The Dash Camera Thread (Videos)

[dave]

No it doesnt i know a fellow class mate who did just that and failed his test for stopping for an amber light .......

he may fail for doing it as that will be judged at the time we dont know how far over the line you mate was he could have been blocking the traffic whos light was green. but if asked in the questions you have to say AMBER means ‘Stop’. if you say it means get ready to stop you will fail

 

[EvoStevo]

There was ample space between the silver car & the police van.
This is a case of excessive speed and not paying attention.
When approaching traffic lights you should "always" be prepared to stop.

The silver car was closer to the red car than the van was to the silver car and yet still managed to stop.
The police van was just not paying attention - simples.

 

[Andy Monty]

he may fail for doing it as that will be judged at the time we dont know how far over the line you mate was he could have been blocking the traffic whos light was green. but if asked in the questions you have to say AMBER means ‘Stop’. if you say it means get ready to stop you will fail

he didnt cross the line but braked so hard it could have lead to an accident from following cars running into the back of him = major fault .....

strange how these driving test manuals / online guides suggest other wise re amber lights unless your only reading the first bit of what is written :

http://www.theory-test.co.uk/asp/highway_code/signs01.asp

http://www.driving-test-success.com/traffic_lights/traffic_lights.html

https://www.learnerdriving.com/ld-system/driving-lessons/crossings.htm

they must all be wrong....

 

[doggybob]

as far as i'm concerned if a driver goes into the rear of another vehicle -for whatever reason- then it's the driver that has gone into the back of someone that's at fault for excess speed and not leaving enough room to stop safely , the driver of the van was obviously too close to stop at the speed he/she was doing

 

[PuntoHowTo]

as far as i'm concerned if a driver goes into the rear of another vehicle -for whatever reason- then it's the driver that has gone into the back of someone that's at fault for excess speed and not leaving enough room to stop safely , the driver of the van was obviously too close to stop at the speed he/she was doing

seconded, irrelevant of the colour of the lights the cars behind should be prepared to stop if needs be by not traveling too fast and not being too close. so the police van was totally at fault, especially as two other cars had effectively stopped by the time he hit them. (id say he wasn't paying proper attention)

if you listen to the audio after that accident it sounds like the silver car had a very young baby on board which was left crying its head off, and in what was seemingly a bit of a bump for the adults involved could have been very nasty for a baby

 

[Ziggy122]

Sometimes though - reaction times aren't as quick as they should be
its clear the van wasn't paying full attention before he realised and anchored on

Ziggy

 

[dave]

he didnt cross the line but braked so hard it could have lead to an accident from following cars running into the back of him = major fault .....

strange how these driving test manuals / online guides suggest other wise re amber lights unless your only reading the first bit of what is written :

http://www.theory-test.co.uk/asp/highway_code/signs01.asp

http://www.driving-test-success.com/traffic_lights/traffic_lights.html

https://www.learnerdriving.com/ld-system/driving-lessons/crossings.htm

they must all be wrong....

they may be right buy you are interpreting wrong, it don't mean don't stop if you have a car behind you its their responsibility to leave a big gap so not to crash. they have put these ' at either end of the word 'stop' to make it clear for you what the most important bit is
if you say this on your test

Interesting. I thought you should only prepare to stop on amber

you wont pass the question.

 

[dombooth]

they may be right buy you are interpreting wrong, it don't mean don't stop if you have a car behind you its their responsibility to leave a big gap so not to crash. they have put these ' at either end of the word 'stop' to make it clear for you what the most important bit is
if you say this on your test
you wont pass the question.

If you have someone too close to you that by you stopping quickly would result in an accident, then you should not stop on an amber. Doing anything else would fail a driving test.

Being right doesn't matter, being safe and avoiding a potential accident does.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

i bet uk insurers would see it as the cars behind at fault.

Not at all as its clear the middle vehicle was rammed into the front. So it would be the 3rd vehicles fault in full. Without video footage it could be contested though without witnesses. Hence why dash cams are so important imo.

 

[dave]

If you have someone too close to you that by you stopping quickly would result in an accident, then you should not stop on an amber. Doing anything else would fail a driving test.

Being right doesn't matter, being safe and avoiding a potential accident does.

doing and saying are 2 different things, read what i was replying to

the front guy in the video didn't cause the crash he did not cause the car behind to hit him.

 

[dave]

Not at all as its clear the middle vehicle was rammed into the front. So it would be the 3rd vehicles fault in full. Without video footage it could be contested though without witnesses. Hence why dash cams are so important imo.

when this happened to a friend of mine and he was the middle car, the insurance said the 3rd car was at fault for his rear damage but he should have left a bigger gap between him and the front car so he was responsible for that damage.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

when this happened to a friend of mine and he was the middle car, the insurance said the 3rd car was at fault for his rear damage but he should have left a bigger gap between him and the front car so he was responsible for that damage.

Nope. Should have fought it.

That's like someone hitting the back of a parked car and only having to pay for the end of the car they hit and not then the other end which was pushed into the next parked car.

 

[Liquid Knight]

Theory test question or verbal question during testing. Amber means prepare to stop if you are at a distance or stop if it's safe to do so and you are closer.

That's why the amber light is staggered to give drivers time to check their mirrors and around to ensure it is safe to stop.

 

[dombooth]

doing and saying are 2 different things, read what i was replying to

The driving test isn't fit for purpose any more, driving isn't black and white. Would I go through an amber? "It depends" If a car is too close then yes I might do, if no-one behind me then I might brake hard.

 

[Liquid Knight]

The letter of the law may suggest stopping but the application of common sense could have avoided the resulting collision.

We should do a Poll Thread on this topic. If you were driving the red car and were being tailgated would you go through the amber and avoid a collision or stop and get hit.

Rather than go further off topic and spark a "Common Law vs Common Sense" debate.

 

[Paddynabs]

when this happened to a friend of mine and he was the middle car, the insurance said the 3rd car was at fault for his rear damage but he should have left a bigger gap between him and the front car so he was responsible for that damage.

Same thing happened to us. Car in front was turning right into his driveway. We pulled up behind and stopped. About 10 seconds later a guy rear ended us and we went into the car in front. Insurance said we had to pay for the guy in fronts car. Worse part was the guy behind wasn't insured so we got screwed over twice!

 

[dave]

The letter of the law may suggest stopping but the application of common sense could have avoided the resulting collision.

We should do a Poll Thread on this topic. If you were driving the red car and were being tailgated would you go through the amber and avoid a collision or stop and get hit.

Rather than go further off topic and spark a "Common Law vs Common Sense" debate.

red car wasn't being tail gated the silver car only closed the gap after the red car had stopped and it pulled up behind same as most would at a set of lights.

 

[Geddes]

The yellow line shows approximately where my Panda went after being rammed up the chuff. Google Earth tells me it is about 150 feet. Not really practical to leave 150' gap to the car in front...

 

[h0sep1pe]

Not at all as its clear the middle vehicle was rammed into the front. So it would be the 3rd vehicles fault in full. Without video footage it could be contested though without witnesses. Hence why dash cams are so important imo.

This is the exact reason I bought a dashcam.

The person in front slowed to a stop on a national speed limit, indicating to turn right. I slowed to a stop behind, and then was shunted by the car following me and I hit the car infront. This should've been a obvious case, however to make things complicated the fella that shunted me was then shunted himself, into me, into the car in front. Ouch, but all were under 20mph.

No cam to back up my claim of 2 shunts in total, the guy that hit me said that he hadn't, and all blame lay on the guy behind him. Needless to say, my insurers (Admiral, at the time) wiped their hands of it by passing it down to an utterly useless '3rd party' to talk direct to the both the other guys insurers, as I wasn't prepared to pay my excess and then attempt to claim it back, my first incident and was pretty sure that's not how it worked? They both denied any fault and nothing came about, insurers stating that they needed solid proof of which car was at fault (Even if I stopped blaming initial guy and also tried to pin it on the final car). Honestly couldn't believe that 2 PEOPLE could get away with hitting the back of someone?

 

[EvoStevo]

I was taught to always prepare to stop when approaching traffic lights - whether I'm at the front or several cars back.