Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre or maybe not!

Explain that to the police..................or maybe let the video do the talking, scarey
 
Just shows how quickly things can go wrong - very scary.

And pity the white van man - innocent party minding his own business, next thing he knows, off down the hill ...
 
all the roads around brecon are treated like racing tracks, seen so many in high performance cars and lots of racers on motorbikes, nearly every week there is a casualty ,from car crashes or motorbikes,
and also there is allot of accidents from vehicles pulling out from junctions , I ride there myself on motorbike, but with caution.
 
I think the driver of the grey car might be to blame ,oops
 
the black fox said:
I think the driver of the grey car might be to blame ,oops
Click to expand...


You would also think the white car might have looked and indicated ...... having been sitting behind the van for a while :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Marc said:
Looks like te grey car was making a legal overtake to me, the white car pulled out without indicating (or looking it would seem)
Click to expand...


Anyone who thinks otherwise is no better than the person who caused the accident.....

Overtaking is a lost art, the majority of car drivers have no clue. Many have NO IDEA of what is around them.

Most people who use the roads are only interested in one thing - Their Right of Way - that exists in their own mind.
 
:jawdrop: Van driver lucky he missed a head on with the tree.
 
whoops to impatient some people
 
LASTOLITE said:
Anyone who thinks otherwise is no better than the person who caused the accident.....

Overtaking is a lost art, the majority of car drivers have no clue. Many have NO IDEA of what is around them.

Most people who use the roads are only interested in one thing - Their Right of Way - that exists in their own mind.
Click to expand...

Exactly this, if that had been a motorcycle overtaking it could well have been a fatality. The drover of the white car would be charged with driving without due care and attention at least. Looking at the road involved, there is a long straight and no oncoming vehicles, I fail to see how anyone could think that was the grey car drivers fault. And I also don't understand the comment about being impatient, it was clearly safe to overtake, and why should you sit behind the other vehicles if it is safe and legal to overtake. Unfortunately you can't see the vehicle speeds, but from the vehicle with the camera on board it looked pretty slow. No doubt those who like to dawdle about at 40 mph on a NSL road will be outraged that someone wants to overtake another vehicle... how irresponsible of them!
 
I'll play this game of "lay blame without knowing the facts!"
There is no reason to think the van wasn't going at 60. The grey car should therefor not be overtaking. When do we find out the winner?
 
pierre said:
I'll play this game of "lay blame without knowing the facts!"
There is no reason to think the van wasn't going at 60. The grey car should therefor not be overtaking. When do we find out the winner?
Click to expand...

But regardless of the speed involved, the white car should have checked for approaching vehicles before pulling out. What if it was an emergency services vehicle approaching at speed, quite within the law?

If anyone thinks that pulling out without checking is not the "immediate cause" of this incident, I'd not want to be driving/riding anywhere near them. There may be other contributory factors, but in my opinion the major fault here lies with the driver of the white car. There are more facts available here than in most accident investigations (the video evidence) the investigator will no doubt be able to calculate the speeds of the relative vehicles. I have no doubt that if the driver of the overtaking vehicle was adjudged to be speeding, they will be apportioned some blame, mainly because speed is seen as the biggest problem, when in actual fact it is clear to see that poor driving is the issue here. If only they could fit poor driving cameras all over the place and fine people!
 
without a doubt the white car shouldn't have pulled out like that, but would the police look at the speed of the grey car and put equal blame on them if they were proven to be over the speed limit?
 
pierre said:
without a doubt the white car shouldn't have pulled out like that, but would the police look at the speed of the grey car and put equal blame on them if they were proven to be over the speed limit?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they will consider that, it may be classed as a contributory part of the accident, though more correctly it may have contributed to the outcome/consequence. I doubt they would put equal blame on this, and in my opinion they certainly shouldn't. But knowing how short sighted people are in relation to the effects of speed where accidents are concerned, then nothing would surprise me. I guess it's pointless debating this as there is such a divided opinion on the issue of speed, it shows that clearly here with people happy to blame a driver who is in a safe position (albeit on the wrong side of the road, but with nothing oncoming) but "possibly" speeding, rather than someone who pulls into their path without checking mirrors... probably the same type of driver who pulls out of a junction without checking properly too.
 
I can't estimate the speed of the vehicles involved but the grey car looks to be moving quickly - possibly above the limit.

However, from where the white car hit the grey one, (somewhere on the back door) the driver of the white car clearly did not look before pulling out.

I'd like to know the outcome and glad there were no serious injuries.

Dave
 
Irrespective of the speeds involved, the only person at fault here is the driver of the white car.

Not only did the white car driver fail to look behind prior to pulling out, but they were also too close to the van to conduct a safe overtake.

The white car in my opinion and based purely on the video footage is too close to the van. It has no forward view. The driver as a result is edging out to see if it’s clear to overtake. I’m guessing they were so preoccupied with sneaking a peak that that failed to look behind.

Correct positioning would have been to have sat further back affording a view on both sides of the van and therefore making the move a lot safer/easier.

As mentioned above, we can all speculate all day, but that’s my take on it.
 
Last edited:
gremlin16 said:
Irrespective of the speeds involved, the only person at fault here is the driver of the white car.

Not only did the white car driver fail to look behind prior to pulling out, but they were also too close to the van to conduct a safe overtake.

The white car in my opinion and based purely on the video footage is too close to the van. It has no forward view. The driver as a result is edging out to see if it’s clear to overtake. I’m guessing they were so preoccupied with sneaking a peak that that failed to look behind.

Correct positioning would have been to have sat further back affording a view on both sides of the van and therefore making the move a lot safer/easier.

As mentioned above, we can all speculate all day, but that’s my take on it.
Click to expand...

Fully agree with this, the grey car came from so far back it was clearly a clear stretch to overtake from earlier but the white car was so far up the backside of the van they couldn't see to start the overtake or get enough momentum fast enough to swiftly overtake. Too pre-occupied looking ahead to see the risk behind them, that could have been far worse if it was a motorbike. This is also the biggest risk on motorways with drivers changing lanes without getting up to speed or checking their mirrors. If the white car was on a motorway tucked behind a HGV and pulled into the path of an overtaking grey car doing 70, the fault would be entirely on the white car. Hang back, if it's clear get up to speed and then overtake. If it isn't clear or the overtake is no longer safe you're still in your own lane and you can brake back down to a safe speed.

One of the things my driving instructor drilled in was to be aware of what's going on behind just as much as in front. He'd randomly test me on the colour of the car behind to make sure I was regularly checking my mirrors.
 
I'm intrigued to know how many vehicles the driver in the grey car planned on overtaking. The vehicle in front of the van wasn't too far in front.
Yes the driver of the white car was at fault for being too close to the van. He may well have looked in his mirrors and not seen the car approaching from behind. The grey car was travelling a lot faster and may have already overtaken several vehicles behind the vehicle with the camera and would have been unsighted. That's not to say the white car driver shouldn't have looked over his shoulder again as he pulled out.
 
pierre said:
I'll play this game of "lay blame without knowing the facts!"
There is no reason to think the van wasn't going at 60. The grey car should therefor not be overtaking. When do we find out the winner?
Click to expand...

Unless you know the law on vans Pierre, in which case you'd re-word that to "There is no reason to think the van wasn't going at 50"
 
CopeImages said:
Unless you know the law on vans Pierre, in which case you'd re-word that to "There is no reason to think the van wasn't going at 50"
Click to expand...
Why? Do vans not break the speed limit? The car would need to break the speed limit to overtake the van if it is doing 60, which it shouldn't be doing. As others stated earlier, we do not have all the facts.
 
That is actually my worst nightmare when driving, because a few years ago I witnessed something very similar on the A2, where fortunately nobody was injured. It involved a car just merging from a slip road, then proceeded to drive clean across two lanes (four lanes on this road at that point) without indicating, and then colliding with a vehicle in the outside lane. The vehicle in the outside lane was not speeding, but ended up flying over the barrier before coming to rest in some undergrowth, fortunately missing trees. I t could have been much worse, but for the fact that at this point, the London bound and coast bound carriageways are separated by a kind of wood.
The white car was totally at blame for this accident, for failing to look in their mirrors or indicate.
 
The white car driver certainly seems to be the prime offender. Nevertheless speed cannot be dismissed without knowing the details (for any of the vehicles). Basic principle - Is it safe and is it legal.
Also, I don't see any sign that the grey car was signalling. If he was intent on overtaking any vehicle ahead he should have been signalling right until intending to move in to the left. (A flashing light may just have caught the white car driver's eye and stopped him making a dreadful mistake) Grey car driver had overtaken the camera car was intent on overtaking the white car then the van (got to wonder (and we can only wonder) if he had just been charging on intent of passing everything. If he was speeding then he could be in bother.
 
arclight said:
The white car driver certainly seems to be the prime offender. Nevertheless speed cannot be dismissed without knowing the details (for any of the vehicles). Basic principle - Is it safe and is it legal.
Also, I don't see any sign that the grey car was signalling. If he was intent on overtaking any vehicle ahead he should have been signalling right until intending to move in to the left. (A flashing light may just have caught the white car driver's eye and stopped him making a dreadful mistake) Grey car driver had overtaken the camera car was intent on overtaking the white car then the van (got to wonder (and we can only wonder) if he had just been charging on intent of passing everything. If he was speeding then he could be in bother.
Click to expand...
Why would continue to signal once you have moved in to position to overtake. Using that premise, any vehicle on a motorway other than the last lane would need to be constantly signalling. You signal to show your intent to move, once you have done so it isn’t necessary surely.

There are lots of maybes in this scenario, the one thing that is clear is that the white car moved into the path of the other vehicle. We don’t actually know if they looked or not, but if they did, it wasn’t a proper look.
 
Mr Bump said:
I didn't know that so open road with a 60 limit then a van max speed is 50mph.
that covers any LCV thanks for that really good to know.
Click to expand...

We occasionally have to drive vans at work, a colleague was cautioned by HR (all the vehicles have trackers), but if you rent one you'll probably not know.
 
rick448 said:
Why would continue to signal once you have moved in to position to overtake. Using that premise, any vehicle on a motorway other than the last lane would need to be constantly signalling. You signal to show your intent to move, once you have done so it isn’t necessary surely.

There are lots of maybes in this scenario, the one thing that is clear is that the white car moved into the path of the other vehicle. We don’t actually know if they looked or not, but if they did, it wasn’t a proper look.
Click to expand...

Motorways are an entirely different scenario. Drivers signal to change lanes and can cancel the signal when the lane change is complete. On a single carriageway road drivers signal to indicate an intention to move out and pass.
Looks like the white car had got too close to the van which could result in the driver only being able to very briefly glance in his mirrors because he would be absorbed with the vehicle ahead. If the grey car was catching up at high speed then visual warning time all round would be perilously low.
This type of incident is not at all unusal. It would be very interesting to read the traffic police report.
 
Its a rubbish accident and the guy in the grey car was probably legal but I would have not done that overtake in a car.
I would have at least pulled in behind the whit car first before moving on.
but hey ho

I actually don't think the white car was SO close to the van as people would make out.
 
Last edited:
The white care was badly positioned to overtake.
The white car clearly did not look or see the grey car.
The white car pulled out without signalling

The grey car had just overtaken the camera car and was well positioned
He had good sight lines to overtake,
The grey car was 3/4 way alongside the white car when struck.

We have no information at what speed any of the cars were being driven.

At the relative speeds shown, the Grey car could have completed the passing manoeuvre safely.

The white car was clearly to blame for the collision.
 
arclight said:
Motorways are an entirely different scenario. Drivers signal to change lanes and can cancel the signal when the lane change is complete. On a single carriageway road drivers signal to indicate an intention to move out and pass.
Looks like the white car had got too close to the van which could result in the driver only being able to very briefly glance in his mirrors because he would be absorbed with the vehicle ahead. If the grey car was catching up at high speed then visual warning time all round would be perilously low.
This type of incident is not at all unusal. It would be very interesting to read the traffic police report.
Click to expand...

I thought your indicators are used to signal intent ' before changing course or direction' or when you wish to 'move out to the right or turn right'.

Once you've moved out to overtake you're no longer wishing to move further right, nor changing course or direction, so there's no requirement to keep it on.

Only signal left again once you wish you 'move to the left' again.
 
Mr Bump said:
Its a rubbish accident and the guy in the grey car was probably legal but I would have not done that overtake in a car.
I would have at least pulled in behind the whit car first before moving on.
but hey ho

I actually don't think the white car was SO close to the van as people would make out.
Click to expand...

You raise a fair point, but in my opinion, by moving back in behind the white car and van you lose situational awareness as your oncoming view is then hindered by two cars. Plus if you then went to move out again, it raises the prospect of whether or not the white car will then try and pull out in front of you.

Best practice is to stay out, indicator on and as long as the oncoming lane is clear overtake as many as you want. Always cover the brake in case the white car pulls out on you (won’t always save the day, but it may give you that split second difference). The only downside is that you have to be very aware of any side roads joining on the offside!
 
gremlin16 said:
You raise a fair point, but in my opinion, by moving back in behind the white car and van you lose situational awareness as your oncoming view is then hindered by two cars. Plus if you then went to move out again, it raises the prospect of whether or not the white car will then try and pull out in front of you.

Best practice is to stay out, indicator on and as long as the oncoming lane is clear overtake as many as you want. Always cover the brake in case the white car pulls out on you (won’t always save the day, but it may give you that split second difference). The only downside is that you have to be very aware of any side roads joining on the offside!
Click to expand...


Cant really cover the brake when you are accelerating past. none of those involved Hit their brakes at any time, during or after, It could only have made matters worse control wise.
Though once hit, I am sure none of them had any Idea what was going on. I pity the poor van driver, who even if he had seen it developing, there was nothing he could do about it.
 
Last edited:
That accident was just one of those "go for it " jobbies that went tits up
 
rick448 said:
Exactly this, if that had been a motorcycle overtaking it could well have been a fatality. The drover of the white car would be charged with driving without due care and attention at least. Looking at the road involved, there is a long straight and no oncoming vehicles, I fail to see how anyone could think that was the grey car drivers fault. And I also don't understand the comment about being impatient, it was clearly safe to overtake, and why should you sit behind the other vehicles if it is safe and legal to overtake. Unfortunately you can't see the vehicle speeds, but from the vehicle with the camera on board it looked pretty slow. No doubt those who like to dawdle about at 40 mph on a NSL road will be outraged that someone wants to overtake another vehicle... how irresponsible of them!
Click to expand...
Slow? My guess is 70-80kmh with the overtaking car at 90-100kmh. The inertia and the flipping 1,5 times suggest quite some speed. The thing that freaks me out is there is no telltales the white car will make that manouvre. Im pretty good at reading drivers in traffic and here i see no signs that overtaking will be made. When the lanechanging starts he would be out of my field of view
 
soeren said:
Slow? My guess is 70-80kmh with the overtaking car at 90-100kmh. The inertia and the flipping 1,5 times suggest quite some speed. The thing that freaks me out is there is no telltales the white car will make that manouvre. Im pretty good at reading drivers in traffic and here i see no signs that overtaking will be made. When the lanechanging starts he would be out of my field of view
Click to expand...

Part of me is wondering if the white car was even going for an overtake or if they were just drifting into the wrong lane, that's a horrendously poor attempt at an overtake if deliberate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top