He seems to tuck in a little bit.
Who is at fault in this dashcam video?
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2019
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 225
- Country
Both drivers are at fault for not ensuring there is enough clearance to get past , that road is plenty wide enough for two cars to pass each without colliding even with parked cars.
It's not worth going through insurance your excess will cost you m
It's not worth going through insurance your excess will cost you m
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2019
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 225
- Country
Ore than a wing mirror from a scrappy
One of them did do that; the other didn't.
Drive in the expectation that the other road users:
- haven't seen you
- couldn't give a toss about you
Safer that way.
In the dashcam footage example, you can seen that both of the drivers in question fit the above description nicely. IMHO.
This time it was a wing mirror each, but they're both something far more serious just waiting to happen.....
- haven't seen you
- couldn't give a toss about you
Safer that way.
In the dashcam footage example, you can seen that both of the drivers in question fit the above description nicely. IMHO.
This time it was a wing mirror each, but they're both something far more serious just waiting to happen.....
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2019
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 225
- Country
Which one ? Both drivers could of stopped if in doubt of the proximity of the other car but both ploughed on regardless
As you said -
Therefore one of them must have been too far to their right. Which one is it?
Please don't write 'could of'; it is 'could have'.
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2019
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 225
- Country
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2019
- Messages
- 1,423
- Reaction score
- 225
- Country
Both!
And I will write English as I see fit please don't correct me again it's incredible rude
Evolution of the language, dear chap. It will be correct soon enough, given how common its use is becoming
As will starting every sentence (particularly on R5L, when being interviewed) with "So,.."
Update -- the drivers have agreed to pay for repairing their respective damage outside of insurance. It'll be around £100 out of the pocket but far better than stating a claim at renewal for the next 5 years.
I personally maintain the view that the oncoming vehicle is to blame and the dash cam driver is not at fault, although both could have done more to avoid the accident.
With regards to the timestamp and vehicle reg, they are both wrong. The reg relates to the car the camera used to be used in and the date stamp keeps resetting for some reason.
I personally maintain the view that the oncoming vehicle is to blame and the dash cam driver is not at fault, although both could have done more to avoid the accident.
With regards to the timestamp and vehicle reg, they are both wrong. The reg relates to the car the camera used to be used in and the date stamp keeps resetting for some reason.
That's an extreme approach! The oncoming car does slow down while approaching their obstacle which we assume was indication that they are giving way. As I said earlier the dash cam car has already passed their obstacle before the oncoming car reaches theirs', so at the point of collision the oncoming car shouldn't have attempted the overtake. It's a close call though.
The parked cars although mildly irritating are doing nothing wrong.
Generally this road is fairly quiet being on the rural fringe -- the only known accident in the last 10 years was when a bus collided with a lamp post! That and the occasional twonk in a German production car.