Hit by an unmarked police car

Hit by an unmarked police car

Author
Discussion

Hooli

32,278 posts

199 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Maybe she needs to learn to use her mirrors properly & judge closing speeds better.

Type R Tom

3,859 posts

148 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
This really isn't a defence. Had she properly observed the car approaching (i.e. not just a glance in the mirror) then she would have been aware of the speed difference. I've had enough people pull out in front of me on DCWs and motorways to know that most of the time people either don't bother looking at all, or look but don't 'see'.

If she feels the Police aren't handling the situation correctly, has she spoken to her insurance company about this?
You ride a motor bike, explains a lot. I once went to a conference regarding perception of speed. Someone (whose name escapes me) had written a programme that tested people perception of speed. It was scary how wrong people can be and mirrors make judgement much harder. As a rider you need to be more careful, the size of vehicle dramatically effects perception

Therefore if you are driving at double the speed limit, you need to expect people to pull out, this isn’t Germany!

twistedsanity

Original Poster:

493 posts

237 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
You don't expect a car in the distance to come up on you in half the time it should, maybe the officers concerned should have been a bit more aware of their speed and the fact they had no blues on as well

PoleDriver

28,616 posts

193 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Why is this thread running twice?

Hackney

6,811 posts

207 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
twistedsanity said:
she is a sensible girl who clearly couldn't have anticipated the approaching vehicle was doing nearly twice the speed limit
This really isn't a defence. Had she properly observed the car approaching (i.e. not just a glance in the mirror) then she would have been aware of the speed difference. I've had enough people pull out in front of me on DCWs and motorways to know that most of the time people either don't bother looking at all, or look but don't 'see'.

If she feels the Police aren't handling the situation correctly, has she spoken to her insurance company about this?
At whatever speeds involved far too many people pull out (change lanes or from side streets) clearly thinking, "well they'll slow down".
She saw the car approaching and pulled out anyway. Insurance, should not find her at fault, but if she'd had a better look it wouldn't have happened.

twistedsanity said:
...she recently made a lane change on a dual carriageway , checked her mirrors first, saw a car in the distance and decided there was enough room so indicated then pulled out , she was then rear ended by the car she had seen in her mirrors , smashed her face up on the steering wheel, busted nose, black eyes etc.
Exactly what was the time span here? She looked, she saw, she changed lanes, how long did that take?
What's she classing as "in the distance"....200m?, 300m?

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
twistedsanity said:
You don't expect a car in the distance to come up on you in half the time it should, maybe the officers concerned should have been a bit more aware of their speed and the fact they had no blues on as well
You do if you observe it correctly. It's not that difficult to work out how fast a car is gaining.

Geekman

2,863 posts

145 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
If they were doing 150-160 then I agree that she couldn't really be expected to anticipate a car approaching that quick (although the correct thing to do would still be to wait until she'd judged the speed), but if they really were approaching at 110-120 I'd say it's mostly her fault.

I'd assume given it was a police vehicle that it was modern and well maintained with decent brakes, in which case she must have pulled out when they were really quite close for this to result in an accident. It's not exactly unheard of to see civilians doing those speeds on DCs, so if she continues driving like that then she could end up having a similar accident, where the other party would be highly unlikely to admit to their speed in the same way the officers did.

Hooli

32,278 posts

199 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
HantsRat said:
twistedsanity said:
You don't expect a car in the distance to come up on you in half the time it should, maybe the officers concerned should have been a bit more aware of their speed and the fact they had no blues on as well
You do if you observe it correctly. It's not that difficult to work out how fast a car is gaining.
This.

I've never pulled out in front of a speeding car (or bike) because I actually look at what I can see rather than just assume.

Eclassy

1,201 posts

121 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Here I was thinking if you are hit in the back, you are not to blame but I guess it is different for police doing almost double the speed limit in an unmarked car.

What happened to all the extra skills these police drivers have?

And whats with asking her to attend an interview under caution? What crime is she suspected of commiting? As she has (rightly) refused to attend, should she be expecting her door kicked in soon?

I rememeber a white van man going to prison for crashing into a car that was stationary in the outside lane of a motorway and killing the driver.

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Eclassy said:
Here I was thinking if you are hit in the back, you are not to blame but I guess it is different for police doing almost double the speed limit in an unmarked car.

What happened to all the extra skills these police drivers have?

And whats with asking her to attend an interview under caution? What crime is she suspected of commiting? As she has (rightly) refused to attend, should she be expecting her door kicked in soon?

I rememeber a white van man going to prison for crashing into a car that was stationary in the outside lane of a motorway and killing the driver.
No amount of extra skills can stop you stopping in time if someone pulls out in front of you at the last min. We don't know the full story and we don't know what moment she pulled out.

As for 'What crime is she suspected of commiting?' I would imagine Driving without due care and attention - IF she pulled out at the last minute.

In reality, she won't get charged with anything and it'll be down to the insurance to sort out. If the police were driving inappropriately then they will be dealt with. If they were using their exemption for a police reason then it will be left for the police insurance to deal with everything.

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Eclassy said:
Here I was thinking if you are hit in the back, you are not to blame but I guess it is different for police doing almost double the speed limit in an unmarked car.
<clicks stopwatch>
I did wonder how long it'd take...

No, there is no simple "Oooh, they hit you up the chuff, must be their fault". If the car that was hit did a manoeuvre that caused the impact, it's their fault. Somewhat unsurprisingly.

And, no, the fact that one car is Plod makes NO difference here whatsoever.

Autopilot

1,298 posts

183 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Hooli said:
HantsRat said:
twistedsanity said:
You don't expect a car in the distance to come up on you in half the time it should, maybe the officers concerned should have been a bit more aware of their speed and the fact they had no blues on as well
You do if you observe it correctly. It's not that difficult to work out how fast a car is gaining.
This.

I've never pulled out in front of a speeding car (or bike) because I actually look at what I can see rather than just assume.
This and this ^^

Speed limits, legal things and moral judgement aside, surely the fact that this thread is about somebody who pulled in the way of a much faster moving vehicle demonstrates that maybe motorists should expect a vehicle to come up at speed.

While the Police have obviously made a few errors here and their actions are questionable, if you don't take in to account how quickly a vehicle is approaching before pulling out then you really shouldn't be driving.


anonymous-user

53 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
twistedsanity said:
You don't expect a car in the distance to come up on you in half the time it should
And how long "should" it take?

Nemo Sum

163 posts

135 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
I agree with other posters whereby most if not all of the blame lies with your friend not that, that is what you asked for OP.

If she saw the car was gaining on her why did she still pull out on it?

ging84

8,832 posts

145 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
You may not expect a car to be approaching at nearly double the speed limit, but you should be expected to at-least look and try and judge the speed of any car you do see approaching in-case they are going faster than they should, rather than simply pull out assuming all cars are law abiding citizens without a speed limit exemption.

When you do pull out, you are also expected to first clearly signal as soon as you intend to make the lane change, then complete that lane change carefully, while continuing to check your mirrors.

If a car is around 50m or less behind you it's less than the save 2 second gap at 60mph so you shouldn't normally be pulling out on someone at that distance even without a closing speed, and if you do need to because of congestion and you need to squeeze into a gap, you need to be extra careful.

If a car is over 50m behind, even if you just pull straight out, without signalling, with a 60mph closing speed they should have every chance of being able to slow down enough to not hit you in that 50m+ gap.
If you clearly signalled before pulling out then they would have ample time to brake

If on the other hand someone checks thier mirrors once, sees a car in the distance, makes no attempt to signal in advance, then a couple of seconds later changes lane without ever rechecking thier mirror or blind spot, they might then be surprised to find that there is a speeding car almost on top of them, which they will say just came out of nowhere, and there was nothing they could have done to avoid, it was all because the other driver was speeding.

FurtiveFreddy

8,577 posts

236 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
She was in shock for several days after the incident and can't remember any of the car details but clearly remembers her observations and the sequence of events leading up to it?
If anything smells fishy, that does.

I'm not saying she's lying, but I find a lot of drivers on the roads these days seem to get the correct order of "mirror, signal, maneuver" confused.
Perhaps her recollection is not as accurate as she's led you to believe?

Either way, she needs to be more observant, especially if she's transporting other people's children.
As she's a childminder, she'll have the relevant insurance which will be robust enough to deal with a claim of this sort, as others have pointed out.

Type R Tom

3,859 posts

148 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
If my maths is correct, if you assume she was doing 60mph (to overtake a slower vehicle) and that the police were doing 115mph. If the police car was 80m away it would close the gap in 3.25 seconds (not taking braking into account).

hedgefinder

3,418 posts

169 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
I wonder if the Police "incident" van was called and carried out the relevant checks/investigation/report into the circumstances of the accident - ie speeds, vehicle positions etc?

HantsRat

2,369 posts

107 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
hedgefinder said:
I wonder if the Police "incident" van was called and carried out the relevant checks/investigation/report into the circumstances of the accident - ie speeds, vehicle positions etc?
Yes and no. It is classed as a PVI and requires a sgt to attend and take down scene details and all other relevant checks. I doubt the collision van would come out as these only really come out fro extremely serious life threatening crashes or fatal's.

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Thursday 14th May 2015
quotequote all
Type R Tom said:
You ride a motor bike, explains a lot.
I drive a car more often than ride a bike, it makes no difference at all except it hurts more on two wheels.

People regularly pull out without looking irrespective of the vehicle I'm using, because quite simply the majority of drivers are morons who think that careful observation is something that other people should do. In over 25 years of driving I have NEVER pulled out in front of rapidly moving vehicle and caused them to have to brake hard. Observation and judging speed isn't difficult if you can be bothered to do it.

It's about time people learn to accept responsibility for their actions (or more to the point, their inactions).

Edited by Mr2Mike on Thursday 14th May 15:01