We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
retractable bollards on carpark entrance
Options
Comments
-
skiddlydiddly wrote: »Those sensors aren't foolproof though sassy, nothing is.Look at the links to other clips on youtube and you'll see one where a reporter is lifted off the ground after a council officer is trying to show him its not possible.
They're a bloody stupid idea especially when one vehicle is following another eg the white van that follows a postvan on one clip.He is higher up than a car so harder to see the bollard coming up(very quickly) as its hidden by the bonnet.His passenger isn't wearing a seatbelt and breaks the windscreen with his head(blah blah should have had a seatbelt on yes but there are exceptions in the law) after they hit the bollard.Another shows an AA van towing a car, it lets the van through then quickly raises underneath the towed car lifting it 3 feet off the ground.
There has tp be more sensible ways of stopping people going through areas you don't want them too without risking injury, you cannot always rely on people to notice everything unfortunately.
I completely agree but most bollards that are auto will have a 'Fail safe' just for this problem, for the sensor to go down and the fail safe to fail too, you would have to be very very unlucky.
I am not making judgment, but from the OP's posting it sounds to me he/she is looking to blame someone who there fault damage, which is not acceptable, even if these bollards are a stupid 'ideal'.
My advice is to take it as bad experience and see what the damage repairs will cost, taking on this company could cost you a lot and you'll most likely fail, even if not at fault as they company will use the defence your driving manner was at fault.0 -
Tough. Easily solved though by making such things an instant lifetime ban to include not only licenced but unlicenced transport such as bicycles. That would result in aforementioned taxi driver never being able to put anyone at risk ever again.
Someone has to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS. You cannot legislate, put up signage or systems to cover every eventuality without making it completely unworkable.
Mind you, we can always go back to a maximum speed of 5 MPH and having to have a man with a red flag running in front of the vehicle. Would that keep you happy? You may have a problem doing the weekly shopping though.
And that would help those in the back of the cab/parents car how?And the AA van towing someone elses pride and joy?There's links to loads of these incidents on youtube.Its not black and white.
My main point is that they could achieve the same thing without making the bollards so strong, they could easily be made of some flexible plastic that would buckle under the weight of a car but still be obviously there to prevent you entering.It's a backwards step when the rest of the automotive world is trying to make things safer.
With your logic of they did it, they deserve it why not just replace airbags for a spike?That would also solve the problem of those not wearing seatbelts in one fell swoop.
I agree we are becoming a nation of ambulance chasers and buck passers but think this is an overly expensive, unsafe way of preventing people breaking the law.The sites are obviously monitored so could just as easily send out tickets to anyone going through when they shouldn't.0 -
Why, is a big lump of metal not big enough to see? That one in the link above took one hell of a whack so it was yet another typical taxi driver trying to beat it rising and thus trying to save himself waiting.
Yeah, that whack looks far too heavy for the "15-20mph" the taxi driver quotes- even York Council doubt that in the report.0 -
skiddlydiddly wrote: »
My main point is that they could achieve the same thing without making the bollards so strong, they could easily be made of some flexible plastic that would buckle under the weight of a car but still be obviously there to prevent you entering.It's a backwards step when the rest of the automotive world is trying to make things safer.
People would just drive over them as they know there little consequence. The AA driver should have had half a brain to realise that was going to happen, I wouldn't have towed a car over it its common sense.0 -
skiddlydiddly wrote: »And that would help those in the back of the cab/parents car how?And the AA van towing someone elses pride and joy?There's links to loads of these incidents on youtube.Its not black and white.My main point is that they could achieve the same thing without making the bollards so strong, they could easily be made of some flexible plastic that would buckle under the weight of a car but still be obviously there to prevent you entering.It's a backwards step when the rest of the automotive world is trying to make things safer.
Don't you mean "pampering to the wimps which natural selection would have otherwise culled"?
But then such a device could be easily broken on purpose by nothing more than a bloke with a bit of rope - back to my point of making it completely useless.With your logic of they did it, they deserve it why not just replace airbags for a spike?That would also solve the problem of those not wearing seatbelts in one fell swoop.
Excellent idea. A spike pointed at your chest would certainly alter your driving. Many people have advocated such an idea.
I agree we are becoming a nation of ambulance chasers and buck passers but think this is an overly expensive, unsafe way of preventing people breaking the law.The sites are obviously monitored so could just as easily send out tickets to anyone going through when they shouldn't.
I note you're doing plenty of buck passing yourself....
We're becoming a nation of soft namby pamby wusses due to people like you who think that everything must be made 100% risk free no matter what which, if you actually want to get anything done, is impossible.0 -
So tell me what you can do to stop someone deliberately trying to risk it?
This doesn't appear to work either apparently, so you tell me.
Don't you mean "pampering to the wimps which natural selection would have otherwise culled"?
Natural selection has given us the ability to evolve and overcome obstacles whilst minimising risk.
But then such a device could be easily broken on purpose by nothing more than a bloke with a bit of rope - back to my point of making it completely useless.
Which is mindless vandalism and would also be recorded on the cctv.You could achieve a similar effect on the metal bollards using a larger vehicle and strong chain, what's your point?
Excellent idea. A spike pointed at your chest would certainly alter your driving. Many people have advocated such an idea.
Many have advocated many stupid things.
I note you're doing plenty of buck passing yourself....
Where?I haven't hit anything and tried to blame someone else.
We're becoming a nation of soft namby pamby wusses due to people like you who think that everything must be made 100% risk free no matter what which, if you actually want to get anything done, is impossible.
True to a point.Where do I say everything has to be 100% risk free?There's risk attached to everyhting you do, especially driving.
You obviously feel quite strongly about it, to the point where you appear to actually want people daft enough to hit, to do so nevermind the consequences for any passengers etc.0 -
I can't see the Youtube links posted as I'm at work, but I can imagine what they show.
I think these bollards are fantastic - they provide people with real consequences to their actions, something we rarely have these days. Don't pay £1,000 a year car insurance, that's ok we'll fine you £50 and tell you not to do it again ? ? These bollards say ignore the no entry sign and we'll destroy your car and give you some neck ache.
We have such bollards in Manchester - there are huge signs leading up to the bollards warning you of them, as you approach there is a loud verbal warning given plus a huge illuminated no entry sign. For 3 years people tried to tailgate busses into the pedestrianised shopping area and suffered the dramatic consequences. Serves them right as far as I'm concerned, only a blind person could not see the signs, they just chose to ignore it. I actually believe everyone who crashed into the bollards should be prosecuted for dangerous driving.
As to those on here saying it's dangerous to the car and van drivers - have a think about why they were introduced. Certainly in Manchester, it was because for the previous 3 years they'd made a road in the city centre pedestrianised during shop opening hours. Lots of no entry signs clearly stating this as you entered the area. As you'd expect all the selfish lazy sods all ignored the signs putting completely innocent pedestrians at risk of being hit by an unexpected car in what was meant to be a pedestrianised zone. As far as I'm concerned it's better to put the health of 1 or 2 moronic drivers at risk than 1,000's of innocent shoppers.
Since all the publicity surrounding the bollards in Manchester it's amazing how the number of incidents has reduced - we used to get 1 a week, I can't think of the last time it happened. I'd say that means such bollards to work as a deterant. It's also amazing how when they occasionally break and retract for a couple of days, it immediately reverts back to the bad old days of cars using it as a shortcut.0 -
skiddlydiddly wrote: »True to a point.Where do I say everything has to be 100% risk free?There's risk attached to everyhting you do, especially driving.
You obviously feel quite strongly about it, to the point where you appear to actually want people daft enough to hit, to do so nevermind the consequences for any passengers etc.
Correct. In a world where responsibility is buck passed, as JQ said it provides people with a real consequence to their actions.
If the passengers are hurt then maybe the injury claims and refusal of said people to get into the car with the moron again might hammer home the severity of their incompetence.0 -
Just a quick update...thanks to all who had given constructive advice...the shopping centre have not operated the bollards since and I received a payment via my solicitor for the market value of my car, cover of legal costs and hire car... definitely relieved to have the whole incident brought to a swift and positive conclusion. For those who have been, or will be unfortunate to ever be in similar circumstances, please don't doubt yourself, and seek professional advice. Please read Rising Bollards TAL 4/97 for information on the recommendations as to how rising bollards are to be controlled/ operated/ signed, and I hope this helps someone else in this situation...0
-
Thanks for the update, always good to see a problem reach a conclusion.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards