using hazard lights when approaching an accident

hartcjhart

. A licence is a privelege not a right, and high standard should be displayed to obtain one

yep you are right,but answer this,HOW the hell did you get one


every one is not 'siding' with the others but just pointing out your serious lack of perception/judgement when approaching a hazard on the roads,

also just because you can drive at high speeds and not have a crash at one moment in time does not make you a good driver,which you clearly have shown you are not

DaveMacD

QUOTE hothothot

Lady luck must be on my side, nearly 10 years licence and not a blemish on it whatsoever. Or could it be I have natural driving ability and able to more accurately assess what a hazard is before panic reacting and causing danger to other road users? How long you have a licence counts for not a lot. I remember an old fella who had been driving all his days, and I've never seen someone so bad. My uncle was in the IAM, and hardly ever had a passenger because he scared the !!!!!! out of them. Have you seen a few accidents in your mirrors???

Unless you have been there, its not best to comment and I think should be giving me the benefit of the doubt, you seem to be siding with the ones who nearly caused another accident, as so often happens. Why should you be getting the benefit of the doubt? Just because you ask the question doesn't make you right. It seems that others are giving the BOTD to the other drivers who erred on the side of caution rather than making an ASSUMPTION about what was going on. You should know that if you run into the back of someone it is YOUR fault. You nearly caused the accident by following too closely/too fast, and not paying attention.

I havent clocked that many motorway milesas you, but have driven in Germany on the at speeds of 120mph that are far more reasonable than paltry 70 which is another indication how behind the times Britain is in terms of knowing how to design and manage its infrastructure. Just because you can drive fast doesn't mean you are safe. Speed limits are sometimes unrealistic, and road design is pitiful, but we are stuck with it for now.

I really think drivers like those who either unreasonably hold up other traffic should have more harsher penalties. If driving skill is the problem, more stricter examination needs to be put into place before cutting people loose with potentialy lethal weapon. Agreed, but that cuts both ways. Just because someone can afford a Ferrari doesn't make them a Schumacher. Passing your test ONLY allows you to become an advanced learner. You are always learning, there is always something new to see. You can either learn from the experience (because if you are taken by surprise, you must have done something wrong somewhere) or blame everyone else for what happens.

There shouldn't be an excuse of 'drivers of varying skill'. A licence is a privelege not a right, and high standard should be displayed to obtain one. By everyone!!! Had I not had to spend the time swerving to avoid a collission, idve noted down their VRMs and reported them.
For what? Taking care at the scene of an accident? I can see that one going far.

Kirri

hartcjhart wrote: »

and here due to bad conditions

Why when you say it was bad weather and bad road conditions were you driving at 70mph

I was wondering about that too, 70mph in poor visibility and poor conditions and too close to the car in front by the sounds of it!

Use of hazards to warn of obstruction/slowing vehicles ahead etc is quite common on motorways - not the panic stop the other vehicle did though! But anyway, I'd be slowing seeing blue lights as you cannot normally see that far ahead to see if the road is definitely clear from debris.

Kirri

raebhoop wrote: »

That would be around a third of male drivers....and ALL of female.

Oi oi, not ALL female drivers!!!

hothothot_3

Thanks for all the constructive replies. To reiterate. I said "some snowfall"....it had been serious weather some hours previously, but the road itself had been very well cleared of snow. Even if I had only been doing 40 or 50, the sudden unexpected braking I still would have had to react to. You cant just do 70mph, slam the brakes and let the people behind crash into you, and then claim they are at fault for being behind? Their offence is dangerous driving. As technically, there was no accident to slow down for (it was on other side of carriageway). Improper use of hazards......which is what this thread is all about. Fair enough, driver 1 probably had good intentions, but it was his poor judgement that risked creating another accident.

DaveMacD

Kirri wrote: »

Use of hazards to warn of obstruction/slowing vehicles ahead etc is quite common on motorways

Yup, HC rule 116 ...you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead. Also, a lot of new cars now automatically put the hazards on when you brake hard.

DaveMacD

hothothot wrote: »

You cant just do 70mph, slam the brakes and let the people behind crash into you, and then claim they are at fault for being behind? Their offence is dangerous driving. As technically, there was no accident to slow down for (it was on other side of carriageway). Improper use of hazards......which is what this thread is all about. Fair enough, driver 1 probably had good intentions, but it was his poor judgement that risked creating another accident.

HC rule 126. Stopping distances.

Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. Leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows down or stops. The safe rule is never to get closer than the overall stopping distance (which at 70 in good conditions is 315 feet, in the wet, nearer 650, and in ice maybe as much as 3000 feet.)

hothothot_3

116 (from highway code)


"Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for dangerous or illegal parking. You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead. Only use them for long enough to ensure that your warning has been observed."

.........yet there was no accident ahead and, therefore, no need to use hazards whilst driving. Sounds more I read into it. the more I realise I was in the right here.

DaveMacD

hothothot wrote: »

116 (from highway code)


"Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for dangerous or illegal parking. You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead. Only use them for long enough to ensure that your warning has been observed."

.........yet there was no accident ahead and, therefore, no need to use hazards whilst driving. Sounds more I read into it. the more I realise I was in the right here.

There was no accident, but there was a hazard. Bright flashing lights, movement on the other carriageway, the possibility of debris on your side of the road. Should they have slammed the anchors on and stopped? We'll never know, because for all you saw as you blasted past, they may have been negotiating bits of gravel or glass or plastic under their tyres. They obviously thought THEY NEEDED to warn YOU (blasting up the road at 70) to slow down in case of debris

hartcjhart

Had I not had to spend the time swerving to avoid a collission, idve noted down their VRMs and reported them.

Perhaps you can give us your VRM so that
1) if we see you on the road we can avoid you like the plague

2)report you for 'driving without due care and attention',see your quote above