Worth reporting this 'driver'?

[Foss62]

poo at Paul's said:

VeeFource said:

can't remember said:

Christ on a bike. Look how sharp everything is. Look at the vans wheels. That's not 60mph, it's basically standing traffic.

That's why you're not getting the video.

Edited by can't remember on Saturday 20th July 12:04

Urghh, why did I check this thread again?! It's a good camera (thank Aldi).

Here's 4 seconds earlier..

So you have two lanes you could have moved into and you still sit there at 60 obeying your "2 second rule".
What a proper flipping Road Captain you are.

It does seem a bit strange doesn’t it? If the van was able to pass on the inside then it looks like the OP could have easily made his way to lane 1 and made some progress.

[anonymous-user]

182 replies?
OP was lane hogging and wouldn't move over, I would have done the same as the van...

[vonhosen]

5Cylinder said:

182 replies?
OP was lane hogging and wouldn't move over, I would have done the same as the van...

His claim is a dangerous lane change in front of him.
Is that acceptable irrespective of if you think he is in the wrong lane or not?

OP
It's pointless posting here about it.
As I said, if YOU think it was dangerous driving (& you are happy to attend court) give it to the Police & let them decide if they think it is. Then let this thread die a death unless you want to report back what they decided.

[SpeedMattersNot]

He's not lane hogging.

The van driver would merely have taken OP's place on the road. If the outermost lane was free, sure, that's lane hogging. But why should he just move over because someone behind him thinks you should tailgate the driver in front of you at all times?

This is such a depressing thread to read.

If the OP moves in to allow the van driver to pass and then pulls back out behind the van driver, should the van driver then move over to let the OP past? Some of you really should NOT be on the road.

[roadsmash]

SpeedMattersNot said:

He's not lane hogging.

The van driver would merely have taken OP's place on the road. If the outermost lane was free, sure, that's lane hogging. But why should he just move over because someone behind him thinks you should tailgate the driver in front of you at all times?

This is such a depressing thread to read.

If the OP moves in to allow the van driver to pass and then pulls back out behind the van driver, should the van driver then move over to let the OP past? Some of you really should NOT be on the road.

You cannot tell the manner of the OP’s driving from the pictures he has posted.

[SpeedMattersNot]

roadsmash said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

He's not lane hogging.

The van driver would merely have taken OP's place on the road. If the outermost lane was free, sure, that's lane hogging. But why should he just move over because someone behind him thinks you should tailgate the driver in front of you at all times?

This is such a depressing thread to read.

If the OP moves in to allow the van driver to pass and then pulls back out behind the van driver, should the van driver then move over to let the OP past? Some of you really should NOT be on the road.

You cannot tell the manner of the OP’s driving from the pictures he has posted.

I can see enough to be sure he shouldn't be moving over in either picture, which is what a lot of people on here are saying!

I agree, I can't comment on what's happened before the 'incident' but I don't see the relevance of that to my post, specifically regarding people who claim he should've let the van past because he is hogging the lane...based on the pictures.

[anonymous-user]

Interesting,

If he isn't lane hogging how did the van come up the inside of him?

[ATG]

SpeedMattersNot said:

He's not lane hogging.

The van driver would merely have taken OP's place on the road. If the outermost lane was free, sure, that's lane hogging. But why should he just move over because someone behind him thinks you should tailgate the driver in front of you at all times?

This is such a depressing thread to read.

If the OP moves in to allow the van driver to pass and then pulls back out behind the van driver, should the van driver then move over to let the OP past? Some of you really should NOT be on the road.

I'd like to echo that final sentence. The level of stupidity and irresponsibility in some of the posts criticising the OP are depressing.

The situation the OP describes happens regularly. The root cause is usually muppets who drive up the middle lane nose to tail irrespective of what's happening around them. All you then need is someone to start crawling past them in lane 1 and you'll end up with a queue of cars in lane 1 waiting to get past the slightly slower moving traffic in lane 2.

In this situation the correct thing to do is to patiently wait for the plonker at the front of the queue in lane 1 to finally complete his feeble overtake.

The wrong thing to do is start overtaking on the left. In almost every case overtaking on the left means you are driving like an irresponsible tit.

[roadsmash]

SpeedMattersNot said:

based on the pictures.

Indeed.

I could send you a picture of my penis which you would think, based on the picture, that it’s a whopper.

However from another angle, perhaps lined up against a ruler, you would see that in fact it is rather average and very disappointing.

You need more information to confirm that the OP is driving appropriately.

What we do know for certain and what a lot of posters here have based their opinion on, is that the OP has got so upset about being cut up (something that most of us experience every day) that he’s downloaded the footage from his dashcam, created some stills, and then posted them on the Internet for reassurance.

This is odd behaviour and suggests that all is not as it seems.

[roadsmash]

ATG said:

I'd like to echo that final sentence. The level of stupidity and irresponsibility in some of the posts criticising the OP are depressing.

The situation the OP describes happens regularly. The root cause is usually muppets who drive up the middle lane nose to tail irrespective of what's happening around them. All you then need is someone to start crawling past them in lane 1 and you'll end up with a queue of cars in lane 1 waiting to get past the slightly slower moving traffic in lane 2.

In this situation the correct thing to do is to patiently wait for the plonker at the front of the queue in lane 1 to finally complete his feeble overtake.

The wrong thing to do is start overtaking on the left. In almost every case overtaking on the left means you are driving like an irresponsible tit.

Maybe OP will provide the video footage at some point to confirm your opinion.

Probably won’t though.

[vonhosen]

5Cylinder said:

Interesting,

If he isn't lane hogging how did the van come up the inside of him?

What lane he is or isn't in isn't really relevant & doesn't excuse a dangerous lane change, which is what is alleged.

Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 20th July 23:44

[SpeedMattersNot]

5Cylinder said:

Interesting,

If he isn't lane hogging how did the van come up the inside of him?

So the van is trying to cut in front of the OP is determined to lane hog, too?

[SpeedMattersNot]

roadsmash said:

SpeedMattersNot said:

based on the pictures.

Indeed.

I could send you a picture of my penis which you would think, based on the picture, that it’s a whopper.

However from another angle, perhaps lined up against a ruler, you would see that in fact it is rather average and very disappointing.

You need more information to confirm that the OP is driving appropriately.

What we do know for certain and what a lot of posters here have based their opinion on, is that the OP has got so upset about being cut up (something that most of us experience every day) that he’s downloaded the footage from his dashcam, created some stills, and then posted them on the Internet for reassurance.

This is odd behaviour and suggests that all is not as it seems.

Making ref. to your appendage is odd behaviour.

I agreed, going from the pictures and description, I don't believe the OP is lane hogging. The fact people are of the opinion that he should move over, just so the van could take his place is what's frustrating to read.

[anonymous-user]

SpeedMattersNot said:

5Cylinder said:

Interesting,

If he isn't lane hogging how did the van come up the inside of him?

So the van is trying to cut in front of the OP is determined to lane hog, too?

It would appear so, yes.


Pair or tools imo.

[roadsmash]

SpeedMattersNot said:

Making ref. to your appendage is odd behaviour.

Meh, maybe, maybe not.

Making a brand new thread about my appendage........ now that would be odd behaviour.

[Sten.]

SpeedMattersNot said:

He's not lane hogging.

The van driver would merely have taken OP's place on the road. If the outermost lane was free, sure, that's lane hogging. But why should he just move over because someone behind him thinks you should tailgate the driver in front of you at all times?

This is such a depressing thread to read.

If the OP moves in to allow the van driver to pass and then pulls back out behind the van driver, should the van driver then move over to let the OP past? Some of you really should NOT be on the road.

This is why

VeeFource said:

I had this muppet come up behind and tailgate for a while

The lane hogging argument doesn't really matter IMO, the above is the key piece of information. The van driver was a tailgating , and it's always better to move aside and let them get on with it.

[Some Gump]

Sten. said:

The lane hogging argument doesn't really matter IMO, the above is the key piece of information. The van driver was a tailgating , and it's always better to move aside and let them get on with it.

Bingo.

[Mr Tidy]

Sten. said:

The lane hogging argument doesn't really matter IMO, the above is the key piece of information. The van driver was a tailgating , and it's always better to move aside and let them get on with it.

But it does matter, because when the road clears the muppet van will be in your way while it chugs along blocking what ought to be a clear lane!

Fair enough to let them get on with it, but they usually just get in the way.

[Lindun]

Mr Tidy said:

But it does matter, because when the road clears the muppet van will be in your way while it chugs along blocking what ought to be a clear lane!

Fair enough to let them get on with it, but they usually just get in the way.

You’d be surprised how quick a modern Sprinter (or any modern van) can go when floored nowadays. Of course, if you’re a standard PHer with a 911 Turbo, as your daily driver, as you save the special stuff for weekends, then it will be slow. However, in reality they will out perform most cars.

[Mike335i]

SpeedMattersNot said:

aking ref. to your appendage is odd behaviour.

I agreed, going from the pictures and description, I don't believe the OP is lane hogging. The fact people are of the opinion that he should move over, just so the van could take his place is what's frustrating to read.

How is it frustrating to advise someone to de-escalate a situation instead of defending their position? Forget about who is right or wrong, if you are faced with reckless behaviour by others, why is it anything other than sensible to avoid the confrontation is the first place?

It stops being about who can make better progress in what lane, but simply about an idiot driving dangerously and wether or not you choose to make the situation worse, just to be right. If there is someone tailgainting and you can get them off your bumper by moving over, just get out the way. It's not worth the aggro, let them be someone else's problem.

The 'why should i'? mentality is what is frustrating, both on the roads and in general.