The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread Vol II

[Vipers]

SpeedMattersNot said:

A bloke once brake tested me (after I hooted due to him cutting in front of me on a spiral roundabout - I was young!). I avoided it, got round him and he then followed me to the shops. He said I woke his baby up by hooting...

He cut me up of which I had to take avoiding action of hitting his car.
He brake tested me. (Grammar fail? Sounds weird).
He then tailgated me to the shops.
Got out of his car and walked with me for about 40 metres, leaving his baby in the car unattended.

None of these meant meant any harm to his precious baby, of course...but me hooting did.

You cut up a woman, she will carry on her merry way. You cut up a bloke, he will follow you to the ends of the earth to have that shouting match.

[Byker28i]

Bike v left turning car, 100% car fault and insurance should see it that way thanks to footage. Bikes are allowed in a lot of bus lanes in London and elsewhere in the country. Car driver didn't look, slowed suddenly and pulled across.

[silentbrown]

Vipers said:

ArsE92 said:

divetheworld said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoqM2S5lupk&fe...

Back to the crap driving. Impatient BMW driver shock....

BMW driver is obviously an idiot, but cam car is doing about 25mph there?

Looks like 30 anyway with a footpath.

System of streetlights, so definitely 30. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Built-up_area_(Highw...

[saaby93]

Byker28i said:

Bike v left turning car, 100% car fault and insurance should see it that way thanks to footage. Bikes are allowed in a lot of bus lanes in London and elsewhere in the country. Car driver didn't look, slowed suddenly and pulled across.

yes but there's no point being right and dead
and where's the anticipation and avoidance
The car driver may not understand the road layout or know that bikes are allowed to use the bus lane
Can we give these things three scores of idiocy
car 70% road layout 40% bike erm 70%

[ambuletz]

saaby93 said:

yes but there's no point being right and dead

1- The car driver may not understand the road layout 2- or know that bikes are allowed to use the bus lane

1-no excuse, read the road/signs they passed a practical driving test.
2- no excuse, the clue is in the name bus lane, it is still a lane on the road. driver is in right-hand lane. if you want to move left use M-S-M. driver did not.

[saaby93]

ambuletz said:

1-no excuse, read the road/signs they passed a practical driving test.
2- no excuse, the clue is in the name bus lane, it is still a lane on the road. driver is in right-hand lane. if you want to move left use M-S-M. driver did not.

Not disputing that but often in these cases it takes two to tango.
The HC says avoid a collision where possible. Was there much attempt at anticipate and avoid?
How many collisions would there be if we see someone make a mistake and we just drive into them saying ha ha your fault - oh maybe not ha ha

[ShaunTheSheep]

saaby93 said:

Not disputing that but often in these cases it takes two to tango.
The HC says avoid a collision where possible. Was there much attempt at anticipate and avoid?
How many collisions would there be if we see someone make a mistake and we just drive into them saying ha ha your fault - oh maybe not ha ha

But that's just an argument for not having to take responsibility for your actions.

"Well, I didn't mean to wipe out the biker, momentary lapse of judgement. We've all done it, right? "

The driver being a fkwit resulted in injury and its fair that they take full consequences of their actions.

If every other day of the week they do the same thing but there's no accident then fine, crack on. But do it in the knowledge that if it goes wrong, there's zero reason to show any mercy on your punishment.

[saaby93]

ShaunTheSheep said:

But that's just an argument for not having to take responsibility for your actions.

No it's an argument for all three parties to take responsibility

Take a different biker or different day
Spots the mistake of the car driver and pulls up
Car driver sheepishly waves to biker ' sorry mate confused by the junction there'
Biker says 'yes it is a bit'
and both go on their way

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 25th June 11:31

[ShaunTheSheep]

saaby93 said:

o it's an argument for both parties to take responsibility

The biker has no obligation to give way to the car here. They didn't breach their responsibility to the car in any way.

It'd be sensible for the biker to ride more defensively than he does currently, but that's neither here nor there when we're talking about who's responsible for creating a collision.

Edit: meant to say, so it's just an argument for not taking full responsibility for their actions

Edited by ShaunTheSheep on Saturday 25th June 11:37

[smithyithy]

Haven't seen this posted yet, DPD driver knocks runs into a biker, argues, denies insurance information, gets aggressive with a bystander then drives off

https://youtu.be/3BWAZ3-xWJ4

[saaby93]

smithyithy said:

Haven't seen this posted yet, DPD driver knocks runs into a biker, argues, denies insurance information, gets aggressive with a bystander then drives off

https://youtu.be/3BWAZ3-xWJ4

I was already thinking the biker was taking some risk but was so surprised when he got knocked off
I guess the van hadn't realised the bike had undertaken and parked in front
Van's fault for not checking what he thought was clear, now wasnt?
Bikers fault for not thinking about blind spots?
Any issues with road layout?

[xRIEx]

saaby93 said:

smithyithy said:

Haven't seen this posted yet, DPD driver knocks runs into a biker, argues, denies insurance information, gets aggressive with a bystander then drives off

https://youtu.be/3BWAZ3-xWJ4

I was already thinking the biker was taking some risk but was so surprised when he got knocked off
I guess the van hadn't realised the bike had undertaken and parked in front
Van's fault for not checking what he thought was clear, now wasnt?
Bikers fault for not thinking about blind spots?
Any issues with road layout?

[Byker28i]

saaby93 said:

ShaunTheSheep said:

But that's just an argument for not having to take responsibility for your actions.

No it's an argument for all three parties to take responsibility

Take a different biker or different day
Spots the mistake of the car driver and pulls up
Car driver sheepishly waves to biker ' sorry mate confused by the junction there'
Biker says 'yes it is a bit'
and both go on their way

Edited by saaby93 on Saturday 25th June 11:31

I understand your point entirely and as a biker I'd be looking for the cars body language that he would be making a direction change, but it came very late and rapidly in this case. Would you have every vehicle I. A left hand lane significantly slow at every left junction, just in case?

[JamesRF]

saaby93 said:

Van's fault for not checking what he thought was clear, now wasnt?
Bikers fault for not thinking about blind spots?
Any issues with road layout?

Do you work for DPD or something?

I can't see how the biker did anything wrong at all! Seemed to be riding perfectly fine, and when he pulled up at the roundabout he was clearly in front of the vans and wasn't sitting in any blind spot!?

Van driver was smiling most the time as well, almost as if he meant to nudge him off and couldn't give a toss!

[skahigh]

saaby93 said:

smithyithy said:

Haven't seen this posted yet, DPD driver knocks runs into a biker, argues, denies insurance information, gets aggressive with a bystander then drives off

https://youtu.be/3BWAZ3-xWJ4

I was already thinking the biker was taking some risk but was so surprised when he got knocked off
I guess the van hadn't realised the bike had undertaken and parked in front
Van's fault for not checking what he thought was clear, now wasnt?
Bikers fault for not thinking about blind spots?
Any issues with road layout?

Wow. There is zero fault on the biker there, he was stopped still in the middle of the land to turn left with the van driver very clearly behind him.

The van driver was obviously doing what many do at roundabouts and looking at the traffic on the roundabout and not what was directly in front of him, he moved forward without looking and shunted the biker from behind.

To make it even worse he was aggressive towards a witness to the incident and then left the scene of an accident. He should be expecting a visit from the police and a loss of his job I should think.

[Starfighter]

I would expect DPD to be taking action over that. The RTC was one thing but the attitude, refusal to supply details and then driving off would be grounds for dismissal.

[saaby93]

skahigh said:

saaby93 said:

smithyithy said:

Haven't seen this posted yet, DPD driver knocks runs into a biker, argues, denies insurance information, gets aggressive with a bystander then drives off

https://youtu.be/3BWAZ3-xWJ4

I was already thinking the biker was taking some risk but was so surprised when he got knocked off
I guess the van hadn't realised the bike had undertaken and parked in front
Van's fault for not checking what he thought was clear, now wasnt?
Bikers fault for not thinking about blind spots?
Any issues with road layout?

Wow. There is zero fault on the biker there, he was stopped still in the middle of the land to turn left with the van driver very clearly behind him.

The van driver was obviously doing what many do at roundabouts and looking at the traffic on the roundabout and not what was directly in front of him, he moved forward without looking and shunted the biker from behind.

Its about positioning. If you pull up the inside something, then stop in front of it as it's about to move off there's a good chance it doesn't know you're there.
As the video shows. Why didn't the bike wait in queue in turn like everyone else?
(Theres enough of these in the cycling in London thread)

There was a similar one a while back where a truck checked a turning it was going down was clear, turned down it just as a bike stopped in the blind spot

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1aSvoIpVss

Where's the magic guardian angel of blind spots? Taking a tea break?

[anonymous-user]

Starfighter said:

I would expect DPD to be taking action over that. The RTC was one thing but the attitude, refusal to supply details and then driving off would be grounds for dismissal.

100%

The biker did nothing wrong, and on approach to the roundabout was central in his lane on the roundabout, only to be rear ended by some idiot looking at traffic on the roundabout rather than forwards to see if the vehicle in front had stopped.

And threatening a member of the public because they saw the incident is a dismissal straight away in my opinion.

[Rostfritt]

Starfighter said:

I would expect DPD to be taking action over that. The RTC was one thing but the attitude, refusal to supply details and then driving off would be grounds for dismissal.

I was hit off my bike a few years ago by someone who refused to give my any details. I called the police, even though there was no damage I could see at the time because they were abusive to me and refused to take any responsibility. He attended a police station later on, obviously realising that he was in trouble. They called me and said that they accepted his excuse that he didn't realise he had to give his details if he hit a bicycle. As there was no damage they closed the case, even though an offence was committed.

[anonymous-user]

saaby93 said:

ts about positioning. If you pull up the inside something, then stop in front of it as it's about to move off there's a good chance it doesn't know you're there.
As the video shows. Why didn't the bike wait in queue in turn like everyone else?

Did we watch the same video?

The biker rode in his own lane without passing anyone or undertaking anything for at least 100 metres before stopping at the roundabout and being rear ended by a van that must have been following him for that same hundred metres.