The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 4)

[john41901]

cb1965 said:

Lemming Train said:

This C-Max arguing is becoming rather tedious. Can you just agree to disagree and move on please gentlemen?

Agreed or should that be disagreed

C-Max driver is clearly a feckwit. I had to go back 10 pages to see what all the fuss was about !

[drjdog]

jagnet said:

Going back to the video clip: the driver in front showed a distinct lack of situational awareness; there was no forward planning to their driving; they failed to check their mirrors before, during or after stopping; they invented their own system of priorities by giving way to drivers entering from a side road.

Do you know he failed to check his mirrors? He was driving slowly, with a large gap behind. If I had checked my mirrors then, in slow moving traffic, with a large gap, at a junction, I would feel perfectly safe to stop.

In your world once you start moving you cannot stop because someone behind might not be paying attention. It's ridiculous. It's so ridiculous that even insurance companies, who we know love to attribute blame when there is none, would not and could not attribute blame in this case to anyone but the guy with the camera.

[anonymous-user]

drjdog said:

jagnet said:

Going back to the video clip: the driver in front showed a distinct lack of situational awareness; there was no forward planning to their driving; they failed to check their mirrors before, during or after stopping; they invented their own system of priorities by giving way to drivers entering from a side road.

Do you know he failed to check his mirrors? He was driving slowly, with a large gap behind. If I had checked my mirrors then, in slow moving traffic, with a large gap, at a junction, I would feel perfectly safe to stop.

In your world once you start moving you cannot stop because someone behind might not be paying attention. It's ridiculous. It's so ridiculous that even insurance companies, who we know love to attribute blame when there is none, would not and could not attribute blame in this case to anyone but the guy with the camera.

They might if they employ some of the challenged from here

[jagnet]

drjdog said:

In your world once you start moving you cannot stop because someone behind might not be paying attention.

for the love of god, it's painful

drjdog said:

even insurance companies, who we know love to attribute blame when there is none

Do they? Is this a new marketing ploy?

[DBSV8]

Lemming Train said:

Blyat is the Russian equivalent of our "fk!" when used as an expletive.

PIZ DETS

[Lemming Train]

DBSV8 said:

Lemming Train said:

Blyat is the Russian equivalent of our "fk!" when used as an expletive.

PIZ DETS

Pizdets is used more for when you're in deep st and everything's completely fked up!

[Nano2nd]

jagnet said:

drivers should account for it in their decision making, avoid unexpected manoeuvres

err... how exactly do you avoid unexpected manoeuvres?

[jagnet]

Nano2nd said:

err... how exactly do you avoid unexpected manoeuvres?

Look further ahead, plan further ahead. Given that so many drivers look no further forward than the car in front, almost everything that happens to them out of the ordinary is unexpected.

[PantsFire]

eldar said:

Russians being unusually crap drivers, includes likely fatalities. However the sub title translations are magnificent - hey you goblins for carnal pleadings crowned member. For example. And they say bliat a lot.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UdhOgi84Os

At 3:20 they have a car accident and just abandon the car, fk it, nothing to do with me.

[Blue Oval84]

drjdog said:

jagnet said:

Going back to the video clip: the driver in front showed a distinct lack of situational awareness; there was no forward planning to their driving; they failed to check their mirrors before, during or after stopping; they invented their own system of priorities by giving way to drivers entering from a side road.

Do you know he failed to check his mirrors? He was driving slowly, with a large gap behind. If I had checked my mirrors then, in slow moving traffic, with a large gap, at a junction, I would feel perfectly safe to stop.

In your world once you start moving you cannot stop because someone behind might not be paying attention. It's ridiculous. It's so ridiculous that even insurance companies, who we know love to attribute blame when there is none, would not and could not attribute blame in this case to anyone but the guy with the camera.

In fairness, you can see from the way the CMAX does a little nose dive that it was actually quite a sudden and firm application of the brake, sort of like he was going to pass the junction, then decided at the last second that he'd stop and let the car out. Not a good idea in any kind of flowing traffic, especially when the driver behind may be looking at other things going on around them.

As more and more cars get fitted with things like City Safety then hopefully these accidents will be massively reduced. In the same situation my car would have audibly and visibly warned me before the impact and almost certainly in time to have averted it.

[jamei303]

Maybe the Cmax driver was having a heart attack, it’s really not relevant.

[Bob-2146]

It looked like the c max driver pulled an emergency stop.

It’s exactly the kind of hesitant idiocy that leads to that kind of ‘accident’.

[carinaman]

I can't believe the discussion on that accident is still ongoing. That situation is like a hazard perception video, there are many of hazards and anything could've happened and it did.

If the car on the far side of the junction has stopped then the C-Max may've just pulled up so as not to inconsiderately block the junction for the Pug on the left?

In my still look how much distance he has to the C-Max. So DCW has caught up with the C-Max reducing the distance behind it for what benefit? It's reduced the distance to it on the approach to a junction while traffic looks busy to me.

Was it driving without Due Care and Attention?

'The offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) under section 3 of the RTA 1988 is committed when the defendant's driving falls below the standard expected of a competent and careful driver - section 3ZA(2) of the RTA 1988.'

'The test of whether the standard of driving has fallen below the required standard is objective.' from:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic...

[Laurel Green]

Dash Cam Owners Australia January 2019 On the Road Compilation

[Blue Oval84]

jamei303 said:

Maybe the Cmax driver was having a heart attack, it’s really not relevant.

It sort of is relevant though.

The accident was still ultimately the fault of the DCW, but by understanding that things like this can happen, and not making unexpected moves we can all, as drivers, reduce the likelihood of having a crash.

Let's imagine how these two hypothetical threads play out...

"My phone rang and I didn't want to miss it so I stopped quickly so I could answer it safely and the tt behind hit my car"

Of course the driver behind was at fault for not leaving suitable gap/reacting in time. But I'm sure the poster of the above statement would get a lot of abuse for stopping suddenly and completely unnecessarily.

Alternatively -
"I had a sudden crushing chest pain so I stopped suddenly to try and call an ambulance and the tt behind hit my car"

Driver behind still at fault, but someone posting that should get no flak whatsoever for that one.

I think all people are saying is, clearly the DCW should have avoided the accident and I'm sure his insurance will take full liability, but clearly if CMAX driver had been driving as per the highway code, and not stopped suddenly they could have minimised the risk of such an accident occurring.

Going around slamming your brakes on for no valid reason (the car nose dipped, they were jabbed on) and complaining about being hit up the rear is like leaving your house unlocked and complaining about being burgled. The burglar is still at fault, but you could have done something to minimise the chance of it happening.

[Lemming Train]

[FWIW]

Lemming Train said:

Indeed.

Un. fking. Believable.

[poing]

Laurel Green said:

Dash Cam Owners Australia January 2019 On the Road Compilation

They seem to have a lot more people driving on the wrong side of the road, is it simply the number of tourists?

[Laurel Green]

poing said:

They seem to have a lot more people driving on the wrong side of the road, is it simply the number of tourists?

Seems like a good possibility as I cannot think of any other reason for such.

[saaby93]

carinaman said:

I can't believe the discussion on that accident is still ongoing.

It looked to me as though a couple of cars in front stopped or significantly slowed up to allow oncoming traffic to come through
The CMax throught rather than block the junction I'll just let that guy out - probably checked the DCW was far enough behind not to give an issue.
The DCW seems to have been asleep

ETA

FWIW said:

ds666 said:

Agreed - C-max is on the brakes for nearly 3 seconds before he is rammed .

Absolutely reasonable for C-Max to have stopped...

Good post

Edited by saaby93 on Wednesday 23 January 08:03