Ouch .... and walk away!

[chuckles]

Anybody got a later version Mini ??? Feel safe and protected.

My wife walked away from this yesterday evening with just her ears ringing (Airbags deployed) and friction burns (from the seatbelt) on her neck.

 

[viv1969]

Ouch indeed!
Glad the Mrs is ultimately ok and everything deployed to protect her.

 

[Steep]

Major case of the shakes after that I bet!

 

[chuckles]

Ouch indeed!
Glad the Mrs is ultimately ok and everything deployed to protect her.

Yep - although she was amazed when she saw the pictures - she didn't realise the airbags had deployed

Major case of the shakes after that I bet!

Indeed - she's a keen photographer but I reckon no amount of Image Stabilisation would've sufficed

 

[Byker28i]

The side crash bars held up well. Whats the details, I mean a 5mph parking lot shut would be different to a pulling out a t junction.

Doesn't look to bad - it'll polish out, Impact from the front into the side at a glancing blow?

 

[chuckles]

it'll polish out

Ha ha! ... that's what I said

Basically, Marie was pulling out of a T-junction on a country road but that junction is on the inside of a bend and a bridge with scaffold pipe type railings.. We were travelling home in two cars, I, having joined her after work saw it all unfold in my mirror.... horrible. This young lad was going too fast and (as you said) caught her a glancing blow on the 'crown' of the road. It was wet, dark with some leaves around

You can imagine, after making sure she was ok, I challenged the young said idiot as to what he was doing. His reply said it all, "I'm allowed to do 60 along here!". I remonstrated to him that people are always speeding along here .... "I know, I live just over there". What can you say to that other than he should know better then?

Still, pulling out onto a major road (no matter how 'minor') is a "Fault" accident" in the eyes of the insurance companies. There are a lot of factors involved in this - the Police moving vehicles before measurements/photos were taken, nobody was breathalysed. Bear in mind she needed Medical Aid although only minor (she cut her hand on some glass sliding over to get on the passenger side).... the list is endless actually when it comes to Procedures and Protocols I can't think of many that were implemneted

I've just been along to the RTA location (it's no more than a 1/2 mile from home) - it's a poorly managed junction with street furniture - got some video clips - it's amazing there aren't more incidents.

 

[gramps]

Whatever the 'issues' thank heavens your good lady is ok

 

[Graham W]

Surprised everyone wasn't breathalysed! I was in a stationary line of traffic and a moped ran into the back of me, I was tested.

 

[gramps]

Surprised everyone wasn't breathalysed! I was in a stationary line of traffic and a moped ran into the back of me, I was tested.

My missus was driving along and a bus approached on the opposite side making it very narrow and she just touched a wing mirror on the near side, no damage, police car driver saw it and breathalysed her ... was 10:30am too!

 

[mark richards]

hope you'r wifes ok and its not put her off driving...get her back in the car soon...

 

[chuckles]

My missus was driving along and a bus approached on the opposite side making it very narrow and she just touched a wing mirror on the near side, no damage, police car driver saw it and breathalysed her ... was 10:30am too!

Unbelievable - once it dies down a little (and I'm a little calmer) it's a letter to the Chief Constable - to start with!

hope you'r wifes ok and its not put her off driving...get her back in the car soon...

Cheers Mark.... yeah I know - tricky cos we've only got a Landrover left which scared her a bit before all this. She's already stated she won't drive at night any more

 

[chuckles]

Surprised everyone wasn't breathalysed! I was in a stationary line of traffic and a moped ran into the back of me, I was tested.

Was your vehicle in reverse gear? The only thing I can think of.

She's a bit disappointed - she's always wanted try to a breathalyser

 

[Box Brownie]

Firstly, I am glad she is OK albeit shaken up a bit.

I hope the outcome is positive and in her favour because from your description and the damage she was turning right and had already fully entered the road such that she was across the crown. Plus at night she had her headlights on and bend or not the other driver should have seen the road area was illuminated thus hazard ahead........the number of drivers I see who completely fail to read the road is not good.

For him to say "he is allowed to do 60mph here........" and was doing so suggests to me he was hardly driving with the required 'care & attention' for the road conditions.

Two aspects, it will be interesting to know the result of this police investigation and unless things have changed, insurers try it on with a 50:50 blame settlement. Subject to how both elements pan out I would not allow yourself to be pushed around by the insurers.

All the best.

 

[chuckles]

Thanks BB....

I refuse to let them bully her because I know how good a driver she is. So far, the insurers are looking almost in a binary fashion..... onto main carriageway = 1, not onto carriageway = 0

I'll let you know the outcome as the Police are coming to interview her tomorrow - by which time all is forgotten and the stories will have changed. However, I've got some interesting photos which I've been taking which shows how any amount of speed makes this junction dangerous - just by how much I'd not realised until I took the shots.

Not certain he was doing 60 (not qualified) but 'helluva lick' is purely subjective - certainly too fast for the conditions that's for sure.

See if I can get a photo up from her perspective and you'll be able to see that speed is the major, contributory factor.

 

[chuckles]

This is roughly where he passed me going at a "helluva lick" (not qualified to offer a numerical estimate - flipping quick) and the junction is to the left, by the white post. This is actually the corner of the small bridge.

The next three shots are taken from roughly the eye-line of a Mini driver, looking to emerge on to the major road.... I waited long enough for a car with lights on to show the poor visibility caused by the bridge railings. The speedy youngster would not have allowed much opportunity to give anybody the likelihood of being seen until it was too late.... hence the accident.

 

[andyred]

Not a nice thing to happen and certainly glad she is okay, hope everything gets sorted out relatively painlessly and quickly...

having joined her after work saw it all unfold in my mirror.... horrible

Feel for you as well, as you must have felt hopeless and i can only imagine the thoughts / feelings that you went through seeing it...

 

[Byker28i]

Bad for youto see it, good for you to get there and she was ok. Cars can be replaced.

However, she pulled out, it'll be seen as her fault probably, only hope the police don't push it as there's a possibility of careless driving. A colleague did similar, turned across traffic, claimed the person coming the other way was speeding, got the full 9 points on his licence.

 

[chuckles]

Sadly, I have to agree but, the degree of mitigation (and even Police failing in several avenues of procedure and protocol) is putting a completely different complexion on things!

Take, for example, the wise words given to a recently new driver (actually, Marie's daughter)....

I was always told if my car was the one who impacted another car I would be at fault because I should be aware of my surroundings enough to be able to slow down in time for a sudden hazard

There is more to come from this

 

[Box Brownie]

The point of impact surely is an important factor that is why I surmised she had already fully exited the junction. Likewise do I surmise that the other in mainly damaged on the OSF quarter...........but how much of that is proportionally on the front vs the rhs wing.

Yes, a qualified traffic officer should have attended but location, spread and directionality of the damage on both vehicles are a good guide as to speed of the impacting vehicle.

Clearer cut would be for example if her damage was front quarter or rear quarter.

What time of day was it?

 

[chuckles]

Her damage is in the first photo... rear of door.

These two shots show the damage to his car and the junction after the vehicles had been moved. It looks minor but, you have to bear in mind he braked heavily, I'm guessing around 50-60 metres with the wheels locked.

Also, you can see the pool of liquids from his car. There are two patches. The one close to the centre of the road is where he came to rest after he'd bounced back from the point of impact, the second is where the car stayed after it was pushed back by 'well-wishers'. I reckon the speed he was travelling prior to sighting the junction was the major factor in not being seen by my wife. Impact damage was reduced by his braking. I have another (rubbish) photo on my phone which shows debris from Marie's car at the crown of the road.... the debris doesn't show here because the Police had swept it away by this time.

It occurred at 18:15

 

[OldCarlos]

Glad she is OK.

Did the driver have his headlights on?
Just seems strange your wife presumably didn't see him coming in the dark. (obviously IF he was gunning it, she wouldn't have had a great deal of time, given the view/road layout)

 

[chuckles]

Glad she is OK.

Did the driver have his headlights on?
Just seems strange your wife presumably didn't see him coming in the dark. (obviously IF he was gunning it, she wouldn't have had a great deal of time, given the view/road layout)

Yes, Carl he did. I was further down the road (about 200 metres) - he was going at quite a pace. He would've been obscured behind the line of trees, and then instantly upon the junction giving her no chance

 

[Box Brownie]

As you say the design of the culvert 'bridge' barrier would flicker obscure approaching lights but street view suggests he would have been well sighted....... so by inference his speed surely was a factor and based on your pictures and description she had almost cleared the zone when he struck her at approx 45degrees.

Though you say he locked up but there are no obvious skid marks???

 

[chuckles]

Though you say he locked up but there are no obvious skid marks???

Yep..... That was one of the things I went back to photograph this morning. But the road surface was wet/damp which would reduce the possibility of leaving any marks and also increase his stopping distance. She was only ever in a losing battle

 

[chuckles]

at night she had her headlights on and bend or not the other driver should have seen the road area was illuminated thus hazard ahead........the number of drivers I see who completely fail to read the road is not good.

This video clip shows just how bad this little bit of road is.... as you say, this is a hazard if she had lights on (she did). Incidentally, I've noticed from a series of photos there is not evena sign indicating a junction ahead. As I said, somewhere, a poorly managed junction.

How does a driver perceive whether a person is emerging on to the road or is already on it? (Ok, I've 'closed' the bend slightly - I didn't want to stand in the middle of the road for 15 seconds )

 

[JohnBradbury]

Very lucky. Glad to hear she's okay.

 

[chuckles]

Very lucky. Glad to hear she's okay.

Thanks - still waiting for Police

 

[Mr Bump]

Humm nasty but glad all is ok.
just looks like one of 1000's of nasty spots litered all over the countryside to be honest and your missus was unlucky.

could have been audi rep dude tonking allong that road rather than chav kid the results would be the same.

 

[Box Brownie]

just looks like one of 1000's of nasty spots litered all over the countryside.........

All too many where the road traffic engineers deem more paint & signage not required and others where you wonder why there is too many signs creating a confusing 'landscape' for the motorists.

Possibly in regard to this bit of road it should have been signed as 40mph until after that bend & junction to reduce the effect of racing out of town following a 30 limit where the next mile has a hazard?

 

[ZoneV]

A tricky little junction and it must have been quite an ordeal for both drivers. At least nobody was hurt.

 

[Leroy4bz]

Glad she's ok. Now that's a picture you don't ever want to recreate! I never realised what a tough little car they are.

 

[lostsoulal2]

Glad your wife is OK, I sympathise as we have to face a similar form of junction coming out of our village daily..................

The driver of the other car said "I'm allowed to do 60 along here!" as if the speed limit is a target!

- the Highway code general rules includes:

Rule 146
Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit
take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution where there are junctions, be prepared for road users emerging.

Country roads
Rule 154
Take extra care on country roads and reduce your speed at approaches to bends, which can be sharper than they appear, and at junctions and turnings, which may be partially hidden. Be prepared for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, slow-moving farm vehicles or mud on the road surface. Make sure you can stop within the distance you can see to be clear. You should also reduce your speed where country roads enter villages.

I have often thought that when you drive at night you should be driving at a speed which would allow you to come to a complete stop in a distance that is shorter than the the stretch of road illuminated by your headlights. But how far is that? I could estimate that on a dark unlit road travelling with dipped headlights on for most cars it would be in the region of 50 metres and taking the Highway Code general rules into account a "safe" speed for that type of road could be nearer to 40mph to achieve a total stopping distance of 50 metres, but given the road was wet, maybe a safe speed would be even lower? (plus the thought crossed my mind that given the absence of skid marks, the other cars braking system / tyres may not be 100% effective?).

In reality, though, very few drivers are this cautious, as evidenced last night when travelling down the Motorway in thick fog, I had reduced my speed to less than 50mph in places as my vision decreased, but some cars were flashing by at inordinate speeds totalling ignoring the conditions.

But "imho" exceeding the "safe" speed limit on a poorly lit, winding road at night then you're definitely at least partly culpable if you drive into someone/something. Maybe not according to the letter of the law or the insurance companies but still............................

 

[chuckles]

Humm nasty but glad all is ok.

Not nice - but relieved I'm not visiting a hospital today

All too many where the road traffic engineers deem more paint & signage not required and others where you wonder why there is too many signs creating a confusing 'landscape' for the motorists.

Possibly in regard to this bit of road it should have been signed as 40mph until after that bend & junction to reduce the effect of racing out of town following a 30 limit where the next mile has a hazard?

I've often thought that --- and a 7.5 tonne weight limit

A tricky little junction and it must have been quite an ordeal for both drivers. At least nobody was hurt.

Definitely not a straight-forward junction. I have a Landrover and never really bothered about the railings as I can see over them. She's a bit sore today though.... definitely bruising to her right-side; that's where the door pocket/arm-rest came into her.

Glad she's ok. Now that's a picture you don't ever want to recreate! I never realised what a tough little car they are

Yes, unbelievably tough....

 

[chuckles]

Glad your wife is OK, I sympathise as we have to face a similar form of junction coming out of our village daily..................

The driver of the other car said "I'm allowed to do 60 along here!" as if the speed limit is a target!

- the Highway code general rules includes:

Rule 146
Adapt your driving to the appropriate type and condition of road you are on. In particular do not treat speed limits as a target. It is often not appropriate or safe to drive at the maximum speed limit
take the road and traffic conditions into account. Be prepared for unexpected or difficult situations, for example, the road being blocked beyond a blind bend. Be prepared to adjust your speed as a precaution where there are junctions, be prepared for road users emerging.

Country roads
Rule 154
Take extra care on country roads and reduce your speed at approaches to bends, which can be sharper than they appear, and at junctions and turnings, which may be partially hidden. Be prepared for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, slow-moving farm vehicles or mud on the road surface. Make sure you can stop within the distance you can see to be clear. You should also reduce your speed where country roads enter villages.

I have often thought that when you drive at night you should be driving at a speed which would allow you to come to a complete stop in a distance that is shorter than the the stretch of road illuminated by your headlights. But how far is that? I could estimate that on a dark unlit road travelling with dipped headlights on for most cars it would be in the region of 50 metres and taking the Highway Code general rules into account a "safe" speed for that type of road could be nearer to 40mph to achieve a total stopping distance of 50 metres, but given the road was wet, maybe a safe speed would be even lower? (plus the thought crossed my mind that given the absence of skid marks, the other cars braking system / tyres may not be 100% effective?).

In reality, though, very few drivers are this cautious, as evidenced last night when travelling down the Motorway in thick fog, I had reduced my speed to less than 50mph in places as my vision decreased, but some cars were flashing by at inordinate speeds totalling ignoring the conditions.

But "imho" exceeding the "safe" speed limit on a poorly lit, winding road at night then you're definitely at least partly culpable if you drive into someone/something. Maybe not according to the letter of the law or the insurance companies but still............................

Thanks.... so many good points in here. Just going to print them off and confront the Police if she's cautioned - as no doubt she will be

Not lost her sense of humour though - "If I have to attend Court I can get a new outfit"

 

[Deleted member 49549]

Thanks.... so many good points in here. Just going to print them off and confront the Police if she's cautioned - as no doubt she will be

Not lost her sense of humour though - "If I have to attend Court I can get a new outfit"

Glad your wife is OK, but playings devils advocate, what in the Highway code quote should mean your wife shouldn't be cautioned or the other driver found to be at some fault?

 

[chuckles]

cautioned - as no doubt she will be

I don't think this ever implies that she won't be cautioned - more the opposite - she will be!

 

[Yelkrub]

Glad your Wife is OK.

plus the thought crossed my mind that given the absence of skid marks, the other cars braking system / tyres may not be 100% effective?

A.B.S. fitted maybe??

 

[boliston]

Had a look on google streetview and the road does not look safe for 60mph, especially at night as it is very narrow with each lane only slightly wider than a car and numerous exits for properties and farms as well. Also if anything goes wrong you would likely end up in a deep water filled trench with your vehicle upside down!

 

[chuckles]

Had a look on google streetview and the road does not look safe for 60mph, especially at night as it is very narrow with each lane only slightly wider than a car and numerous exits for properties and farms as well. Also if anything goes wrong you would likely end up in a deep water filled trench with your vehicle upside down!

Yep... that about sums it up!

 

[Box Brownie]

Looks like that a car thst age and equipped level excludes ABS. Perhaps it is my age but do they still teach cadence braking and its benefit where ABS is not fitted, afteral many novice drivers will be in older cars once they pass their test.