• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Would you overtake here?

Some have said that the second car was following too closely, it is more likely that the gap had closed as the front car was slowing to pull into the laybay. A scenario that no doubt we have all been party too, following at a safe distance, the car in front indicates a turn, you lift off and try to avoid loss of momentum figuring that by the time you reach the preceding vehicle your path is clear and you can accellerate again. No brake lights shown, so Mr impatient behind thinks I'll pass him, not realising what's going on ahead. Too often people only look at the car in front not the several cars that may be ahead. Driver awareness again!
 
Hmmmm, looks like this guy was travelling at speed closing down these two cars and did a hasty overtake.

Either that or he has really slow reactions...an old dear pulling into a layby would have taken a number of seconds. By the description she would have almost fully completed the manoeuvre. Guilty as charged.

Experience tells you to wait if you are not sure.
 
Some have said that the second car was following too closely, it is more likely that the gap had closed as the front car was slowing to pull into the laybay. A scenario that no doubt we have all been party too, following at a safe distance, the car in front indicates a turn, you lift off and try to avoid loss of momentum figuring that by the time you reach the preceding vehicle your path is clear and you can accellerate again. No brake lights shown, so Mr impatient behind thinks I'll pass him, not realising what's going on ahead. Too often people only look at the car in front not the several cars that may be ahead. Driver awareness again!

All the following car has to do is move slightly to the left and with the lead car moving slightly to the right the driver planning the overtake can see exactly what is happening ahead.
This seems only to happen when I do it. Watch and learn. Why isn't this stuff taught?
 
Hey, speak for yourself......I'm a spring chicken :)
 
Mirror signal manoeuver ! how often do you see that ? I've spent half my life on the roads. Its usually brake lights, slow down, almost come to a stop, then signal. Give a blast on the horn, shout what was that all about and they look at you like you're a nutter ( which I am ).
I would have gone for the overtake if I was late for work and had been following the 2 cars at 40mph for miles, he got past the first one so she should have seen him. He's been found guilty because the lady lost her family ( a terrible tragedy that she will never get over ) and he's been given 4 years because of his previous. The whole thing is a terrible event that only those involved know what is the truth, and they will have to live with it.
 
Last edited:
A bit more reliance on mirrors and less leaving it to God and she might still have a family. Not that she'd believe me.
(The convicted driver was still wrong - but the accident was still preventable. Bikers call it 'life saver' for good reason).
 
I was going to make the same point that artyman did in post #41. The idea that both the other cars were doing 40mph at the time of the overtaking manoeuvre must be nonsense. Nobody would attempt to pull over into a layby that small at 40mph - the lead car must have slowed to a virtual standstill before pulling over. If the convicted driver wasn't aware of this while performing his overtake then he can't have been paying proper attention. Thus, his driving was careless, so the verdict seems fair enough to me.

And for the record, I would not have attempted to overtake on that stretch of road, for pretty much the same reasons given by mercy1 in post #32.
 
I was going to make the same point that artyman did in post #41. The idea that both the other cars were doing 40mph at the time of the overtaking manoeuvre must be nonsense. Nobody would attempt to pull over into a layby that small at 40mph - the lead car must have slowed to a virtual standstill before pulling over. If the convicted driver wasn't aware of this while performing his overtake then he can't have been paying proper attention. Thus, his driving was careless, so the verdict seems fair enough to me.

And for the record, I would not have attempted to overtake on that stretch of road, for pretty much the same reasons given by mercy1 in post #32.

I agree, he certainly wasn't following at the same speed, then ran into the back of one (he wasn't driving a top fuel dragster). He must have almost unexpectedly come across the two cars with the lead car already completing the right turn.
 
the driver is a moron and has plenty of history for it

would i have overtaken - no

would i have tried to park like she was - no
 
I drove that road in the opposite direction a few days before that accident. What the picture does not show you is the gradient-it's STEEP. Once mateyboy got up a head of steam coming down the hill he would have struggled to slow due to the gradient helping his car down the hill. Once over the dam you are very soon in a built up area and executing the manoeuvre would not have saved him much time at all.

The roads to the west of there (not many off them) are real driving country and I can imagine he got frustrated at not being able to tear along at his usual rate. As a local he new that area was his last chance to overtake and he made a fatal mistake.

It's pretty clear that his previous actions counted against him though if any of us killed 4 people I suspect we would be looking at a stretch
 
The other classic situation is when there is a side road on the right, people enter the main road turning left onto the main road but only looking right. Head-on territory. Both situations give me kittens when overtaking and I am ready to react in an instant if either presents itself. But apart from this incident perhaps the worst is when others pull out to overtake when you are already overtaking.

Education and experience is the key here..........

By the way, I have a habit of signalling first, then looking, then manoeuvring. Is this wrong?
 
By the way, I have a habit of signalling first, then looking, then manoeuvring. Is this wrong?

It's not considered good practice. For instance, if you signal to change lanes without realising that there's a car coming up to overtake you in the lane you intend to join, there's a good chance you'll spook the other driver into taking evasive action.

You should always be aware of what's going on around you before deciding whether to make a manoeuvre, and should only indicate that move to others once you're sure it's safe to carry it out.
 
Looking at a still photograph with zero perspective gives no indication of circumstance so makes the question a nonsense.

As I understand it the lady was indicating right and had started to turn right when this chap came down the hill at speed overtook the first car and tried to pull left to miss the now right turning car. He misjudged that left turn and the speed of the right turning car and hit it pushing it into the lake.

He admitted it was his his fault as did the other driver who witnessed it (not the lady).

I mitigation he stated he was late for work and frustrated at being held up by slower traffic. I do not believe that he was referring to the two cars involved as being the ones that "held him up" he came across these as he came down the hill and admitted that he should not have attempted the overtake.

We could all say what we might or might not have done. Bottom line is that a family have been killed that need not have been. To suggest that it may in some way have been their fault in the face of he accused drivers admission of guilt beggars belief.
 
With regard to double-overtaking, I saw a particularly bad example of this a couple of months ago while I was a pedestrian. It was a drizzly morning, and the road had one lane each direction (each lane being just about wide enough to accommodate two cars side by side, but not two lines of traffic). The two lanes were separated by a strip of cross-hatching of barely one car's width.

As I was walking, I heard a police car coming my way at speed with lights and sirens. The only car in front of it within sight was a small hatchback tootling along at about 30mph (the speed limit for the road), and a little further ahead of the hatchback there was a car parked at the roadside. A few hundred yards further on there was traffic light junction.

With the police car fast bearing down on the hatchback as it passed me, I instictively looked round to check whether the hatchback had slowed or pulled over to let the police car pass. Far from it - it had actually pulled out and was passing the parked car, leaving the police car with little option but to overtake both by using the cross-hatching and part of the oncoming lane. Luckily there was nothing coming the other way at the time, and despite the 'greasy' road surface the police driver managed to complete the manoeuvre safely and pull back into the correct lane before reaching the junction.

If they hadn't been on a call, I'd imagine the police would have had words with the hatchback driver. I still wonder whether he/she was simply oblivious to the fact that there was a police car bearing down on them, or whether they just had no intention of making life easier for the police driver.
 
Last edited:
I still wonder whether he/she was simply oblivious to the fact that there was a police car bearing down on them, or whether they just had no intention of making life easier for the police driver.

I would place a substantial amount of money on the former. It seems an increasing number of road users are sat there in la-la land, blissfully unaware of what is going on around them.
 
With the radio turned on at volume (even with a standard car radio), the driver might not have heard the siren until the police car was very close, and not everyone check their rearview mirror as often as they should.

On another note, the existence of hard shoulder and central reservation area are literally life savers, as they make the road a 'forgiving' one, leaving more room to absorb driver error without fatalities.
 
If they hadn't been on a call, I'd imagine the police would have had words with the hatchback driver. I still wonder whether he/she was simply oblivious to the fact that there was a police car bearing down on them, or whether they just had no intention of making life easier for the police driver.

If they hadn't been on a call, I'd have had a word with the police driver...but if they hadn't been on a call this would not have happened. Even though they were on a call...all blame for an accident would have rested with the police driver...on blues and twos they have a duty to use utmost care...even running red lights they do not have right of way...so must be extremely careful.
 
If they hadn't been on a call, I'd have had a word with the police driver...but if they hadn't been on a call this would not have happened. Even though they were on a call...all blame for an accident would have rested with the police driver...on blues and twos they have a duty to use utmost care...even running red lights they do not have right of way...so must be extremely careful.

You're right, of course, and when I said "luckily" there was nothing coming the other way, I'm certain that if there had been the police driver would not have made the overtaking manoeuvre - so more judgement than luck.

However, it must be extremely frustrating for police drivers when other road users do not give way to them, for no apparent reason other than inattention or indifference.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom