BIB car accident, any more details?
Discussion
This could have been very messy if it weren't for the railings.
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/show
The lad in the Hyundai appears to have been turning right from the main road into a minor road whilst the BIB were overtaking. However, this is not 100% clear. Was just wondering though, on an emergency is it normaly permissable for a BIB to overtake traffic over a pedestrian crossing/zig zag lines?
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/show
The lad in the Hyundai appears to have been turning right from the main road into a minor road whilst the BIB were overtaking. However, this is not 100% clear. Was just wondering though, on an emergency is it normaly permissable for a BIB to overtake traffic over a pedestrian crossing/zig zag lines?
I think we should wait to see if we get to hear ALL the facts before we make any assumptions.
But my personal thoughts are.... You have lights and sirens on, the whole roads stops for you....
Should you just sit there and wait ???? For how long ???? Just sit because there is a crossing ???
No, you proceed as safely as possible taking into account ALL hazzards that you can see.
Sometimes it goes wrong, statistics alone suggest that with thousands of blue light runs a day on increasly busier roads, things will go wrong with the best drivers (both in the police car and the public car) - That's life and we need to stop trying to think we can totally stop all such incidents, we won't, not without stopping all blue light runs and there is a price to pay if we want to go that route.
Thankfully, with cars designed well, good railings etc noone seems to have been seriously hurt.
It just looks bad as it is on it's roof but unless we get more info to say "Data system in car shows driver was doing 100MPH as he passed" then I think we should look at this with a big dose of reality ?
But my personal thoughts are.... You have lights and sirens on, the whole roads stops for you....
Should you just sit there and wait ???? For how long ???? Just sit because there is a crossing ???
No, you proceed as safely as possible taking into account ALL hazzards that you can see.
Sometimes it goes wrong, statistics alone suggest that with thousands of blue light runs a day on increasly busier roads, things will go wrong with the best drivers (both in the police car and the public car) - That's life and we need to stop trying to think we can totally stop all such incidents, we won't, not without stopping all blue light runs and there is a price to pay if we want to go that route.
Thankfully, with cars designed well, good railings etc noone seems to have been seriously hurt.
It just looks bad as it is on it's roof but unless we get more info to say "Data system in car shows driver was doing 100MPH as he passed" then I think we should look at this with a big dose of reality ?
Police car overtakes a row of traffic at speed. The head of the queue turns right, into the path of the overtaking police car.
A tricky one, but somehow I would have expected the Police driver to have done better.
I have the utmost respect for the highly-trained police drivers in their high powered cars, but more than once have I been alarmed at the antics of 'panda' cars and police mini-busses.
Out of interest, how much training would the driver of a regular police car like this get compared to a genuine traffic police officer?
A tricky one, but somehow I would have expected the Police driver to have done better.
I have the utmost respect for the highly-trained police drivers in their high powered cars, but more than once have I been alarmed at the antics of 'panda' cars and police mini-busses.
Out of interest, how much training would the driver of a regular police car like this get compared to a genuine traffic police officer?
leadfootlydon said:
Police car overtakes a row of traffic at speed. The head of the queue turns right, into the path of the overtaking police car.
A tricky one, but somehow I would have expected the Police driver to have done better.
I have the utmost respect for the highly-trained police drivers in their high powered cars, but more than once have I been alarmed at the antics of 'panda' cars and police mini-busses.
Out of interest, how much training would the driver of a regular police car like this get compared to a genuine traffic police officer?
A tricky one, but somehow I would have expected the Police driver to have done better.
I have the utmost respect for the highly-trained police drivers in their high powered cars, but more than once have I been alarmed at the antics of 'panda' cars and police mini-busses.
Out of interest, how much training would the driver of a regular police car like this get compared to a genuine traffic police officer?
Maybe more, maybe less.
You can't tell from the vehicle the qualifications of the driver.
Hi all, first time posting on here.
In response to Vanhosen, I would say that 99 times out of 100 a traffic officer will be more highly trained, from a driving perspective, than a panda driver. The only time I could see this being different, is if the panda driver was an experiencerd ex traffic officer and the traffic driver was a newly appointed traffic officer.
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
That said the Police driver, when overtaking a line of vehicles in this manner, should have been aware of the potential for the vehicle at the head of the queue to turn right wihout warning, and should have reduced his speed, to a complete stop if necessary, until he was certain that the driver of that vehicle was fully aware of his presence.
In response to Vanhosen, I would say that 99 times out of 100 a traffic officer will be more highly trained, from a driving perspective, than a panda driver. The only time I could see this being different, is if the panda driver was an experiencerd ex traffic officer and the traffic driver was a newly appointed traffic officer.
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
That said the Police driver, when overtaking a line of vehicles in this manner, should have been aware of the potential for the vehicle at the head of the queue to turn right wihout warning, and should have reduced his speed, to a complete stop if necessary, until he was certain that the driver of that vehicle was fully aware of his presence.
MR2Mike said:
Was just wondering though, on an emergency is it normaly permissable for a BIB to overtake traffic over a pedestrian crossing/zig zag lines?
To answer Mike's query,the simple answer is no. The legislation is 'The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997'
There is no exemption allowing ESVs to pass the leading vehicle.(Sec 4(24))
However, there are exemptions if an ESV is the lead vehicle.
At a Zebra crossing, or at a Pelican crossing (when the lights show red or steady amber) precedence must given to pedestrians, and mustnot proceed in a manner or at a time likely to endanger any person or any vehicle approaching or waiting at the crossing, or to cause the driver of any such vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident
Similar exemptions apply to Puffin crossings.(Sec 3 (12)(13))
ESVs in this legislation, ONLY include a vehicle that is being used for fire brigade, ambulance, national blood service or police purposes.
M5Dave said:
Hi all, first time posting on here.
In response to Vanhosen, I would say that 99 times out of 100 a traffic officer will be more highly trained, from a driving perspective, than a panda driver. The only time I could see this being different, is if the panda driver was an experiencerd ex traffic officer and the traffic driver was a newly appointed traffic officer.
In response to Vanhosen, I would say that 99 times out of 100 a traffic officer will be more highly trained, from a driving perspective, than a panda driver. The only time I could see this being different, is if the panda driver was an experiencerd ex traffic officer and the traffic driver was a newly appointed traffic officer.
Depends on your force area. In my local area there are many times more advanced drivers who are not trafpol, than are.
pen9 said:
To answer Mike's query,the simple answer is no. The legislation is 'The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997'
There is no exemption allowing ESVs to pass the leading vehicle.(Sec 4(24)).
There is no exemption allowing ESVs to pass the leading vehicle.(Sec 4(24)).
Thank you for the very concise answer. I did think that it's probably one of the most dangerous areas to make progress through.
M5Dave said:
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
I would have said responsibility would lie with the BiB to be honest. It is him that is driving in a way that is out of the ordinary so may well not be expected by a regular driving going about their everyday business.
The responsibility should lie with the person whose actions cause the incident, not the person who when driving 'normally' and reasonably did not manage to avoid someone driving in a way that is not expected, whether they had the lights and sirens on or not.
If it had been a regular civilian car and driver acting as this police car did with the same consequences everyone would be saying it was the civvy car in the role of the police car at fault. Having lights and a siren does not absolve of the need to drive safely and be aware that in contravening 'accepted' and expected methods of driving that others may not be expecting your actions and to build in a greater margin for error in others.
In this case it would appear that this did not happen.
Edited by IT10 on Saturday 9th December 13:10
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
I would have said responsibility would lie with the BiB to be honest. It is him that is driving in a way that is out of the ordinary so may well not be expected by a regular driving going about their everyday business.
The responsibility should lie with the person whose actions cause the incident, not the person who when driving 'normally' and reasonably did not manage to avoid someone driving in a way that is not expected, whether they had the lights and sirens on or not.
If it had been a regular civilian car and driver acting as this police car did with the same consequences everyone would be saying it was the civvy car in the role of the police car at fault. Having lights and a siren does not absolve of the need to drive safely and be aware that in contravening 'accepted' and expected methods of driving that others may not be expecting your actions and to build in a greater margin for error in others.
In this case it would appear that this did not happen.
Edited by IT10 on Saturday 9th December 13:10
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
I read in the linked forum that the officer was rushing to a woman who had collapsed - I'm not sure that's a good reason (for the Police)?
Having said, sounds like the other car would have just as likely turned in front of an Ambulance. If he'd happened to have done in front of a Fire Engine on it's way to a job then he might not have lived to tell the tale.
Having said, sounds like the other car would have just as likely turned in front of an Ambulance. If he'd happened to have done in front of a Fire Engine on it's way to a job then he might not have lived to tell the tale.
M5Dave said:
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
I would have said responsibility would lie with the BiB to be honest. It is him that is driving in a way that is out of the ordinary so may well not be expected by a regular driving going about their everyday business.
The responsibility should lie with the person whose actions cause the incident, not the person who when driving 'normally' and reasonably did not manage to avoid someone driving in a way that is not expected, whether they had the lights and sirens on or not.
If it had been a regular civilian car and driver acting as this police car did with the same consequences everyone would be saying it was the civvy car in the role of the police car at fault. Having lights and a siren does not absolve of the need to drive safely and be aware that in contravening 'accepted' and expected methods of driving that others may not be expecting your actions and to build in a greater margin for error in others.
In this case it would appear that this did not happen.
Edited by IT10 on Saturday 9th December 13:10
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
There is very little if any amount of blame you could put on the Hyundai Driver, just because the other party is a police officer it doesn't mean he has piority over everyone else. If the Hyundai was turning right, and indicating to do so, the officer should have been able to forsee this circumstance happening. He was the one engaging in a manoeuvere that placed the most duty of care on his lap.
I've dealt with claims with exactly the same circumstances, our client is turning right and the third party has decided to overtake. They were all 100% non-fault, why is this any different? Excuse the pun, but the police aren't a law unto themselves you know.
M5Dave said:
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
Looking at the link I would say this accident will probably go down as a 50/50. The Hyundai driver should have been aware of the Police vehicles presence prior to making the turn, and his excuses for not being so look pretty feeble, i.e he didn't have his car properly positioned so that he could check his mirrors, and his music was so loud that he was completely unaware of what was going on around him.
I would have said responsibility would lie with the BiB to be honest. It is him that is driving in a way that is out of the ordinary so may well not be expected by a regular driving going about their everyday business.
The responsibility should lie with the person whose actions cause the incident, not the person who when driving 'normally' and reasonably did not manage to avoid someone driving in a way that is not expected, whether they had the lights and sirens on or not.
If it had been a regular civilian car and driver acting as this police car did with the same consequences everyone would be saying it was the civvy car in the role of the police car at fault. Having lights and a siren does not absolve of the need to drive safely and be aware that in contravening 'accepted' and expected methods of driving that others may not be expecting your actions and to build in a greater margin for error in others.
In this case it would appear that this did not happen.
Edited by IT10 on Saturday 9th December 13:10
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
HC rule 105......
Nuff said.
M5Dave said:
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
I agree that the guy in the Hyundai must have been a bit of a drongo to miss a police car with blues and twos going coming up in the right hand lane - he must have been looking way as he turned so should have seen the poloce car in his wing mirrors.
But the police driver (it seems from what is known) may not have been giving enough of a margin to allow for others - idiots or not - to be aware of his actions.
ETA - No bias intended in that. I dont intend to create an impression that I am being biased against the police, as I am not - I have a lot of respect for people doing a difficult job in difficult circumstances - but sometimes it seems that there is a division between the police in how and what they enforce and the general public.
I know this is not down to the individuals on the front line, but you must realise that although policy is not the decision of front line officers, that is the interaction most people have.
I genuinely have concerns that there is a greater and greater division seemingly opening between the police and the public.
ANyway, rant over
Edited by IT10 on Saturday 9th December 22:33
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
I agree that the guy in the Hyundai must have been a bit of a drongo to miss a police car with blues and twos going coming up in the right hand lane - he must have been looking way as he turned so should have seen the poloce car in his wing mirrors.
But the police driver (it seems from what is known) may not have been giving enough of a margin to allow for others - idiots or not - to be aware of his actions.
Yup.
ESV drivers on call should assume every other driver is an absolute dozy muppet, not overtake them till it it would normally be safe to do so, not overtake anybody who stops to let them past (just in case they stopped for some other dozy reason). They should assume that other drivers are too stupid to use their mirrors properly, and are driving along in a mobile disco with bleeding ears.
Is that what you want? Cos that's what'll happen.
Anybody who turns in front of an ESV on full blues and twos because they are driving along half-asleep should have their licence torn up.
tvrgit said:
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
I agree that the guy in the Hyundai must have been a bit of a drongo to miss a police car with blues and twos going coming up in the right hand lane - he must have been looking way as he turned so should have seen the poloce car in his wing mirrors.
But the police driver (it seems from what is known) may not have been giving enough of a margin to allow for others - idiots or not - to be aware of his actions.
Yup.
ESV drivers on call should assume every other driver is an absolute dozy muppet, not overtake them till it it would normally be safe to do so, not overtake anybody who stops to let them past (just in case they stopped for some other dozy reason). They should assume that other drivers are too stupid to use their mirrors properly, and are driving along in a mobile disco with bleeding ears.
Is that what you want? Cos that's what'll happen.
Anybody who turns in front of an ESV on full blues and twos because they are driving along half-asleep should have their licence torn up.
All I am saying is that in a situation where a police driver is legally using their exemption from the usual laws of driving, that they MUST assume others will be taken unawares by their exempted unexpected driving behaviour.
IMO the burden is on the person acting outside the usual limits of the law to ensure that in acting in such a manner that they take account of people who may not be expecting such behaviour.
If that offends anyone, tough. The police are here to protect us - and that includes from themselves when excercising a legal exemption
IT10 said:
tvrgit said:
IT10 said:
M5Dave said:
I agree with everything you say regarding the Police driver's responsibility to others when attending an emergency call, and I said as much in my original post.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
However I still say that the Hyundai driver must take some proportion of the blame, I accept that the Police car is in a position where you might not expect it to be, but when driving a car you cannot drive around totally oblivious to your surroundings, and carry out manoeuveres
without checking it's safe to do so. The Highway Code does state that you should carry out an offside mirror check prior to making a right turn.
I agree that the guy in the Hyundai must have been a bit of a drongo to miss a police car with blues and twos going coming up in the right hand lane - he must have been looking way as he turned so should have seen the poloce car in his wing mirrors.
But the police driver (it seems from what is known) may not have been giving enough of a margin to allow for others - idiots or not - to be aware of his actions.
Yup.
ESV drivers on call should assume every other driver is an absolute dozy muppet, not overtake them till it it would normally be safe to do so, not overtake anybody who stops to let them past (just in case they stopped for some other dozy reason). They should assume that other drivers are too stupid to use their mirrors properly, and are driving along in a mobile disco with bleeding ears.
Is that what you want? Cos that's what'll happen.
Anybody who turns in front of an ESV on full blues and twos because they are driving along half-asleep should have their licence torn up.
All I am saying is that in a situation where a police driver is legally using their exemption from the usual laws of driving, that they MUST assume others will be taken unawares by their exempted unexpected driving behaviour.
IMO the burden is on the person acting outside the usual limits of the law to ensure that in acting in such a manner that they take account of people who may not be expecting such behaviour.
If that offends anyone, tough. The police are here to protect us - and that includes from themselves when excercising a legal exemption
I agree.
The Police driver has it all before them to see. They should expect poor mirror work from the vehicle infront, they've seen it enough before in drivers out there.
Yes the vehicle turning right has driven without due care, but so has the Police driver failed to show reasonable care. 70/30 against the Police driver in such circumstances in my view.
Not saying that applies to the case of the photos provided here, because we don't have sufficient information about the collision. Just making a general comment about Police vehicles on blues & twos attempting to overtake vehicles turning into an option right.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff