Law on brake checking someone

facade

silverwhistle wrote: »

Until I read this thread with an increasingly morbid fascination I'd never even heard the phrase 'brake checking'.

I've only heard (read) it called that on here.

Seems daft to me, why would you want to check the brakes of the person behind by trying to get them to run into the back of you? Can only end in tears really

Kiran

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

:rotfl:Laughable.


…..regardless of how little time they gave him, even if they pulled out in front of him and hit him because they left it so late then it is STILL his fault because he should've predicted the future and known the other guy was going to pull out"

Appreciate your post was longer than the section I've quoted above. Just to point out nobody is suggesting you can predict the future, its call situational awareness.


Far be it for me to give you any advice as you don't appear to want to hear it but do yourself a favour and look up "Roadcraft" or better still buy the book and have a read.

almillar

The correct time is before they pull out, to alert them of your presence.

Honk at everyone that looks like they might pull out in front of me? Not sure that's practical. By the book, but not practical.

facade

almillar wrote: »

The correct time is before they pull out, to alert them of your presence.

Honk at everyone that looks like they might pull out in front of me? Not sure that's practical. By the book, but not practical.

But what is the point of honking at someone who has already pulled out into your path?



They could


1) stop dead out of shock that you have appeared "from nowhere because of your excessive speed" (when really you were hidden by their screen pillar and they didn't look properly) so you now hit them


2) get a bit of a move on because they hadn't seen you and try to accelerate out of the crash (good result)



3) take no notice, they were ignoring you anyway...


4) become so incensed at you daring to sound your horn as if to criticise their exemplary and text book perfect driving that they now feel the need to have you run into the back of them anyway :eek:


I suspect we both know that you only honk when making a noise will improve the chances of the other drivers knowing you are there- e.g. the brow of a humpbacked bridge, when a car is just reversing blindly out of a space without looking, when someone playing on their 'phone is about to walk into traffic etc.







I think that in my post #16 what happened was I naively thought that a premium German car needs the same distance to stop as my low quality British/French/Japanese clunker, when in reality, charging right up to a junction and coming to a dead stop with smoking tyres is normal for that car when driven by that driver.
So when I tapped my horn I was actually criticising his ability to stop and his observational skills, rather than as I thought, helpfully pointing out that I was approaching and he might not have seen me.

Scrapit

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

:rotfl:Laughable.


I know there's people on here who love to go delving. Look long enough and you'll see many examples on here of me 'bad attitude when typing', however you'll see many examples of me being polite and thankful.

The important thing to note is what comes BEFORE the 'attitude' or the politeness. It's not hard to work out.
When i'm being polite and thankful on here that's because others have been helpful with no attitude so i'm grateful for their time.
However when others just spout absolute BS (certain forums on this board are worse for it than others) then i'll get 'attitude' each and every time thank you. Why not talk to people how they talk to you?


All this nonsense of "he probably did this" and "this usually happens so i bet that's what did happen, even though i don't have a clue at all but i want to jump on the bandwagon to up my like count" and then there's your .... he used 847 words in a post so that MUST mean he's guilty, it's scientifically proven.



Honestly :rotfl:
Correct.


Or not. This is MSE after all



Now you can take the obvious stance of i've not posted it therefore i am guilty your honour because clearly that's the ONLY reason for not posting right? Any other reason just isn't juicy enough.


Or maybe when there's the nonsense i just mentioned about people talking of "he's posting aggressively therefore his driving must surely be aggressive" and "he's guilty because if someone pulls out in front of him, regardless of how little time they gave him, even if they pulled out in front of him and hit him because they left it so late then it is STILL his fault because he should've predicted the future and known the other guy was going to pull out"


...then do you really think i'm going to post any video? The video could show the guy racing out at the last second, hitting my side & then ramming me head on and you'd still decide that i'd be in the wrong so aside from giving you a fresh angle to twist things on what would posting a video actually do?
Answer is nothing. You decided what stance you were taking, regardless of absolutely anything.

Way to prove my point.

almillar

But what is the point of honking at someone who has already pulled out into your path?

'To make them aware of your presence'.

I mean, I guess you're letting them know that they judged your speed and distance incorrectly, and maybe they'll learn from it, and do better next time. Or, mabe they'll brake check you. There's a place for driving defensively, certainly, but there's also a place for letting people know they've made a mistake. Maybe they'll cut it even finer next time and actually cause a crash!

bonnyrigger

Best bit of brake checking I saw recently was while sitting in a bus. Car parked in the bus stop, two buses come along, first one starts dropping off passengers - the car starts reversing slowly along the inside of the bus I'm in. As the first bus move off the car guns it and pull out in front of our bus causing the driver to stamp on the (fortunately excellent) brakes! The car then proceeds to do a three point turn and head off back the way we had come from, nice exchange of swear words between the bus driver and the car driver! Of course the car in question was a private hire vehicle - I love having my prejudices confirmed

Nigly

Agreed. We must all look at our response to other drivers actions. It's very difficult to control a negative response when the adrenalin is flowing.

I have found having a rear camera stops the tailgaters (not the nonobservant ones!)

I have also found the installation of cameras improves your own behaviour.

bigisi

And let me guess, you can offer us all some great cameras at much cheapness out of the goodness of your heart?

ElefantEd

Scrapit wrote: »

The answer to your question is: the car pulling out is accelerating. This must be the case. You said you were braking. This will be the case if you haven't lied. Therefore the gap between your vehicle and the car pulling out is increasing. This must be the case if everything is how you said. So brake checking you cannot be possible if they are pulling away from you, is this not how it happened?

I get your point but your conclusion isn't necessarily true. Whether the gap increases or decreases depends on the relative speeds of the two vehicles. The car in front could be accelerating but still not have reached the speed of the decelerating car behind. (Think of a tortoise accelerating, whilst a jet fighter approaches it from behind, slowing down. Will the gap close or not?). It depends therefore on the initial speeds of both vehicles as well as their respective rates of change of speed.