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

[Rostfritt]

blueg33 said:

My thoughts.

Dash cam driver had an inkling the van was going to pull in front of him so closed the gap to the Skoda because he didn’t want to let the van in. Van came across anyway doing what many van drivers do.

Two idiots can't occupy the same bit of road at the same time. Dash cam shouldn't be following so close, should have just backed off when the van started moving over to avoid a collision in lane 3, which is no fun for anybody. Van driver should have checked his blind spot and shouldn't have pulled into the lane even closer than the dash cam was to the Skoda. Skoda was still overtaking the van and probably the car in front so is the only innocent party (unless they were going over 70 obvs).

[SpeedMattersNot]

John Galt said:

funkyrobot said:

ericmcn said:

This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.

https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc

It's not just the van driver who is an idiot in that clip.

Completely agree. You could see that van starting to drift ages before you reacted.

It continues to amaze me that people post these dashcam videos in the genuine belief that they've done nothing wrong. Put bluntly, both of you were driving without due care here.

...but we're watching these clips expecting something to happen. In truth, nearly all of these near misses and crashes we see are exceptionally rare occasions. Just because someone could have avoided the accident, I don't see why that somehow relieves the offender of their poor driving.

Absolutely, do what you can to avoid being involved in an accident, but not everyone will be as experienced/good at driving as some of us on here. The baseline required to pass your driving test is exceptionally low and our expectations should be just that.

With that in mind, it's entirely the van drivers fault.

[Drive Blind]

Dromedary66 said:

New exposed - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGfNeB8jJgM

2 belters in a row from the DCW's

Massive over reation, lots of swear words, and the classic "i've got kids in the car"

then the folk wanting to report everything. The poor fiesta driver getting reported. lol just for driving along the road.

It shows you the mentality of these folk. They buy their 'CAMRUH' and have to justify it's purchase on every journey.

[drjdog]

WCZ said:

“They were racing”
10 seconds later a 1.0 fiesta comes past fairly slowly
“He was racing too”
“They could have killed all 3 of us, we will have to report it”

The pope could have come along driving james Bond's DB5 and machine gunned them to pieces.

[saaby93]

SpeedMattersNot said:

..but we're watching these clips expecting something to happen. In truth, nearly all of these near misses and crashes we see are exceptionally rare occasions. Just because someone could have avoided the accident, I don't see why that somehow relieves the offender of their poor driving.

Absolutely, do what you can to avoid being involved in an accident, but not everyone will be as experienced/good at driving as some of us on here. The baseline required to pass your driving test is exceptionally low and our expectations should be just that.

With that in mind, it's entirely the van drivers fault.

Yes but thats not why we're looking at theses clips ( or is it)
The Highway Code lets us know everyone has a duty to try to avoid a collision - sounds sensible?
Yes the van driver drifts across into Lane 3 = mistake
The cam car takes a while to realise what's happening but does avoid a collision = good.
No harm done - useful video of the sequence

It's the roundabout ones that get me.
You're supposed to give way to anything else on the rounbout (give priority to the right)
It doesnt say beep your horn and swear at anyone who might have made a minor mistake, or who might not even have made a mistake but just happened to be there.

[ericmcn]

tigger1 said:

Frimley111R said:

Turfy said:

Turfy said:

ericmcn said:

This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.

https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc

This is like standing in front of a train approaching at full speed and still 10 seconds away when the light is red. Morally you are in the right and had every chance to save yourself, but idiocy, arrogance or stupidity took over and you got splattered.

Your wife had 10 seconds to avert the situation but ignored all the signs of the impending accident. Sorry, this is madness and you are just as much to blame for that near-miss as the van driver. Silly.

I'll add to my above post it the drive of the car was a 25 year old in a Lamborghini, everyone would be saying they were in the wrong as they did not let an indicating driver into lane 3 (the kinda people we ALL hate at a merge in turn place).

It looked like the space was closed on purpose; just sayin...

I disagree. Its easy to say you should have seen it coming when that is what the OP has already done - informed us what will happen. 100% the van's fault and you took good avoiding action.

watch the fuller version:

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

This driver was a , look at when he veered to the outside lane and see where my bonnet is, close huh? The driver directly in front of him was miles ahead so absolutely no f***ing reason whatsof**king ever to f**k into the outside lane where cars tend to go a bit fast, especially not without checking mirrors.

anyone who thinks the citroen driver was fine is a f**king idiot. After that near niss i went over to the middle lane to have a gesture at the tt and he put his hand up in acknowledgment, albeit acknowledgement in been a useless driver.

I had a hetrz 24/7 van hire today from Southampton to Bristol and was driving fairly lively but in the middle lane, I was not f**king out ontop of people in the outside lane and if I did go into the outside lane I used my f**king mirrors! Its not f**king rocket science

If he collided with me and crashed me into the central reservation and injured either my wife or myself, well good luck to his lawyers.

[shost]

ericmcn said:

This driver was a , look at when he veered to the outside lane and see where my bonnet is, close huh? The driver directly in front of him was miles ahead so absolutely no f***ing reason whatsof**king ever to f**k into the outside lane where cars tend to go a bit fast, especially not without checking mirrors.

anyone who thinks the citroen driver was fine is a f**king idiot. After that near niss i went over to the middle lane to have a gesture at the tt and he put his hand up in acknowledgment, albeit acknowledgement in been a useless driver.

I had a hetrz 24/7 van hire today from Southampton to Bristol and was driving fairly lively but in the middle lane, I was not f**king out ontop of people in the outside lane and if I did go into the outside lane I used my f**king mirrors! Its not f**king rocket science

If he collided with me and crashed me into the central reservation and injured either my wife or myself, well good luck to his lawyers.

All perfectly reasonable mate. But. This is PH. They can’t work out difference between camera perspective and the human eye. And have to blame OP for everything.

[blueg33]

Human eye has a wider field of view, handles contrast better and should see things earlier than a dash cam which is only average optics and light sensors.

[John145]

blueg33 said:

Human eye has a wider field of view, handles contrast better and should see things earlier than a dash cam which is only average optics and light sensors.

With the reduced field of view the brain processes the images quicker in a video appearing to make events look slower than they are (even done a track day and watched the footage back and thought damn that looks slower!) and also videos remove depth and the feeling of how close they are.

For technical errors dashcams are fine but they do have their weaknesses and the subjective areas of that felt close, etc cannot be communicated with a single camera.

[Graveworm]

ericmcn said:

This driver was a , look at when he veered to the outside lane and see where my bonnet is, close huh? The driver directly in front of him was miles ahead so absolutely no f***ing reason whatsof**king ever to f**k into the outside lane where cars tend to go a bit fast, especially not without checking mirrors.

anyone who thinks the citroen driver was fine is a f**king idiot. After that near niss i went over to the middle lane to have a gesture at the tt and he put his hand up in acknowledgment, albeit acknowledgement in been a useless driver.

I had a hetrz 24/7 van hire today from Southampton to Bristol and was driving fairly lively but in the middle lane, I was not f**king out ontop of people in the outside lane and if I did go into the outside lane I used my f**king mirrors! Its not f**king rocket science

If he collided with me and crashed me into the central reservation and injured either my wife or myself, well good luck to his lawyers.

His lawyers would almost certainly have said pay up you are liable. Police presented with the evidence would probably prosecuted him for careless or inconsiderate driving. The van is clearly most to blame.
That doesn't change that different driving by the overtaking vehicle, could have anticipated it might happen and made it less of an issue. Not being at fault doesn't make anyone less injured or mean you don't have to spend hours sorting everything out.

This is one of the reasons that insurance companies find that people, who have non fault accidents, are still an increased risk and that people who have passed further driver training have less accidents, including non fault, than those who have not.

[PF62]

ericmcn said:

This driver was a , look at when he veered to the outside lane and see where my bonnet is, close huh? The driver directly in front of him was miles ahead so absolutely no f***ing reason whatsof**king ever to f**k into the outside lane where cars tend to go a bit fast, especially not without checking mirrors.

anyone who thinks the citroen driver was fine is a f**king idiot. After that near niss i went over to the middle lane to have a gesture at the tt and he put his hand up in acknowledgment, albeit acknowledgement in been a useless driver.

I had a hetrz 24/7 van hire today from Southampton to Bristol and was driving fairly lively but in the middle lane, I was not f**king out ontop of people in the outside lane and if I did go into the outside lane I used my f**king mirrors! Its not f**king rocket science

If he collided with me and crashed me into the central reservation and injured either my wife or myself, well good luck to his lawyers.

If you are such a wonderful driver, what are you doing out in lane three at this point with two empty lanes to the left of you?

[mac96]

shost said:

ericmcn said:

This driver was a , look at when he veered to the outside lane and see where my bonnet is, close huh? The driver directly in front of him was miles ahead so absolutely no f***ing reason whatsof**king ever to f**k into the outside lane where cars tend to go a bit fast, especially not without checking mirrors.

anyone who thinks the citroen driver was fine is a f**king idiot. After that near niss i went over to the middle lane to have a gesture at the tt and he put his hand up in acknowledgment, albeit acknowledgement in been a useless driver.

I had a hetrz 24/7 van hire today from Southampton to Bristol and was driving fairly lively but in the middle lane, I was not f**king out ontop of people in the outside lane and if I did go into the outside lane I used my f**king mirrors! Its not f**king rocket science

If he collided with me and crashed me into the central reservation and injured either my wife or myself, well good luck to his lawyers.

All perfectly reasonable mate. But. This is PH. They can’t work out difference between camera perspective and the human eye. And have to blame OP for everything.

I don't think it's fair to say 'blame OP for everything'.
Apart from amusement surely the point of watching these videos is to learn lessons. Generally they contain a bit of idiocy- we all think 'I wouldn't do that'- and a bit of 'could have done better' driving- which is where we think, yes, perhaps I might have made that mistake- I'll learn from that.
Hence most of the discussion ends up around what the OP could have done better- it's obvious what the van driver could have done better.

[sue20]

I’m increasingly sure that there’s a link between DCW wkery and the stty music they’re listening to.

[shost]

blueg33 said:

Human eye has a wider field of view, handles contrast better and should see things earlier than a dash cam which is only average optics and light sensors.

I’m not an ophthalmologist but as poster below you suggested the camera has its flaws. Presented with a flat image on screen held at typical distance your central cones in the retina are focused on a greater portion of the picture. The rods responsible for the wider field mainly.

The human eye in the car would have barely registered the indicating van as I assume the driver was focused ahead. And the rods mainly would have been the ones that detected the vans movement towards.

The field may be wider but acuity is far greater in the camera.

I’m not a neurologist, but the brain only processes a tiny proportion of what the eye can see and flicks from one object to another. Really the human can only ‘focus’ on one object at time.

Therefore it looks like the driver had ages to react to indication and movement. But to the driver I very much doubt that was the case.

Two things are clear to me, the act of indication should not be at same time as movement. Many confuse this. If the van had paid any attention to mirrors he would have had far more time to react to cam car, than cam car had to react to them. Cam car was there to be seen.

Neither were in correct lane.

And also to repond to Mac, I really don’t think that was predictable, though appreciate we and I do learn a lot from these vids.

Edited by shost on Sunday 28th July 13:06

[jamei303]

sue20 said:

I’m increasingly sure that there’s a link between DCW wkery and the stty music they’re listening to.

I haven't come across a single DCW video featuring classical music or jazz.

[carlove]

https://youtu.be/bGvKY0cJiw8

This is pretty mental. Chav in what looks like a fake focus st hits somebody in road rage.

[JaredVannett]

carlove said:

https://youtu.be/bGvKY0cJiw8

This is pretty mental. Chav in what looks like a fake focus st hits somebody in road rage.

WTF....

two sides to every story of course but still doesn't make the bit at the end right.

Edit: Here's the car: https://www.gumtree.com/p/ford/ford-focus-st-/1344...

Edited by JaredVannett on Sunday 28th July 13:27

[Chris Stott]

carlove said:

https://youtu.be/bGvKY0cJiw8

This is pretty mental. Chav in what looks like a fake focus st hits somebody in road rage.

Someone’s Should be getting a long ban and some jail time for that.

[Bonefish Blues]

JaredVannett said:

WTF....

two sides to every story of course but still doesn't make the bit at the end right.

Edit: Here's the car: https://www.gumtree.com/p/ford/ford-focus-st-/1344...

Edited by JaredVannett on Sunday 28th July 13:27

It's got a Sport Decaf

[Bonefish Blues]

Chris Stott said:

Someone’s Should be getting a long ban and some jail time for that.

Absolutely.