Opinions, accident video.....

Stigy

mishkanorman wrote: »

all your points are irrelevant as you moved without checking it was clear to do so.

Taking the other driver out of the equation completely, if a child had been attempting to cross the road in-front of you from your right they may have believed you had seen them and were allowing them to cross when in fact you didnt even bother to look as you believe you have right of way and have no need to follow common sense.

If i was a suspicious type i would think you had set that accident up deliberately, bit odd to have a passenger filming whlist your driving isnt it ?

I assumed the camera was fixed to the vehicle in some way, just in case some idiot has a crash :A

Strider590

taker920 wrote: »

OP, I assume by having the camera and your hesitancy to move past the parked silver car (counted about 8-9 seconds with nothing coming the other way) that you are a new driver?

Case in point..... The video pauses for a few seconds while the annotations are displayed. I don't know why you can't realise this seeing as the timer displays in the top left corner. I could change the pause to 30 seconds if that helps.....

taker920

Didn't realise there was another timer. Maybe the unedited real time video would be more helpful as my first impression of watching that video is that the van at the end of the road was at or coming to a standstill and progress should have been made

skiddlydiddly

You do drive along the curb for a bit to allow cars coming towards you space due to the parked cars on the other side of the road but someone might think you were parking up.It looks like you then come off the pavement on a dropped curb and are back on the road behind the car in front.They don't move so you assume they are parked(as the blue car does to you) and go to pass them without checking your mirrors properly just as someone is doing exactly the same thing to you and you collide.

She shouldn't have been passing you but you should have checked your mirrors better.I'd say they will go 50/50 at best, maybe even in her favour although it doesn't seem fair.

andygb

Strider, do you drive around all the time with a camcorder on? I only ask this, because on another thread you used a couple of videos to try to, for want of a better word "ridicule me". One of those videos you took, clearly shows you driving in the outside lane of a dual carriageway, when you should have pulled over to let a car behind overtake you. As a result of this, he overtakes you in a dangerous place, and then gives you a "brake test".
I would love to be able to see this video in order to make a judgement, but it does not seem to exist any more - "malformed URL".

Rolandtheroadie

andygb wrote: »

I would love to be able to see this video in order to make a judgement, but it does not seem to exist any more - "malformed URL".

Edited version (the 6 seconds that count). He came up behind a people carrier half on/half off the pavement. Unable to judge if it was parked or queued, he waited 6 seconds. By this time, an elderly lady who probably has little enough time left on this earth, decided HE was parked and went past.
Mr Strider then moved off (allegedly indicated but the car behind him may have obscured this) without checking his mirror or blindspot and went into the side of this poor old lady.
We cant get any confirmation of whether his insurer is accepting 50/50 or if he's 100% liable.

Strider590

andygb wrote: »

Strider, do you drive around all the time with a camcorder on?

Yes I do...

andygb wrote: »

I only ask this, because on another thread you used a couple of videos to try to, for want of a better word "ridicule me".

I've done no such thing, a forum debate is all par for the course.....
I have and voice my opinions and I would hope you continue to do the same.
We all have different opinions and we all come here (I would hope) in search of knowledge and to assist others in the same quest.

I come here to use what I know in the hope that I can assist others, but it seems that whenever I start a thread I just get a load of abuse and unhelpfullness. Perhaps this is just the norm, perhaps it's different when your looking from the OP point of view (I think it probably is).

While there are names here which i've grown to realise just come here to brow beat others into their way of thinking and to (for want of a better word) exert their "alpha male" status on those who dare to think for themselves, I can't recall ever being drawn into a slanging match with yourself and I really don't care to go through all my old posts just to check.

This isn't about right or wrong, it's not even about the subject of the thread, this is simply about "epeen".

I don't really "kowtow" to anyone, I don't care how "alpha male" they think they are, and while that can cause friction in both online and offline debates, one thing will always stand true.... My opinions can be changed by fact and logic, but I will NEVER be bullied into anything.

skiddlydiddly

I remember you original post strider and I thought then that it was the blue car drivers fault, but seeing this I think the insurers would side with her.I think she was wrong to overtake stationary traffic but can see how the insurers would see it as you moving off without doing the proper checks and hitting her rather than her hitting you.

foofi22

Strider, video link in OP is not working. Could you post a new one?

Strider590

^^ No, because all that's happened so far is abuse.....

Had it been a motorcycle (as someone else mentioned), the insurance would historically go in my favour (unless I'd failed to indicate and there are countless cases posted online) as overtaking is done at the drivers risk and while filtering on a bike is legal, doing the same in a car is not.