Settle a liability debate?

ontheroad1970

DB1904 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

So are you saying if it's unsafe to stop you should run over the pedestrians?

You should be checking mirrors regularly, so should have a reasonable guess of what is behind you when you make an emergency stop.  I regularly check mirrors when approaching pedestrian crossings, especially traffic light controlled ones as there is often a lemming that will step out.  Appropriate observation can mean that you moderate your speed/lift off the gas pedal in order to make any emergency stop less violent, thus reducing the chance of a rear end.  

Flight3287462

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

The pedestrian has right of way under the new legislation even if just waiting to cross.  So the driver turning left is obliged to stop.

Car_54

Flight3287462 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

The pedestrian has right of way under the new legislation even if just waiting to cross.  So the driver turning left is obliged to stop.

There is no new legislation, just a new Highway Code. 

And the current Highway Code says "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance ...", and I don't expect the new one to be any different.

Chris_English

ontheroad1970 said:

DB1904 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

So are you saying if it's unsafe to stop you should run over the pedestrians?

You should be checking mirrors regularly, so should have a reasonable guess of what is behind you when you make an emergency stop.  I regularly check mirrors when approaching pedestrian crossings, especially traffic light controlled ones as there is often a lemming that will step out.  Appropriate observation can mean that you moderate your speed/lift off the gas pedal in order to make any emergency stop less violent, thus reducing the chance of a rear end.  

That’s ridiculous.

Jenni_D

Chris_English said:

ontheroad1970 said:

DB1904 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

So are you saying if it's unsafe to stop you should run over the pedestrians?

You should be checking mirrors regularly, so should have a reasonable guess of what is behind you when you make an emergency stop.  I regularly check mirrors when approaching pedestrian crossings, especially traffic light controlled ones as there is often a lemming that will step out.  Appropriate observation can mean that you moderate your speed/lift off the gas pedal in order to make any emergency stop less violent, thus reducing the chance of a rear end.  

That’s ridiculous.

What part of that is ridiculous? Reads as observant driving to me.

Chris_English

Jenni_D said:

Chris_English said:

ontheroad1970 said:

DB1904 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

So are you saying if it's unsafe to stop you should run over the pedestrians?

You should be checking mirrors regularly, so should have a reasonable guess of what is behind you when you make an emergency stop.  I regularly check mirrors when approaching pedestrian crossings, especially traffic light controlled ones as there is often a lemming that will step out.  Appropriate observation can mean that you moderate your speed/lift off the gas pedal in order to make any emergency stop less violent, thus reducing the chance of a rear end.  

That’s ridiculous.

What part of that is ridiculous? Reads as observant driving to me.

The suggestion that in an emergency stop, if a pedestriam walks out in front of you, that you decide to not brake as hard as you otherwise would, to reduce the probability of being hit from behind.

If a pedestrian walks out and you need to do an emergency stop you stop as hard as you can. Braking a bit less hard to try to protect your shiny car is simply ridiculous.

ElefantEd

I think the point is that if you take your foot off the accelerator in advance, anticipating having to stop, then if you do have to do an emergency stop it will be less abrupt.

As a general rule I think it's good practice to slow slightly when approaching potential hazards, rather than always going at the same speed.

ontheroad1970

Chris_English said:

Jenni_D said:

Chris_English said:

ontheroad1970 said:

DB1904 said:

sevenhills said:

Flight3287462 said:

This type of shunt will become more common when cars (that don't indicate left) stop to let a pedestrian cross the road.

MSM, meaning that you should check your mirrors before doing a manoeuvre, so you should only stop if it's safe to do so.

Although the driver in front cannot read minds.

So are you saying if it's unsafe to stop you should run over the pedestrians?

You should be checking mirrors regularly, so should have a reasonable guess of what is behind you when you make an emergency stop.  I regularly check mirrors when approaching pedestrian crossings, especially traffic light controlled ones as there is often a lemming that will step out.  Appropriate observation can mean that you moderate your speed/lift off the gas pedal in order to make any emergency stop less violent, thus reducing the chance of a rear end.  

That’s ridiculous.

What part of that is ridiculous? Reads as observant driving to me.

The suggestion that in an emergency stop, if a pedestriam walks out in front of you, that you decide to not brake as hard as you otherwise would, to reduce the probability of being hit from behind.

If a pedestrian walks out and you need to do an emergency stop you stop as hard as you can. Braking a bit less hard to try to protect your shiny car is simply ridiculous.

Perhaps I am being too subtle.  If you are already moderating your speed, having used your observation skills to see what is ahead, then your emergency stop will have been from a lower speed, therefore less severe.  Drivers following behind you will also be driving slower so will require less braking distance.  All the hallmarks of defensive driving.  If I see people waiting at a crossing, then there is a chance of two things happening:  The lights might change, or the person waiting may be on the phone or listening to loud music and out of lack of concentration steps out.  These are not rare hazards.  You should always be well aware of what is around you.  It's not about protecting a shiny car, it's about avoiding any incident in the first place.  

In London I have had people pushing prams in front of me, not even using a crossing that is less than 100m away.  After the first time it happened, I keep an eye on people pushing prams and moderate my speed.  Yes, I have had to brake harder on occasion, but my braking has never had to be severe to the extent that someone rear ends me.  

born_again

ontheroad1970 said:

Perhaps I am being too subtle.  If you are already moderating your speed, having used your observation skills to see what is ahead, then your emergency stop will have been from a lower speed, therefore less severe.  Drivers following behind you will also be driving slower so will require less braking distance.  All the hallmarks of defensive driving.  If I see people waiting at a crossing, then there is a chance of two things happening:  The lights might change, or the person waiting may be on the phone or listening to loud music and out of lack of concentration steps out.  These are not rare hazards.  You should always be well aware of what is around you.  It's not about protecting a shiny car, it's about avoiding any incident in the first place.  

In London I have had people pushing prams in front of me, not even using a crossing that is less than 100m away.  After the first time it happened, I keep an eye on people pushing prams and moderate my speed.  Yes, I have had to brake harder on occasion, but my braking has never had to be severe to the extent that someone rear ends me.  

Read "Should be"

How many times do you find the car behind, far too close as they have not noticed you have slowed down. I pick my daughter up on this all the time. Usual excuse is "Well I did not see any brake lights" 🤦‍♀️

[Deleted User]

scrappy_returns said:

Deleted_User said:

scrappy_returns said:

Deleted_User said:

scrappy_returns said:

I know people that have brake checked others and taken no liability from the resulting crash.

Sure, with no dash cam footage that could well happen. Even if the BMW behind is on your bumper and are at fault for not leaving space, if you brake check them and they crash or report you and have footage of you doing it, plod may well come and have a word with you and insurer might well be less favourable

No, not could well happen, it's happened. No questions asked by either party insurers. Settled in less than 16hours, no police interest. With dash cam footage it could well be different but that's not something I know about.

That's what I said, it could well happen that someone gets away with it. The number of cars with dash cams now though, means there is a very good chance that brake checking someone will be caught by the person behind or a witness

It has happened, not could well.

Again, it could well happen. You are some random anonymous person on the internet, just as I am, you have no evidence to support your claim so suggesting people will get away with it is meaningless - not least as it's bad driving and as I said, these days it's far more likely you would be on dash cam