Safe Speed Forums

What on earth has that got to do with a good, bad,indifferent driving instructor????

It's the woman's attitude that's at fault NOT her instruction . She would have been instructed how to indicate in order to pass her test but too many people now are concentrating on being a "good" motorist, by not speeding, that all the other basics like indicators, mirrors and lane positioning gets forgotten about.

I'm pretty sure I could drive at 100 mph in the fog without hitting anyone if A) I knew the road and B) there was on body in front of me.

Yup.

Note your second scenario involves the driver travelling too fast for the conditions as they've had to take emergency action in an attempt to avoid the hazard, which means they were travelling at a speed that meant they couldn't stop in the distance they can see to be clear.

Pratnership on Mon Jun 29, 2009 7:55 am

graball wrote:What on earth has that got to do with a good, bad,indifferent driving instructor????

It's the woman's attitude that's at fault NOT her instruction . She would have been instructed how to indicate in order to pass her test but too many people now are concentrating on being a "good" motorist, by not speeding, that all the other basics like indicators, mirrors and lane positioning gets forgotten about.



Because that's pretty much where people get their driving ideas from, to start with anyway. If you have a sensible instructor that teaches you to look out for things and use sense, then chances are you are going to stick to that, or at least retain some of it dispite what the government pumps out.

I'd say the instructor is far more of an influance on someones driving than any other source.

In my experience though (and it may be totally different in your part of the world), I notice that younger drivers tend to indicate more than middle age drivers, so I can't hold your belief that they have learnt bad habits from their driving instructor. I really can't envisage a driving instructor saying "well now you've past your test you can forget indicating but don't forget NOT to speed".

I notice more middle age women than anyone, not indicating, but in fairness to them, they do tend to stick to speed limits religiously, even the newly dropped (IMO, silly ones) where most men are still travelling the new 40MPH limits at 50ish MPH. I also notice that when there is a big debate in our local paper, it is usually women who are pro camera/speedlimits and the men who think that the limits are being set too low.

Around here, they are just the worst possible drivers, they are astonishingly inattentive. And the worst offenders out that group are the ones driving 4x4s. I put this down to the fact I work almost in Tetbury (if you know it, then perhaps you sympathise). While they usually stay under the limit, it's because they are doing something else at the same time. I bet if you asked them the limit, they wouldn't know what it was.

To be honest, I didn't hear the Vine programme so don't know how old the lady in question was who thought that sticking to a speed limit does away with the need for indicators (and possibly all other road manners too).

anybody who contacted a car in front (that weren't shoved from behind) should just never be allowed near a car again

I read stuff like this and it does make me wonder, and whilst it's likely that not everybody in the crash behaved stupidly, it's clear to me that anybody who contacted a car in front (that weren't shoved from behind) should just never be allowed near a car again:

the driver in front has changed their mind and dropped the anchors. (Her reason was "the sun was in her eyes”. Er, unless we have a second sun – no it wasn’t!)

Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.

So I approach all junctions at a snail's pace, to completely block anyone from tail-ending me at more than (say) 5 mph. What else can I do?

Well, you make me wonder if there isn’t an exception to that weepej...

Your story hasn't made me change my mind really (does you sister want the number for claims direct? I'm sure there's some money to be had off the person in charge of the motorcycle there...), but I was specifically talking about people charging through fog at a speed that means they'll hit anything that looms out of the it in front of them, i.e. a pile up full of other absolute idiots who've done the sme thing.

Big Tone wrote:

weepej wrote:I read stuff like this and it does make me wonder, and whilst it's likely that not everybody in the crash behaved stupidly, it's clear to me that anybody who contacted a car in front (that weren't shoved from behind) should just never be allowed near a car again:


Well, you make me wonder if there isn’t an exception to that weepej...



Your story hasn't made me change my mind really (does you sister want the number for claims direct? I'm sure there's some money to be had off the person in charge of the motorcycle there...), but I was specifically talking about people charging through fog at a speed that means they'll hit anything that looms out of the it in front of them, i.e. a pile up full of other absolute idiots who've done the sme thing.


I know weepej, (that motorcyclist is my oldest/dearest friend and been with my sis for ~ 20+ years, known her since ~77), and maybe because it's very personal to me my post was...???

But you make a point which saddens me. Let's go back in time, to a time before 'Where there's blame, there's a claim'.

It was an innocent mistake, as I have explained, but there's no such thing as an "innocent mistake" anymore! If this happend 20+ years ago all the people involved would have resolved it without the need for the Spanish Inquisition and prosectution etc.. He was thinking in terms of 'if you would like to settle this, I can bung you however much to get your bumper like new".

But you know what turned up that day? I'll tell you: Two police cars + one unmarked police car with blue light flashing, (giving away its identity), one ambulance and minutes later a Fire Engine

I have to give credit to the police officers here: They were very nice and concerned about getting the facts and making sure everyone was okay . What made me smile is when the fire service arrived and I said to the one officer on the scene "what the hec is that doing here?" and he said to me "you didn't hear what came through my earpiece". I can imagine (He didn't know me very well bless him ).

They were all very good, kind and understanding but sadly it looks as though it's still going to go down the prosecution and claim route anyway . The woman needs her car for her job so what's going to happen? She can't drive it in this 'dangerous' state can she? (H&S).

She will get it checked by a garage of course who will tell her the bumper needs changing so the cost of new bumper @ about £50 per hour labour and blah blah blah.... She will need a hire car too of course while they repair this 'life-threatening' damage and the bill is going to run into hundreds if not four figures!

Really? Seriously? IT'S BULLSHIT! (Sorry for bad word). So the current situation is this: He's going to get screwed so he's said to my sis, his girlfriend, you may as well make a claim too. (You can't make this stuff up).



Another thing which made me is one of the first questions from a PC there. "How fast was he going? 30?" (Meaning 30mph of course). It was approximately zero!

He braked hard and stopped on her bumper. The damage was so minimal you wouldn't get your breath! The bumper of her car has a smudge and that's all but let's get all we can eh?

He rode his bike back home, he followed me once my sis was in the ambulance with my girlfriend. The reason my sister broke her arm BTW is that they stopped so abruptley he couldn't hold the bike upright so they both fell sideways while stationary, down an embankement, so sis Tone put her entire weight on her arm as she hit the ground to break her fall, as we all would if you fall. (Radial fracture which I could post if you're not squeemish?).

I have never ever lied here to 'big' my argument up and never will! The situation is rediculous and I fear the law will, once again, turn it into a drama and prosecute while others rake money off it.

We'll see...

Edit to add:

Image

for a genuine mistake caused mainly by the incompetent driving of the woman in the car. I've had similar happen to me where at a junction the person in front has stopped, looked started to pull off, I've looked right too, seen that there is still time to pull away then looked up at the last minute to find that the person in front has changed their mind.

What a total farce.... with two police cars, ambulance and FIRE ENGINE turning up. The cost of that little episode to us the tax payer will run into several hundred just for the turn out. No wonder they say that road accidents are costing us millions.....millions in wasted time and money.

As Tone says, in the old days that would have been classed as an accident, a trip to the hospital in the ambulance and all would be sorted. These days there will be a witch hunt, masses of paper work and maybe a prosecution for a genuine mistake caused mainly by the incompetent driving of the woman in the car. I've had similar happen to me where at a junction the person in front has stopped, looked started to pull off, I've looked right too, seen that there is still time to pull away then looked up at the last minute to find that the person in front has changed their mind.

Graball, not even big tone is suggesting that more than 0% of the blame for this sitaution should be laid at the door of the lady in the car. It's got nothing at all to do with her.

Secondly how can you suggest that pulling out from a junction then "skidding to a halt" without reason is good driving???????