Lucky to be alive.

[KungFooPanda]

Mk3Spitfire said:

I can't/wont speak for the police because it wasn't me, and I wasn't there.
What I was getting at, was that a professional legal team, having dealt, I imagine with hundreds of accidents are under the impression that damage limitation is the way forward. That to me suggests they feel there is more to it...otherwise they'd pursue it and argue the case more.
If they are that lazy...can you change them? Or employ your own if these are via your insurance?

I'm not trying to be obtuse, by the way.

Edited by Mk3Spitfire on Friday 20th March 21:27

Thats why Im seeking independent advice next week.

[Mk3Spitfire]

KungFooPanda said:

Thats why Im seeking independent advice next week.

Please update the thread then, will be interesting to hear what they say.

[Pit Pony]

If (an I am not suggesting you fake it) you had an injury, that would cost a fortune in lawyers fees in court, the third party always backs down and pays up because the costs very quickly ramp up.

[TooMany2cvs]

KungFooPanda said:

The traffic officer attending has explained to me that the police car was doing 83mph on the approach

Irrelevant.

KungFooPanda said:

he braked to 56mph 5 seconds before the accident

125 metres away. Yet you didn't see him in that time.

KungFooPanda said:

3 seconds before the accident he put his blue lights on.

75 metres away. Yet you didn't see him in that time.

KungFooPanda said:

By this time I had already pulled away and was looking left as I crossed the junction.

At night, and you didn't notice approaching headlamps in five seconds and 125 metres, and you didn't notice blue strobe lights being added to them in three seconds and 75 metres?

[kazste]

Please be aware i am not calling the op a bad driver.

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react, dont forget the initial response of most would be to panic and freeze up then react.

[TooMany2cvs]

kazste said:

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

If you can't tell the difference between the lights of a car doing 50+mph and not slowing, and one that's pulling up to lights - even in the two seconds before it turns all Xmas Tree...

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

[KungFooPanda]

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

If you can't tell the difference between the lights of a car doing 50+mph and not slowing, and one that's pulling up to lights - even in the two seconds before it turns all Xmas Tree...

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Expect a lot of licenses in the post then. Is it normal police practice to approach traffic lights at that speed, in the rain, in the dark without blue lights flashing? If it is then I suggest you all put your badges on your bosses desk in the morning. When the traffic light goes green, you look right, see lights 75-100m up the road. Safe to pull out? You pull out, your attention is now looking left as you cross the dual carriageway, then you look right again to be bet by a police car with blue lights on pushing you sidewards down the road. There is more data on the recorder of the car that hit me and his wingman who sped across the front of me.

Ive been told to make a complaint to the Inspector of the Humberside Police and the IPCC. If any of you can advise Id be greatful.

[Bigends]

KungFooPanda said:

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

If you can't tell the difference between the lights of a car doing 50+mph and not slowing, and one that's pulling up to lights - even in the two seconds before it turns all Xmas Tree...

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Expect a lot of licenses in the post then. Is it normal police practice to approach traffic lights at that speed, in the rain, in the dark without blue lights flashing? If it is then I suggest you all put your badges on your bosses desk in the morning. When the traffic light goes green, you look right, see lights 75-100m up the road. Safe to pull out? You pull out, your attention is now looking left as you cross the dual carriageway, then you look right again to be bet by a police car with blue lights on pushing you sidewards down the road. There is more data on the recorder of the car that hit me and his wingman who sped across the front of me.

Ive been told to make a complaint to the Inspector of the Humberside Police and the IPCC. If any of you can advise Id be greatful.

If the Police car had slowed and crept through the lights - as theyre trained too - at a reasonable speed then this probably wouldnt have happened. In this case they didnt make the job they were on their way to - and theyve cost the job a fortune in court cases.

[KungFooPanda]

TooMany2cvs said:

KungFooPanda said:

The traffic officer attending has explained to me that the police car was doing 83mph on the approach

Irrelevant.

KungFooPanda said:

he braked to 56mph 5 seconds before the accident

125 metres away. Yet you didn't see him in that time.

KungFooPanda said:

3 seconds before the accident he put his blue lights on.

75 metres away. Yet you didn't see him in that time.

KungFooPanda said:

By this time I had already pulled away and was looking left as I crossed the junction.

At night, and you didn't notice approaching headlamps in five seconds and 125 metres, and you didn't notice blue strobe lights being added to them in three seconds and 75 metres?

Irrelevant??? I hope your not a police officer. Its irrelevant if your on an open road and conditions dictate you can drive at that speed. Thats probably why there are so many accidents with police cars, there were three that week alone for the police force concerned. There is something that affects us all, its called physics. When police put on their blue lights it does not improve the performance of their cars, they dont turn better or stop shorter. When they do their advanced driving course, this should be explained.

[eldar]

TooMany2cvs said:

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Or that a car passed through red lights at high speed and that in three seconds you were unable to predict the appropriate course of action - stop/continue/reverse with 100% accuracy.

Not a mistake a superbeing would ever make.

[singlecoil]

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

I assume the reaction time included not only the realisation that something bad was about to happen, but the time needed to actually do something about it.

[hondansx]

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

If you can't tell the difference between the lights of a car doing 50+mph and not slowing, and one that's pulling up to lights - even in the two seconds before it turns all Xmas Tree...

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Wow. What a nice guy you are...


Being right doesn't make it right; that's what i've learnt during my experience of (completely unrelated ) litigation and legal matters at work. If you really have the time and money to pursue this, then fair play. If you don't, then be mindful that you could just be at the first step of a very, very long and frustrating road. Consider the impact on your life (and the lives of others around you) of having this on your mind day after day.

From experience, life is short and you should spend as much of it as you can doing positive things.

[KungFooPanda]

hondansx said:

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

So what if you see the lights of a car coming up to a junction, remembering its dark and you probably dont know its a police car most would assume this car to stop for the red light.

If you can't tell the difference between the lights of a car doing 50+mph and not slowing, and one that's pulling up to lights - even in the two seconds before it turns all Xmas Tree...

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Wow. What a nice guy you are...


Being right doesn't make it right; that's what i've learnt during my experience of (completely unrelated ) litigation and legal matters at work. If you really have the time and money to pursue this, then fair play. If you don't, then be mindful that you could just be at the first step of a very, very long and frustrating road. Consider the impact on your life (and the lives of others around you) of having this on your mind day after day.

From experience, life is short and you should spend as much of it as you can doing positive things.

Too many positive things in my life so need a bit of negative to balance things out.Im amazed at the way the system works. I know the police have a difficult job and the two traffic officers that attended the scene were very professional. The officer in the car that hit me was not. Sometimes we do things wrong and we should put our hands up and say so not try to hide behind regulations and a uniform.

[Jonmx]

OP-any pics of the damage to your car?

[TooMany2cvs]

KungFooPanda said:

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Expect a lot of licenses in the post then.

Let's hope so, because somebody who can't react to an approaching emergency vehicle IN THREE SECONDS - Say it out loud... One elephant. Two elephant. Three elephant. - has no place on the roads.

The thinking distance in the highway code is based on 0.7 seconds. Less than a quarter of the time you say that you cannot possibly be expected to react in - and you were in a junction, where you should be MORE alert, not less. Traffic lights are amber for less than three seconds. Do you find them impossibly fast to respond to, too?

KungFooPanda said:

Is it normal police practice to approach traffiTc lights at that speed, in the rain, in the dark without blue lights flashing?

You said that the blue lights lights WERE flashing from three seconds, 75 metres away.

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Saturday 21st March 13:33

[Ken Figenus]

Bigends said:

If the Police car had slowed and crept through the lights - as theyre trained too - at a reasonable speed then this probably wouldnt have happened.

Lurking but have to say that this is my experience of how things work from my personal observations too. Blues and twos are not a licence to slam through junctions with impunity, and I have never ever seen them used that way either. Professionals that we depend upon then live to drive another day and make it to the call.

Do you have any idea of the age/experience of the officer that slammed into you - unlikely to have red mist if time served I guess, as these guys really are some of the best drivers in the world. Given what they do daily such incidents like this are rare.

Good luck and take it all they way if you are right; hate people who dont take it like a man as we all screw up now and again. Its a human feature!

[eldar]

[quote=TooMany2cvs

Let's hope so, because somebody who can't react to an approaching emergency vehicle IN THREE SECONDS - Say it out loud... One elephant. Two elephant. Three elephant. - has no place on the roads.


[/quote]


So you would expect a normal driver to approach green lights at a reasonable speed, detect a potential abnormal hazard, evaluate the complexity of the hazard, decide the possible options, analyse each of those, including the time to take that action - accelerate, stop or reverse, straight, left or right while monitoring the hazard. In three seconds with perfect judgement.

Meanwhile, a highly trained driver is approaching red traffic lights in excess of the speed limit at a point that restricts their ability to avoid any expected hazard, and hits the side of a stationary vehicle.

And you blame which driver? The fact you apportion blame that way indicates you should be returning your licence on the grounds your hazard perception is inoperative.

[KungFooPanda]

TooMany2cvs said:

KungFooPanda said:

TooMany2cvs said:

kazste said:

Three seconds just isnt long enough for some to react

<blink>
Then those people should put their licences in an envelope, addressed to SA99 1TU, together with a covering letter stating that a comatose sloth would put their reactions to shame.

Expect a lot of licenses in the post then.

Let's hope so, because somebody who can't react to an approaching emergency vehicle IN THREE SECONDS - Say it out loud... One elephant. Two elephant. Three elephant. - has no place on the roads.

The thinking distance in the highway code is based on 0.7 seconds. Less than a quarter of the time you say that you cannot possibly be expected to react in - and you were in a junction, where you should be MORE alert, not less. Traffic lights are amber for less than three seconds. Do you find them impossibly fast to respond to, too?

KungFooPanda said:

Is it normal police practice to approach traffiTc lights at that speed, in the rain, in the dark without blue lights flashing?

You said that the blue lights lights WERE flashing from three seconds, 75 metres away.

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Saturday 21st March 13:33

Errr you said 75m not me and the data recorder said they were switched on 3 secs before the imoact. Im guessing theres lots of other good informtion on there too such as gps and how violent he was braking.He had no lights on at 83 or 56mph, in the rain, in the dark but chose to put them on 3 secs before he hit me...a last, desperate attempt to alert me of his presence and his inability to stop. Ah quoting highway code now too officer...look at the stopping distances in the rain and tell me if you would have time to stop before the lights whilst travelling at those speeds.

[longshot]

Panda.

Ignore him.
He wasn't there so doesn't know what he's talking about.

2CV. It's one thing 'thinking' what you'd do and another 'doing' it.

[TooMany2cvs]

KungFooPanda said:

Errr you said 75m not me and the data recorder said they were switched on 3 secs before the imoact.

Umm, 3 seconds at 56mph IS 75m.

56mph = 90kph = 90,000 metres in one hour = 1,500 metres in one minute = 25 metres in one second = 75 metres in three seconds.

It's basic arithmetic.

longshot said:

Panda.

Ignore him.
He wasn't there so doesn't know what he's talking about.

You're right. I wasn't there - which is why I'm only going by Panda's own words.

He pulled away from the lights when they changed to green, saw an oncoming police car, couldn't get out of the way, and stopped 10ft into the junction. Those are his words from the original post of this thread. The blue lights on that police car had been on for three seconds, 75m approaching that junction. He did not see them.

Other people have since said that some drivers cannot be expected to react within three seconds, but see no problem in drivers having reaction times over four times as long as the HC thinking distance time.

Edited by TooMany2cvs on Saturday 21st March 14:45