. There is no law that says we have to go faster than traffic if it is backed up. There would have been no harm in waiting a few seconds to clear the driveway. We as cyclists always complain that drivers are too impatient in waiting for us yet we, sometimes, forget that we should also have a little patience and wait for them. Waiting in that scenario would not have killed anyone but filtering almost did kill someone, the rider.

Yes, you could do it that way too.

or her could have waited behind the truck until the driveway was passed then he could have proceeded on the shoulder safely. There is no law that says we have to go faster than traffic if it is backed up. There would have been no harm in waiting a few seconds to clear the driveway. We as cyclists always complain that drivers are too impatient in waiting for us yet we, sometimes, forget that we should also have a little patience and wait for them. Waiting in that scenario would not have killed anyone but filtering almost did kill someone, the rider.

I'm actually more likely to stay in the line of traffic in conditions like the video. Since traffic is moving slowly, it's easy for me to keep up and I don't feel compelled to get out of the way to let faster traffic through. When I move to the right, it's most often to let faster traffic pass me on the left.

I wonder how much of that is stuff that's ingrained in my mind since, until the last 4 years or so, I've been a full time car driver and have an inherent tendency to be able to put myself in the motorist's frame of mind, versus maybe someone who's been bike commuting for years or is car free and hasn't viewed traffic from the behind the wheel for some time.

To me, whether the driver behaved legally or not is not really relevant to the practical art and skill of safe riding in traffic. So I don't even consider it.

The incident is predictable to anyone who has experience in riding in traffic and/or is always thinking ahead of potential dangers when riding in traffic. It doesn't matter if the driver signaled or not, this sort of situation is so predictable, and so easy to avoid, that I judge it to be the cyclist's fault. If not legally, certainly in terms of poor riding habits and situational awareness.

Yes, Ive done the same, and actually hit the vehicle (no damage, nobody hurt), so I'm not claimiing holier than thou. But, rather than try to figure out if the driver signaled, I immediatly realized it was my own fault because I should have predicted it and avoided it and should never filter right in this situation.

Sort of like walking under a ladder on a pbulic sidewalk. If the guy on the ladder drops something and hurts you, yes, it's his fault he should never drop anything! But aren't you to blame, or at least stupid for walking under the ladder in the first place? You didn't have to do it, there was a reasonable route around it, and it should be predicted that every once in a while a person working on a ladder is going to drop something, even though we can say all day long that they should be more careful.

To me, whether the driver behaved legally or not is not really relevant to the practical art and skill of safe riding in traffic. So I don't even consider it.

The incident is predictable to anyone who has experience in riding in traffic and/or is always thinking ahead of potential dangers when riding in traffic. It doesn't matter if the driver signaled or not, this sort of situation is so predictable, and so easy to avoid, that I judge it to be the cyclist's fault. If not legally, certainly in terms of poor riding habits and situational awareness.

Yes, Ive done the same, and actually hit the vehicle (no damage, nobody hurt), so I'm not claimiing holier than thou. But, rather than try to figure out if the driver signaled, I immediatly realized it was my own fault because I should have predicted it and avoided it and should never filter right in this situation.

Sort of like walking under a ladder on a pbulic sidewalk. If the guy on the ladder drops something and hurts you, yes, it's his fault he should never drop anything! But aren't you to blame, or at least stupid for walking under the ladder in the first place? You didn't have to do it, there was a reasonable route around it, and it should be predicted that every once in a while a person working on a ladder is going to drop something, even though we can say all day long that they should be more careful.

What he said.

I do notice that some cyclists seem to be more concerned with assigment of blame and technical fault versus riding in such a way as to personally avoid collisions.

Unfortunately, you can't depend on drivers to use turn signals. I think a lot of drivers are don't bother to use them for turning into driveways.

Also, signals are difficult to see on a car you are pacing immediately on your left.

Finally, I think many drivers do not check their right hand side mirrors for approaching cyclists in the bike lane when turning to the right. I've started to do this more consciously now but only because being a cyclist has given me that awareness. And I'm still not 100% consistent.

What he said.

I do notice that some cyclists seem to be more concerned with assigment of blame and technical fault versus riding in such a way as to personally avoid collisions.
The two aren't mutually exclusive, I hope. Would I ride the same way if a similar situation were to present itself again? No, absolutely not. Live and learn.

I was only concerned with assignment of blame because it came so close to being a collision where blame would need to be assigned.

edit: Also, I wasn't pacing anyone at any point. That's one thing I've always avoided.

He was wrong for not using his turn signal but I think here(Az) you may have been at fault because here the vehicle in back has the responsibility to maintain a safe stopping distance from the vehicle in front of them at all times. Since there was no bike lane and he did not cross any traffic lanes to make his right turn, I would put the blame on you for trying to pass on the right (jmo). I'm just glad all turned out well, could have been a lot worse

The two aren't mutually exclusive, I hope. Would I ride the same way if a similar situation were to present itself again? No, absolutely not. Live and learn.

I was only concerned with assignment of blame because it came so close to being a collision where blame would need to be assigned.

edit: Also, I wasn't pacing anyone at any point. That's one thing I've always avoided.

Fair enough -- I made the comment about assignment of blame because so often these threads break down into tedious arguments about legal interpretations and who should or shouldn't get a ticket versus how to stay alive and well. Kind of like cyclists who use cameras but not mirrors -- they want to be able to see what happened after the collision so they (or next-of-kin) can press charges, but don't care to see what is happening prior to the collision in order to avoid it.

I would say that you both share the responsibiliy for causing the accident. Him for failing to signal, and you for passing on the right at a point that there was a driveway, and you again for approaching him on his right rear where he very likely had no chance to see you because you where in his blind spot.

I personally would have stopped passing the cars as soon as I saw the driveways and I would have lined up on the right front bumper of whoever I passed just before the driveway.

I do a lot of filtering in the city/congested situations but I always have a scenario generation going in my mind as to where an escape route is. Left or right, there is usually a way around a situation if paying attention. I also don't trust turn signals since some people signal but do not act, others act without signal and some simply signal a LH to make a pass and RH to come back in the lane(on a double yellow zone). Interpretation of a driver's demeanor in the heat of traffic is a learned art and takes focus but it is far from impossible. Mistakes do however happen to us all. At least you weren't hurt.

What he said.

I do notice that some cyclists seem to be more concerned with assigment of blame and technical fault versus riding in such a way as to personally avoid collisions.

+1.

Technical fault doesn't matter if you're killed, maimed, or your beloved commuter bike is in ruins.

Also, unless there's a resulting civil suit, who's at fault doesn't matter. Fault only assists the insurance companies in deciding how much to raise rates after an accident. Unless you're carrying liability insurance for your bicycle, fault likely won't matter.

BTW, in WA, you passed on the right (wrong). While the driver didn't signal, you shouldn't have passed on the right. Had the driver run you over, would that be because the driver didn't signal, or because you passed on the right? Sure, you wouldn't have passed on the right had the driver signalled (assuming you noticed it), but that doesn't matter. You shouldn't have passed on the right. Fault = you.

In Ca it's not illegal for vehicles to share a lane, thus lane splitting and filtering is technically legal here. Thus the driver would be at fault. In your state? No clue.

...when it can be done safely...

Operative phrase. Passing on the right near a driveway access isn't someplace where passing on the right can be done safely. Both are at fault. The motorist is at fault for failing to signal but the bicyclist is at fault for passing on the right in an area where it wasn't safe, nor legal, to do so.

In Ca it's not illegal for vehicles to share a lane, thus lane splitting and filtering is technically legal here. Thus the driver would be at fault. In your state? No clue.

Again, only when safe to do so. California law on passing on the right


Passing on the Right

21754. The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass to the right of another vehicle only under the following conditions:

(a) When the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn.

(b) Upon a highway within a business or residence district with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles in the direction of travel.

(c) Upon any highway outside of a business or residence district with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width and clearly marked for two or more lines of moving traffic in the direction of travel.

(d) Upon a one-way street.

(e) Upon a highway divided into two roadways where traffic is restricted to one direction upon each of such roadways.

The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a slow moving vehicle from the duty to drive as closely as practicable to the right hand edge of the roadway.



None of those factors were in play here nor would they be if you were splitting lanes in California.

Operative phrase. Passing on the right near a driveway access isn't someplace where passing on the right can be done safely. Both are at fault. The motorist is at fault for failing to signal but the bicyclist is at fault for passing on the right in an area where it wasn't safe, nor legal, to do so.

Locally, it is legal for a cyclist to filter on the right, so long as the cyclist remains on the paved portion of the roadway. In the OP's case, if would have been legal for him to pass, driveway or not, since it was considered safe to pass at the time since there was no indication of any turning movement being signaled by the motorist.

Filtering up alongside moving traffic when there is barely ample room to maneuver especially in this case where a quick flinch by the driver places the vehicle in your path is asinine regardless of who's at fault. Also on looking at your video a second time, the shoulder disappeared on that stretch of road so you should not have been passing at all. If it had not disappeared, I can see the argument that you were rightfully riding in the shoulder.

that was intentional. the truck had no good reason to swerve right.

btw that video showed a very frustrating situation for drivers, and that one has trouble being patient and he just got pissed for no good reason. maybe he doesn't like cyclists that can keep going even though he has to sit in traffic.

that was intentional. the truck had no good reason to swerve right.



This is where a rear cam would have been helpful, if the motorist continued turning into the driveway, then it would have not been intentional, if not, and there was no still no signal, then I would consider it an intentional maneuver.

Filtering up alongside moving traffic when there is barely ample room to maneuver especially in this case where a quick flinch by the driver places the vehicle in your path is asinine regardless of who's at fault. Also on looking at your video a second time, the shoulder disappeared on that stretch of road so you should not have been passing at all. If it had not disappeared, I can see the argument that you were rightfully riding in the shoulder.

I ride this way a lot. Shoulders come and go. Some cars ride closer, others leave more room. It is very fluid and I work with it. The less room there is the more risky it becomes. To me, riding like this doesn't quite qualify as asinine.

Once I was riding past some cars that were stopped and wondering why they were stopped. I ended up running a light I did not see and causing a bus to apply braking to avoid hitting me. That was asinine.

btw that video showed a very frustrating situation for drivers, and that one has trouble being patient and he just got pissed for no good reason. maybe he doesn't like cyclists that can keep going even though he has to sit in traffic.
Because of this, I probably wouldn't filter after the right turn given the lack of shoulder on the bridge. Really depends on how much ill will I'm going to generate when I finally have to pull in front of someone before the bridge. It's tricky either way, no doubt

Don't know about the legalities, but as a driver I hate it when cyclists do that. Happens here mostly around the large university campus. Streets are not very wide and you simply can't see riders filtering on the right until they're right next to you. If they're moving at any speed (and being 20 year olds, they often are), that's way too late. I'm already in my turn.

I signal my turns and being a rider I'm pretty damn cautious in looking for bicycles on the road, but I've had two incidents (neither actually resulting in an accident fortunately) where I've had riders get pissed at me for turning in front of them when there is just no way I could see them until I was already in the turn. Filtering is fine when traffic is stopped, but riders doing it at higher speeds alongside slow moving traffic are asking for problems. Legal or not, as a driver I wish people wouldn't do it.

Don't know about the legalities, but as a driver I hate it when cyclists do that. Happens here mostly around the large university campus. Streets are not very wide and you simply can't see riders filtering on the right until they're right next to you. If they're moving at any speed (and being 20 year olds, they often are), that's way too late. I'm already in my turn.

I signal my turns and being a rider I'm pretty damn cautious in looking for bicycles on the road, but I've had two incidents (neither actually resulting in an accident fortunately) where I've had riders get pissed at me for turning in front of them when there is just no way I could see them until I was already in the turn. Filtering is fine when traffic is stopped, but riders doing it at higher speeds alongside slow moving traffic are asking for problems. Legal or not, as a driver I wish people wouldn't do it.

Everyone shares responsibility for safety. As a driver in that situation, there is only one possible route for danger to approach you - from behind. So you signal, check your mirror, check your blindspot, and you begin your turn slowly. If a cyclist still manages to hit you, well you've done all you can.

Legal or not, as a driver I wish people wouldn't do it.

Ain't happening, just put you head on a swivel just like many of us cyclists have to do, and keep signaling your turns, I'll be watching for them.

Locally, it is legal for a cyclist to filter on the right, so long as the cyclist remains on the paved portion of the roadway. In the OP's case, if would have been legal for him to pass, driveway or not, since it was considered safe to pass at the time since there was no indication of any turning movement being signaled by the motorist.

Read what you wrote again and see what you left out of the above statement: "...when it can be done safely..." If you are riding along a section of road with driveways, you can not consider it a place to 'safely' pass on the right. Yes, the driver of the truck should have signaled his turn but the cyclist should have exercised caution as well. Since the cyclist is the following vehicle, it is up to him to exercise the most caution.

' (b) ..... with unobstructed pavement of "sufficient width" for two or more lines of moving vehicles in the same direction of travel '
Was there sufficient width for two or more lined of moving vehicles ? Inches of clearance? feet of clearance? what is a reasonable safe width/space between vehicles?
If there had been a little more room could a Mini Cooper have pulled into the space to pass the red truck on the right with inches to spare ?
Whats reasonable?

State of Florida says a passing vehicle must give the passed vehicle/bicycle 3ft of space. Two feet for the bike three feet clearance . That's 5 feet of safe roadway you need to pass a bicycle. 12ft lane, you will have to cross the center line to pass a bike. Good law , I really like it.
This law was made to protect bicycles. And if this had happened in Fl. and there had been an accident with injuries or damage I guess the Bicyclist could have been ticketed for violating the "clearance" law that was made to protect the bicycles.:rolleyes:

Don't we all get uneasy and a little put off when we are waiting at a red light and a vehicle pulls up within inches of us ready to crowd us off the roadway ? Aren't we doing the same thing when we crowd up next to a slow moving vehicle?

Be safe
Dave.

...... Since the cyclist is the following vehicle, it is up to him to exercise the most caution.

There you go, the OP's movement was still made in a safe manner, just that not enough caution was exercised on his part on not being aware of a motorist not signaling their turn.


Personally, I would have considered this incident a non issue, no contact was made as I read it, and not even posted a video of it.

There you go, the OP's movement was still made in a safe manner, just that not enough caution was exercised on his part on not being aware of a motorist not signaling their turn.

degnaw's going around on the right side while crossing a drive way to a fast food place at what I assume is at lunch time doesn't show too much caution on his part. I would assume that the cars waiting at the driveway were going to pull out at any time and that people are going to be pulling into the driveway at anytime.


Personally, I would have considered this incident a non issue, no contact was made as I read it, and not even posted a video of it.

With that I fully agree.

If there had been a proper bike lane there, I'd put it on the driver. He should have merged into the lane to turn right.

As it was, IMO it's the cyclist at fault.

Personally I don't filter. I don't consider advancing when I'm in a bike lane to be filtering though, any more than cars in their own lane will go past cars in another lane.

My father - who is NOT a cyclist, was involved in an accident similar to this. In his case he was stopped, with his right turn indicator on, wheels cranked to the right trying to turn into a driveway, but with traffic stopped, he was not moving. A cyclist filtering forward clipped his front wheel, went over his hood and hit the back of the car in front of him. When the police arrived, they wrote up a report finding my father at fault - which absolutely infuriated him since he couldn't see anything that he might have been able to do to prevent this collision. To add insult to injury, the police report was written poorly enough for the insurance company of the car that was in front of him to come after him for damage to the back of that car, caused by the cyclist hitting it. Fortunately, the cyclist was not seriously hurt. When the cyclist was asked if there was a turn indicator on - his reply was that he didn't know - that he had been travelling too fast to see. I think that if you are filtering forward of cars that are in a position reasonable to make a right turn from, you should be filtering on the left side of any cars in the right-most lane.

I work close to a corner where the students filter -- at speed -- to the intersection and pass right turning cars to their right. I'm always amazed that it works for them and I've never seen a collision. If I was there I am not sure I would think to look in my mirror if I was signalling a turn.

The two aren't mutually exclusive, I hope. Would I ride the same way if a similar situation were to present itself again? No, absolutely not. Live and learn.

I was only concerned with assignment of blame because it came so close to being a collision where blame would need to be assigned.

edit: Also, I wasn't pacing anyone at any point. That's one thing I've always avoided.

I just looked at your clip again. The last I saw of his rear tail light was a flash, maybe a brake, but also maybe the strart of a turn signal. You were past his rear tail light, right along side him when he turned. I could not see if his front turn signal was flashing.

So, the way I'm looking at it, the video may or may not show that he did not use his turn signal. An arguement could be made that he did turn on his turn signal far enough ahead of turning. But, to me it is not obvious to me that he did not use his turn signal at all before turning. Therefore, the issue might turn into a very technical issue - did he use his turn signal enough ahead of time? Probably not.

However, in that particular situation, sure, he's obligated to use his turn signal, but how much in advance? Is the stated 100 feet practical, and would it be enforced in a situation of stopped traffic, single lane? Would any cop in the world give a ticket to a guy who, in stopped traffic, briefly signaled and made a right turn into an adjacent driveway? I don't believe there's any reasonable expectation on the driver's part, or anyone's that there will be anyone passing on the right and therefore minimal need to signal his intention. So as a practical matter (which if I was asked to judge, I would say so), it might very well likely that he's legal if he even used the signal briefly before turning. Bottom line, I'm not sure you could "prove" he didn't signal adequately. Even if you did, it's an extremely minor technicality in my opinion.

Second, you say you were filtering legally, but is this true. The law you linked to states:

1) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass upon the right of another vehicle only under the following conditions:

(a) When the vehicle overtaken is making or about to make a left turn;

(b) Upon a roadway with unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles moving lawfully in the direction being traveled by the overtaking vehicle.

(2) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass another vehicle upon the right only under conditions permitting such movement in safety. Such movement shall not be made by driving off the roadway.
[1975 c 62 § 23; 1965 ex.s. c 155 § 18.]

I don't see how either of the above highlighted situations apply to passing on the right in that situation Arguably, there was not enough room for two vehicles, and certainly, it was not safe to pass on the right.

I'm not a lawyer, but if on a jury, based on what I've seen, I'd "rule" in favor of the driver. Probably both share fault, I just think your error was quite a bit greater than his.