Other driver pranged barrier while overtaking.
Discussion
Getragdogleg said:
A rule is nothing without the application of interpretation and common sense.
Much of the highway code is written as guidelines and is intended to be applied sensibly.
In my opinion the 4X4 had an accident with himself though failing to read the road and drive according to the circumstances. Due care and attention was not applied.
As I said before, the highway code writer did not envisage a berk in a 4x4 overtaking a queue of traffic slowing before they passed a bus that was pulling into a bus stop in a built up area. It was to make sure faster vehicles could pass slower ones on the road so as not to have progress impeded for miles and miles, probably written back at the dawn of motoring. Over due for a revision to stop people like you reading it and extrapolating silly conclusions from it.
It was last revised August 2019 - how much has changed since then? It's not just internet warriors but Courts who use it who use it to make silly conclusions as to who is in the wrong and whether they are driving dangerously, carelessly or without due care. Much of the highway code is written as guidelines and is intended to be applied sensibly.
In my opinion the 4X4 had an accident with himself though failing to read the road and drive according to the circumstances. Due care and attention was not applied.
As I said before, the highway code writer did not envisage a berk in a 4x4 overtaking a queue of traffic slowing before they passed a bus that was pulling into a bus stop in a built up area. It was to make sure faster vehicles could pass slower ones on the road so as not to have progress impeded for miles and miles, probably written back at the dawn of motoring. Over due for a revision to stop people like you reading it and extrapolating silly conclusions from it.
Edited by Graveworm on Monday 17th February 17:58
Dont like rolls said:
Known hazard.....?
That massive bus stop that you cannot see ?
You are making that up to re-enforce your excuse for an unsighted Pull-Out..
You don't need to see the bus stop. You could see the massive bus. And buses stop A LOT.That massive bus stop that you cannot see ?
You are making that up to re-enforce your excuse for an unsighted Pull-Out..
Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
oyster said:
You don't need to see the bus stop. You could see the massive bus. And buses stop A LOT.
Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
You have NEVER overtaken a bus ?Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
What was the reason the overtaker crashed ?
Dont like rolls said:
oyster said:
You don't need to see the bus stop. You could see the massive bus. And buses stop A LOT.
Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
You have NEVER overtaken a bus ?Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
What was the reason the overtaker crashed ?
The chump in the OP left no space - either to the left for the other car, or ahead to hit the anchors.
Dont like rolls said:
oyster said:
You don't need to see the bus stop. You could see the massive bus. And buses stop A LOT.
Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
You have NEVER overtaken a bus ?Seriously, would you have overtaken in such circumstances?
Because I sure as hell wouldn't. And I suspect 99% of drivers wouldn't.
And if it went to court (were there to have been an injury), I am pretty certain blame would be apportioned much more to the overtaker.
What was the reason the overtaker crashed ?
I've already explained why a multiple overtake in the circumstances at that location is an inadvisable action.
Maybe you should check out the Advanced Driving sub forum.
meatballs said:
Let it go rolls...
Dont like rolls said:
People keep asking me questions 
That's because they are trying to find out why you can't accept that your reasoning may be wrong.Dont like rolls said:
I will .....now I know (massivly shocked that) so many people seem to think the HC does not exist/is wrong and it is my fault if they pull out on me without looking in their mirrors.
Excellent. 
Dont like rolls said:
Red Devil said:
Dont like rolls said:
Dont like rolls said:
I will .....now I know (massivly shocked that) so many people seem to think the HC does not exist/is wrong and it is my fault if they pull out on me without looking in their mirrors.
Excellent. This is a circumstantial incident, not a straightforward overtaking one.
If this was an open A road and the bus was going slowly and the 4 x 4 went to legitimately overtake the bus and the car immediately behind it and the car puled out as the overtake was happening and caused the 4x4 to have to take evading action then yes, the car driver would be to blame for poor observation.
This is a slow moving queue of traffic, the bus is pulling in and the lead car is in the process of passing when 4X4 berk comes barrelling past (possibly multiple cars) and runs out of space/talent when the car that was already manoeuvring and overtaking the bus "gets in the way"
The overtake was not clear for the 4X4, its was not sensible, it was not in accordance to the highway code itself.
Timings are the big deal here, and the circumstance. If this was an open road discussion the car the 4X4 was passing would cop blame here, but its not. that's what I am trying to get you to see. I agree with the highway code and you just not in this case because its was a very very poor attempt at an overtake that was never a clear overtake that could have been executed safely in accordance with the highway code.
As I said before, the 4X4 had an accident with himself.
Getragdogleg said:
This is a circumstantial incident, not a straightforward overtaking one.
It should have been straight forward for the 4x4.Getragdogleg said:
The overtake was not clear for the 4X4, its was not sensible, it was not in accordance to the highway code itself.
It is in accordance with the highway code. As quoted many times in this thread.Getragdogleg said:
its was a very very poor attempt at an overtake that was never a clear overtake
That's no excuse for the OP's wife not to look in a mirror.Getragdogleg said:
As I said before, the 4X4 had an accident with himself.
And there was absolutely no cause or influence to the accident??Torquey said:
Getragdogleg said:
This is a circumstantial incident, not a straightforward overtaking one.
It should have been straight forward for the 4x4.Getragdogleg said:
The overtake was not clear for the 4X4, its was not sensible, it was not in accordance to the highway code itself.
It is in accordance with the highway code. As quoted many times in this thread.Getragdogleg said:
its was a very very poor attempt at an overtake that was never a clear overtake
That's no excuse for the OP's wife not to look in a mirror.Getragdogleg said:
As I said before, the 4X4 had an accident with himself.
And there was absolutely no cause or influence to the accident??Seems like a house of cards built on layered assumptions. Is that good enough to pointlessly clobber another keyboard yahoo over the head ad nauseum? haha whatever makes your existence tolerable I guess. It takes all kinds to make the online world of inanity chug around.
my 2p: I wouldn't draw any conclusion without a precise time vs position of each vehicle mapped onto the area. Just hanging onto your one (potentially flawed, definitely skewed and biased) perception as if it couldn't happen slightly different seems like a kind of delusion
Dont like rolls said:
I get they were committed as they were (very close to) next to the driver who pulled out and cannot have been at WARP speed as they did not kill themselves when forced into the barrier (or turn over/go down the steep embankment).
Think about the time it takes to get to where they were when the driver pulled out without looking correctly.
I take it you now accept they were unlikely to have seen the bus stop ?
Think about the time it takes to get to where they were when the driver pulled out without looking correctly.
I take it you now accept they were unlikely to have seen the bus stop ?
Let's try to remain within the confines of normal space/time please?
The way you describe it, they didn't need to see the bus stop - the bus must have been stopped or stopping if they were not at WARP speed.
Bus doing say 30mph along with the Q so you'd aim to overtake at maybe 35-40mph, making up more than 4m/s on the bus. Maybe it takes a minimum of 10 seconds for the bus to pull in. At those modest speeds, you're suggesting that the 4x4 must have been more than 40 metres behind (10 car lengths) to have not seen the bus indicating or pulling in. Increase that overtake speed and the numbers start getting more ridiculous - 60mph gets us to 120 metres or 30 car lengths..
So. Seeing the bus stop is irrelevant. The 4x4 attempting a 10 car overtake is the only way your timeline works - still think that's a legitimate, reasonable, defensible manoeuvre?
As suggested, the 4x4 chancing a sneaky overtake from close behind once he saw the bus stopping is far more probable though IMO not safe due to the high likelihood that this exact situation might occur.... OPs OH may well have checked her mirror but the 4x4 might not have started the move yet...
Overtake one car, 5 secs from start to No Look pull-out.
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Dont like rolls said:
Overtake one car, 5 secs from start to No Look pull-out.
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Relevance please?
Figures are fine for showing the 4x4 saw the bus indicate and pull in, thanks.
Remember that you're the one suggesting he couldn't anticipate the bus or lead car's actions....
sibriers said:
Relevance please?
Figures are fine for showing the 4x4 saw the bus indicate and pull in, thanks.
Remember that you're the one suggesting he couldn't anticipate the bus or lead car's actions....
The only thing we have is the admittance OP wife pulled out without looking correctly forcing the 4x4 to bin it.
sibriers said:
Relevance please?
Figures are fine for showing the 4x4 saw the bus indicate and pull in, thanks.
Remember that you're the one suggesting he couldn't anticipate the bus or lead car's actions....
Subsequent vehicle gaps will depend on their own risk appetite. So getting from 40-60 will take a typical 4x4 pickup 4 seconds or so during which time it will have travelled 88m and made up that 40m so another second would allow a speedy return if there was enough space whilst travelling another 26m.
Add in another car with a riskier 1 second gap we have 2.5 seconds to pull alongside them adding 60m. So a 2 car overtake is comfortably over 150m.
But the overtaking car can rely on the highway code which says - If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass.
Edited by Graveworm on Tuesday 18th February 12:13
sibriers said:
Dont like rolls said:
Overtake one car, 5 secs from start to No Look pull-out.
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Your figures/times do not work.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/w...
Relevance please?
Figures are fine for showing the 4x4 saw the bus indicate and pull in, thanks.
Remember that you're the one suggesting he couldn't anticipate the bus or lead car's actions....
- The collision takes place in the middle of the countryside, not a village.
- The slow vehicle at the front of the queue is not a bus (which could be expected to stop within the confines of a village).
- The Yeti driver didn't check his wing mirror at any time (hence the resulting prosecution), but the OP's wife did hers (see his first post).
It's not clear from the video whether the driver of the overtaking car sounded his horn.
Careful observation would have already alerted him to the possibility of the Yeti driver making a dodgy manoeuvre.
The latter clearly veers towards the centre line at 0:07 a full two seconds before he indicates.
I notice the writer of the article couldn't refrain from the usual journalistic hyperbole. High speed smash, my a**e.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff