Maybe He Should Stop Driving

Cobra said:
The passenger was on the local news tonight displaying her broken arm ....
Click to expand...
Which may require surgery if it doesn't heal correctly.....just like every broken arm :lol:
 
viv1969 said:
Which may require surgery if it doesn't heal correctly.....just like every broken arm Massive insurance claim
Click to expand...
Who's a cynical old git then?
 
viv1969 said:
No matter why he pulled out in front, that car had to be travelling at some mighty lick to help tip an armoured Land Rover.
Crash investigation officers will be able to tell how fast.
Click to expand...
If it was doing 60mph (the limit) it would easily tip one of those over, there is a great amount of energy in a vehicle travelling at that (legal) speed. The crash investigators will be able to estimate the speed for sure. It's funny how people seem to want to make the injured party the villain here. (Not aimed at you Viv).

I hate the current claim culture, but given the possibility of a few quid, and no doubt the number of offers of help from friendly "where there blame there's a claim" companies, I reckon the vast majority of people would have a bit of that. A broken arm is hardly going to make her a millionaire in any case, though it may be an out of court settlement would be more lucrative, who knows.
 
rick448 said:
If it was doing 60mph (the limit) it would easily tip one of those over, there is a great amount of energy in a vehicle travelling at that (legal) speed. The crash investigators will be able to estimate the speed for sure. It's funny how people seem to want to make the injured party the villain here. (Not aimed at you Viv).

I hate the current claim culture, but given the possibility of a few quid, and no doubt the number of offers of help from friendly "where there blame there's a claim" companies, I reckon the vast majority of people would have a bit of that. A broken arm is hardly going to make her a millionaire in any case, though it may be an out of court settlement would be more lucrative, who knows.
Click to expand...


Very true about claims companies. A good few years ago unbeknown to us our car was hit while stationary and unoccupied outside our house. We talked to insurance company and for a few days after the incident we had a number of calls from companies asking about our 'accident'. Even after I told them no one was in it at the time and we were unaware of it happening until a neighbour told us about it, some persisted, asking if we had suffered any stress because of it.

Sorry I have diverted this thread. If the accident involving the DoE happened as I read at 3pm and if it was a clear day the sun would have been straight on to the car as he approached the junction. Not that means he was not responsible but we won't know that until it is sorted.


Dave
 
rick448 said:
If it was doing 60mph (the limit) it would easily tip one of those over, there is a great amount of energy in a vehicle travelling at that (legal) speed. The crash investigators will be able to estimate the speed for sure. It's funny how people seem to want to make the injured party the villain here. (Not aimed at you Viv).

I hate the current claim culture, but given the possibility of a few quid, and no doubt the number of offers of help from friendly "where there blame there's a claim" companies, I reckon the vast majority of people would have a bit of that. A broken arm is hardly going to make her a millionaire in any case, though it may be an out of court settlement would be more lucrative, who knows.
Click to expand...

I actually had some sympathy for the occupants of the other vehicle until they started bleating to the likes of the gutter press.
 
viv1969 said:
I actually had some sympathy for the occupants of the other vehicle until they started bleating to the likes of the gutter press.
Click to expand...
In all honesty I haven't followed the whole thing in much detail, Ive just been looking at one of the oddly polarised opinions on here, but I guess that's the internet for you :)
 
Tringa said:
Sorry I have diverted this thread. If the accident involving the DoE happened as I read at 3pm and if it was a clear day the sun would have been straight on to the car as he approached the junction. Not that means he was not responsible but we won't know that until it is sorted.
Dave
Click to expand...

This is what I was wondering earlier. I understand how a low sun can make visibility difficult, especially if your windows aren't clean or fully demisted and sometimes the sun is so low that shielding it can obscure your required view, but how could the low sun have effected his view when it was perpendicular?
 
gman said:
This is what I was wondering earlier. I understand how a low sun can make visibility difficult, especially if your windows aren't clean or fully demisted and sometimes the sun is so low that shielding it can obscure your required view, but how could the low sun have effected his view when it was perpendicular?
Click to expand...
Try looking towards a light bulb for a few seconds and then look away, your vision will be hindered for a while. It would be similar effect with approaching a junction with low sun directly opposite.
 
nilagin said:
Try looking towards a light bulb for a few seconds and then look away, your vision will be hindered for a while. It would be similar effect with approaching a junction with low sun directly opposite.
Click to expand...


If you are stupid enough to stare directly at the sun the whole time perhaps. So then you stop at the junction, stop staring at the sun and wait a moment.

I drive into the low sun straight away every morning (when it's not overcast) at the moment doing the school run and I can still see ahead never mind left (North) and right (South) which are perfectly clear as I pass through several alternating give-way cross roads.

Light bulb comparison...lol honestly, stop being so patronising.
 
gman said:
If you are stupid enough to stare directly at the sun the whole time perhaps. So then you stop at the junction, stop staring at the sun and wait a moment.

I drive into the low sun straight away every morning (when it's not overcast) at the moment doing the school run and I can still see ahead never mind left (North) and right (South) which are perfectly clear as I pass through several alternating give-way cross roads.

Light bulb comparison...lol honestly, stop being so patronising.
Click to expand...


Yes, if the Duke didn't make sure he could see possible traffic then he should have done but Neil's point is valid and not I think patronising.

I know that as I have got older my sight takes longer to return to 'normal' after looking towards a bright light or the sun. It could easily have happened to the DoE. I'm not attempting to say the Duke wasn't responsible but it is something that does happen.

Dave
 
I found it patronising, not offensively though but more comically, because he's using a lightbulb theory as if I have no experience of driving when there's a low sun. Besides, I'm sure I remember seeing a ton of branches defusing the low sun as well?

If he's stupid enough to stare directly at the sun whilst driving or to not wait until his impaired vision returns to normal then he shouldn't be on the road. I don't care about age or position in society: only competence.
 
TBH I've driven in conditions where the sunlight has been low enough that the sun visor is useless. It's particularly worse after it rains as the sun reflects off the shiny wet road. Thankfully I carry sunglasses with polarised lenses for driving in such conditions and it makes a huge difference to glare. But I know how difficult it can be if you're unprepared for it.
 
gman said:
I found it patronising, not offensively though but more comically, because he's using a lightbulb theory as if I have no experience of driving when there's a low sun. Besides, I'm sure I remember seeing a ton of branches defusing the low sun as well?

If he's stupid enough to stare directly at the sun whilst driving or to not wait until his impaired vision returns to normal then he shouldn't be on the road. I don't care about age or position in society: only competence.
Click to expand...
You don't have to stare at a light source to be affected by the glare. The fact that there are tree branches in the way can make it like a flickering light which sometimes makes it worse for the eyes to readjust.
 
omens said:
TBH I've driven in conditions where the sunlight has been low enough that the sun visor is useless. It's particularly worse after it rains as the sun reflects off the shiny wet road. Thankfully I carry sunglasses with polarised lenses for driving in such conditions and it makes a huge difference to glare. But I know how difficult it can be if you're unprepared for it.
Click to expand...
On the subject of sunglasses, I daresay the majority of motorists will be unaware of this. https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...DhAP&usg=AOvVaw0GNC1ubPPlIj7RWFEqsS0A&ampcf=1
Basically it's like too dark a tint on the front windows of a vehicle.
 
nilagin said:
You don't have to stare at a light source to be affected by the glare. The fact that there are tree branches in the way can make it like a flickering light which sometimes makes it worse for the eyes to readjust.
Click to expand...

A flickering light when it's head on (not at the side) and he's coming to stop? lol But regardless it's irrelevant. If he were genuinely blinded then I'll reiterate the fact that he should stop driving until his visibility is safe again.

I could understand if he were going over a hill with an immediate corner afterwards and he was suddenly blinded (or dazzled) by the sun. But in this instance he was sat at a junction and could wait, so it's a very poor excuse.
 
I am surprised there are so many confident statement here about what happened or was said, relying on secondhand reports in the Press.
I am reminded of my most recent, and only, moving traffic collision when a BMW clipped my wing mirror with his on a bend in a narrow village road that needs navigating at 5mph. “You were on my side of the road” he said. When I pointed out the width of the road and the fact he’d forced me on to the footpath he had the grace to agree . It’s a popular shortcut for commuters so he’s likely to have been using it every day in the same fashion!
 
gman said:
A flickering light when it's head on (not at the side) and he's coming to stop? lol But regardless it's irrelevant. If he were genuinely blinded then I'll reiterate the fact that he should stop driving until his visibility is safe again.

I could understand if he were going over a hill with an immediate corner afterwards and he was suddenly blinded (or dazzled) by the sun. But in this instance he was sat at a junction and could wait, so it's a very poor excuse.
Click to expand...
And as I said in an earlier post, how long does he have to wait, until the sun has set? The sun will still be shining in his eyes regardless of having to turn his head whilst looking in both directions and still checking in front of him. It could have all led to him misjudging the speed of the approaching vehicle. The fact that there has already been accidents on the same stretch of road and a call for a reduction in the speed limit would suggest that not everything is as idyllic as your drive towards the sunrise on the school run.
 
Last edited:
sphexx said:
I am surprised there are so many confident statement here about what happened or was said, relying on secondhand reports in the Press.
Click to expand...

It's what we do here - much harder to have a damning argument after the facts come out. :p
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
And as I said in an earlier post, how long does he have to wait, until the sun has set? The sun will still be shining in his eyes regardless of having to turn his head whilst looking in both directions and still checking in front of him. It could have all led to him misjudging the speed of the approaching vehicle. The fact that there has already been accidents on the same stretch of road and a call for a reduction in the speed limit would suggest that not everything is as idyllic as your drive towards the sunrise on the school run.
Click to expand...

lol, I hope you aren't driving in low sun then.
 
gman said:
lol, I hope you aren't driving in low sun then.
Click to expand...
I will be in about 1.5hrs but I will have sunglasses on and the sun only gets through a gap between the sun visor and the mirror for a very short period so not a problem.
 
nilagin said:
I will be in about 1.5hrs but I will have sunglasses on and the sun only gets through a gap between the sun visor and the mirror for a very short period so not a problem.
Click to expand...

Lol One thing is for certain, you do give me a good laugh! :)
 
I wonder if he has a sticker on the LR saying"If in doubt, Pull out"?

Sorry Colin Mc.
 
Its OK at the moment, but it won't be long before I'm driving a couple of hours due East as the sun rises over my bonnet.
( tis a bit flat in East Anglia that's the place not the old Ford, in case you were wondering @nilagin :p )
What sun visor will cope with that? and to add to the fun, a nice wet road thrown into the mix, my favourite time of year (y)
I just hope there aren't and freeloaders I mean Freelanders about !
 
Cobra said:
Its OK at the moment, but it won't be long before I'm driving a couple of hours due East as the sun rises over my bonnet.
( tis a bit flat in East Anglia that's the place not the old Ford, in case you were wondering @nilagin :p )
What sun visor will cope with that? and to add to the fun, a nice wet road thrown into the mix, my favourite time of year (y)
I just hope there aren't and freeloaders I mean Freelanders about !
Click to expand...
I am sure I have seen tinted plastic extensions that clamp onto the bottom of the sun visor, the sort of thing you'd see advertised in a Sunday newspaper or supplement. :)
I sit quite far back in the car so the visor being down usually blocks out the sun, it's when the sun is slightly to the left and the passenger visor leaves a gap to the rear view mirror.
 
nilagin said:
I sit quite far back in the car so the visor being down usually blocks out the sun,
Click to expand...
I sit back as far as I can, and drive straight armed, I'd need to cover virtually all the screen, I'd rather squint and dodge play "spot the landrover" its safer
 
Cobra said:
What sun visor will cope with that? and to add to the fun, a nice wet road thrown into the mix, my favourite time of year (y)
Click to expand...
I always wear a peakedcap or hat and find that the best way to cope with constantly changeing (relative to road) position of the sun and rarely use the visor except at the side window. YMMV.
 
sphexx said:
I always wear a peakedcap
Click to expand...
I've tried that but the head rest keeps hitting the peak and pushing it off my head :(

:D


sphexx said:
and rarely use the visor except at the side window.
Click to expand...
Its amazing the amount of people that don't do that I've followed loads of cars with the sun streaming through the RHS window and you can clearly see the visor facing forward
 
Cobra said:
I've tried that but the head rest keeps hitting the peak and pushing it off my head :(

:DIts amazing the amount of people that don't do that I've followed loads of cars with the sun streaming through the RHS window and you can clearly see the visor facing forward
Click to expand...
I think your first line refers to the peak of stupidity :)
On the second, My guess would be that they don’t know you can do that. I also have a theory that a lot of drivers don’t know where the dip switch is for their headlights or possibly (more likely) don’t know they are height adjustable for load.
 
viv1969 said:
No matter why he pulled out in front, that car had to be travelling at some mighty lick to help tip an armoured Land Rover.
Crash investigation officers will be able to tell how fast.
Click to expand...
When did his car become armoured?

Landies tip over very easily, high centre of gravity and a lot of suspension movement. People who drive proper 4WD cars have no illusion about their alleged safety, it's only the people who buy into the marketing snake oil who believe that they are in some way safer than ordinary family cars
 
Garry Edwards said:
When did his car become armoured?

Landies tip over very easily, high centre of gravity and a lot of suspension movement. People who drive proper 4WD cars have no illusion about their alleged safety, it's only the people who buy into the marketing snake oil who believe that they are in some way safer than ordinary family cars
Click to expand...
When it was manufactured.
 
Alls well now, he' has sent a letter of apology, bet next moan is that there was a huge cheque in the envelope ;)
 
Gremlin said:
Alls well now, he' has sent a letter of apology, bet next moan is that there was a huge cheque in the envelope ;)
Click to expand...
Nah! She'll wait for him to pop his clogs then sell the letter on eBay. ;)
 
Read an article today/yesterday? Kia was judged by plod to doing approx 40mph and that Landies tip quite easily, armoured even more so, high centre of gravity don’t ya know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top