Mum been hit from behind, what to do now?

derrick

esmerobbo wrote: »

So just to summarise after coming to have a look at this thread. If you are an advanced driver and you believe the road markings are incorrect then you do the opposite to what they are advising?

Yes as to do otherwise is wrong, as well as the incorrectly advised arrows you have to take into account the road layout, this is more important than some paint on the road.

Imagine the road without arrows, or as recently with snow on the road, you would not see the arrows and would use common sense re the road layout and that is to merge to the right!



.

mikey72

derrick wrote: »

Yes as to do otherwise is wrong, as well as the incorrectly advised arrows you have to take into account the road layout, this is more important than some paint on the road.

Imagine the road without arrows, or as recently with snow on the road, you would not see the arrows and would use common sense re the road layout and that is to merge to the left!



.

I can agree with that. I believe red lights are wrong, so I never stop.

Gene_Hunt_2

Funny isn’t it. Tell a guy his wife is ugly with nothing to back it up other than your opinion, he see’s your point of view. Tell him his driving is 5h1te and despite overwhelming evidence he continues to dig.

derrick

mikey72 wrote: »

So the zipper principle is good, unless it's your turn to give way then?
And what's that attempted overtaking across a set of lights in the other video?
Did the car you lost it with turn right there by any chance?

Not sure where you are coming from!

I was in front of the Audi in as much he was about 8-9 feet behind my front bumper, making me the lead vehicle, therefore he should merge behind me, it isn't rocket science!

Overtaking at a set of lights? Don't know what you mean, but it isn't illegal.

I did not lose anything, the Audi turned left at the next set of lights about half a mile up the road.

.

Gene_Hunt_2

derrick wrote: »

Imagine the road without arrows, or as recently with snow on the road, you would not see the arrows and would use common sense re the road layout and that is to merge to the left!



.

If the snow was that bad I would suggest there would only be one lane anyway. Unless your going to tell us about your special snow.

You talk about common sense. I'd put some on your Christmas list if I were you.

mikey72

derrick wrote: »

Not sure where you are coming from!

I was in front of the Audi in as much he was about 8-9 feet behind my front bumper, making me the lead vehicle, therefore he should merge behind me, it isn't rocket science!

Overtaking at a set of lights? Don't know what you mean, but it isn't illegal.

I did not lose anything, the Audi turned left at the next set of lights about half a mile up the road.

.

No, you've hung yourself in your own video.
Regardless of your interpretation of road marking, the escort is next to the toyota, the audi is next to you.
So the escort moves off first, the toyota should then be behind him, then the audi should be the next vehicle, then you.
You obviously object, drive up the back of the toyota, so the audi has to go somewhere, and the toyota slows to let him in.
I'd probably do the same if I was in the toyota, rather than force him up the pavement.
Especially if as you say cars should merge in from the left.

derrick

Gene_Hunt wrote: »

If the snow was that bad I would suggest there would only be one lane anyway. Unless your going to tell us about your special snow.

You talk about common sense. I'd put some on your Christmas list if I were you.

It does not need to be "that bad", a light covering would make them invisible to the eye. I am just trying to take the ,(wrong), arrows out of the equation and concentrate on the road layout, the planners don't a lways get it right.

.


.

Gene_Hunt_2

He's like a puppy isn't he?

Kick the crap out of him and he keeps comming back for more.

esmerobbo

Which one of your comments is right then?

"the one that should merge to the right".

"and would use common sense re the road layout and that is to merge to the left"

derrick

mikey72 wrote: »

No, you've hung yourself in your own video.
Regardless of your interpretation of road marking, the escort is next to the toyota, the audi is next to you.
So the escort moves off first, the toyota should then be behind him, then the audi should be the next vehicle, then you.
You obviously object, drive up the back of the toyota, so the audi has to go somewhere, and the toyota slows to let him in.
I'd probably do the same if I was in the toyota, rather than force him up the pavement.
Especially if as you say cars should merge in from the left.

Lots of shoulds in there, the Audi did not move off as quickly as he might, hence why I was the lead vehicle between him and me at the merge point, giving me the right of way.


.