muppet should i report him?

patrickc

hi all

I was on my way to work this morning driving between Carlow and Castledermot, there was a van up my ass as such and annoying me, so I went to overtake a truck and a car on a long straight, checked my mirror and off I went, I looked in rearview mirror and no sign of van, checked right hand mirror and there he was in the hardshoulder to my right overtaking me. I know his reg and the company he works for? what would happen if I reported him to traffic watch? He could of caused a serious accident and i blew my horn at him, he stuck his fingers out the window at me and sped on.

LundiMardi

report him... To do that is retarded, to do it with the company name on the side of the van is just plain moronic.

Hal1

'He was in the hardshoulder to my right overtaking me'


What?, where you driving against the flow of traffic, playing a bit of chicken ehh On a serious note you should report him for wrecklesss driving, dont let mugs get away with driving like that.

Moanin

Defo report him!

ciarsd

1890-205805

Gran Hermano

Sounds like a proper moron. Report him to the gardai and as long
as the van didnt have "Joe Bloggs Company" on the side and you
got the impression it was 'Joe' himself driving I'd be straight on the
phone to the company.

peasant

Not trying to defend the van driver, but the fact that you hadn't a clue of the wherebaouts of the van until it "suddenly" appeared to your right on the hard shoulder raises some questions too.

Could be you actually forced him onto the hard shoulder because you didn't pay enough attention while pulling out ...

yop

Without a doubt report it. Ignorance and arrogance all in one

patrickc

peasant wrote:

Not trying to defend the van driver, but the fact that you hadn't a clue of the wherebaouts of the van until it "suddenly" appeared to your right on the hard shoulder raises some questions too.

Could be you actually forced him onto the hard shoulder because you didn't pay enough attention while pulling out ...

he was behind me one second I looked in my left mirror pulling back in then in rearview mirror, and he wasnt behind me.

dade

report him and then put a complaint in against him with the company. most companies take these complaints very seriously. idiot could have killed someone.

peasant

he was behind me one second I looked in my left mirror pulling back in then in rearview mirror, and he wasnt behind me

Ahh ..so now you pulled in again as well at some stage during your overtaking attempt?

Could it just be that you drove somewhat erratically?

Still no excuse for what van-man did ...but a possible explanation

patrickc

peasant wrote:

Ahh ..so now you pulled in again as well at some stage during your overtaking attempt?

Could it just be that you drove somewhat erratically?

Still no excuse for what van-man did ...but a possible explanation

I pulled in after completing my overtaking manoveure.

peasant

Well ...if you're sure you've done everything right ...report him

Triangle

Something like this happened to me before, except I was the 'Van'

I started overtaking the car who decided then to start overtaking and 'pushed' me over to the verge.

Before making an alligation - are you 100% that he hadn't started overtaking first and you just missed him?

(I'm not saying you did, i'm just playing the devils advocate)

Edit: beaten to the post by peasant

prospect

peasant wrote:

Ahh ..so now you pulled in again as well at some stage during your overtaking attempt?

Could it just be that you drove somewhat erratically?

Why is there always someone waiting to jump down the neck of a poster?

You are a mod, you should know better, really. Were you there, did you see what happened, are you even aware of the exact stretch of road? I would guess the answer is 'no' to all those questions. So why would you try to put blame on the OP? Are you trying to start a row?

The OP simply asked if we think the van driver should be reported. I say 'yes, he should', regardless of what way the OP was driving, there is no excuse to overtake using the hard shoulder of the opposite lane.

patrickc

prospect wrote:

Why is there always someone waiting to jump down the neck of a poster?

You are a mod, you should know better, really. Were you there, did you see what happened, are you even aware of the exact stretch of road? I would guess the answer is 'no' to all those questions. So why would you try to put blame on the OP? Are you trying to start a row?

The OP simply asked if we think the van driver should be reported. I say 'yes, he should', regardless of what way the OP was driving, there is no excuse to overtake using the hard shoulder of the opposite lane.

thanks prospect,
I always check my mirrors before overtaking, learned that the hard way when learning to drive some years back.

MrPudding

prospect wrote:

there is no excuse to overtake using the hard shoulder of the opposite lane.

Yes there is. If you are overtaking a car and the driver of that car decides to overtake without checking his blindspot. Given the choice of being involved in an accident or moving to the hard shoulder to avoid one is a no brainer. Anyone who whould not do this is an idiot and should not be on the road.

MrP

Triangle

patrickc2006 wrote:

thanks prospect,
I always check my mirrors before overtaking, learned that the hard way when learning to drive some years back.

Then definately report him - that type of driving will get someone killed.

colm_mcm

I'm sure the people "waiting to jump down the neck of a poster" are just making sure the OP is certain that they were not in the wrong and forced the van to overtake, before reporting it to the Gardai or company involved.

MrPudding

patrickc2006 wrote:

thanks prospect,
I always check my mirrors before overtaking, learned that the hard way when learning to drive some years back.

I am not having a go at you but checking your mirrors is not enough. When carrying out a manouver like this you should also do a blindspot check.

When you think about how this guy was driving prior to this, tailgating you and such, I think it was pretty obvious that he would try to pass you at the first oportunity.

If it had been me I would have held back a moment and waited for him to go, I don't think you would have been waiting long.

I would say that in your case this was most likely not a matter of you pulling into him and him taking evasive action, simply him being an impatient idiot.

MrP

MrP

prospect

MrPudding wrote:

Yes there is. If you are overtaking a car and the driver of that car decides to overtake without checking his blindspot. Given the choice of being involved in an accident or moving to the hard shoulder to avoid one is a no brainer.

No there is not,
In that case you break and move back and occupy the space the 'offending' car has vacated.
I cannot believe anyone would advocate using the oncoming hardshoulder for such a manoeuvre.

MrPudding wrote:

Anyone who whould not do this is an idiot and should not be on the road.

I think you may have this accusation the wrong way round. Anyone who thinks it is acceptable to drive, at speed (if overtaking), in the hardshoulder of oncoming traffic, should not only be off the road, but should be jailed for being grossly incompetent.

colm_mcm

no mention of oncoming traffic here.

patrickc

colm_mcm wrote:

no mention of oncoming traffic here.

there was none.

Q_Ball

MrPudding wrote:

Yes there is. If you are overtaking a car and the driver of that car decides to overtake without checking his blindspot. Given the choice of being involved in an accident or moving to the hard shoulder to avoid one is a no brainer.

prospect wrote:

No there is not,
In that case you break and move back and occupy the space the 'offending' car has vacated.
I cannot believe anyone would advocate using the oncoming hardshoulder for such a manoeuvre.

I think you're both right, depending on the position of the idiot pulling out If i was parallel with them I'd have moved into the hard shoulder to avoid the idiot hitting me and pulled back in my lane when they had moved off in front of me

lightening

Just like Triangle... this happened to me.

I went to overtake two cars. Checked mirrors, no one behind me, indicated, moved over the broken white line and proceeded to overtake.

I had a clear road ahead of me, no oncoming traffic.

The car in between be suddenly indicates and proceeds to overtake the car in front!

I was in his blind spot, he never saw me and pushed me on to the opposit hard shoulder.

I sounded my horn, breaked and backed right off.

The guy freaked at me.

patrickc

ye have me doubting myself now..

MrPudding

prospect wrote:

No there is not,
In that case you break and move back and occupy the space the 'offending' car has vacated.
I cannot believe anyone would advocate using the oncoming hard shoulder for such a manoeuvre.

It is quicker to move to your right in a case like this than to brake. Even if you brake hard there is still a chance that you will take at least a glancing blow from the car moving out.

Dismissing the opposite hard should as a possible escape route is, I'm afraid, an idiotic attitude. What if there was a car behind you who has now also started accelerating for a possible overtake? The gap you left might not be there anymore, you may not have a route into the space this guy is leaving.

I personally would prefer not to have to use the opposite hard should for evasive moves but at least I can see that there are times when it might be the best and only option.

prospect wrote:

I think you may have this accusation the wrong way round. Anyone who thinks it is acceptable to drive, at speed (if overtaking), in the hard shoulder of oncoming traffic, should not only be off the road, but should be jailed for being grossly incompetent.

Oh, a nice piece of word twisting there. I am talking about using the opposite hard shoulder as an escape route to avoid a collision. I would never advocate driving there at speed or using it to overtake simply for convenience.

MrP

lightening

patrickc2006 wrote:

ye have me doubting myself now..

At least you can do that. Most drivers think they are always in the right... At least there wasn't an accident.

And of course... Maybe you were in the right, put it down as a experience I guess.

Dades

I think you have to ask why a van would attempt to overtake a car that was already overtaking slower moving traffic.

I'm more inclined to believe the van driver had his foot on the gas to overtake first. Whether or not he should have backed off, or kept going is a different question.

lightening

The Atheist wrote:

I think you have to ask why a van would attempt to overtake a car that was already overtaking slower moving traffic.

Good point, but maybe he started before Patrick did.

prospect

Look,

You can make up obscure situations till the cows come home,
but,

there is NEVER and excuse to drive in the hard shoulder on the opposite side of the road, (where there can be oncoming traffic).

Worst case scenario, if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car, and rejoin the traffic when it is safe to do so.


I am simply stunned that anyone would see that driving this way is even remotely acceptable.

gyppo

prospect wrote:

Look,

You can make up obscure situations till the cows come home,
but,

there is NEVER and excuse to drive in the hard shoulder on the opposite side of the road, (where there can be oncoming traffic).

Worst case scenario, if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car, and rejoin the traffic when it is safe to do so.


I am simply stunned that anyone would see that driving this way is even remotely acceptable.

Totally agree.

MrPudding

prospect wrote:

Worst case scenario, if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car, and rejoin the traffic when it is safe to do so.

Christ on a stick. Once more for the cheap seats. I am NOT advocating driving on the oposite hard shoulder.

I have said, a couple of times now I would use it as an escape route. that does not mean i would use it as an additional lane to continue on my journey.

if I had to do it, once there I would access whether my best optin would be to come to a complete halt, and move on after changing my underwear and claming down, assuming of course it was safe to do so or move straight back into my lane rather than coming to a stop, again, only if it was safe to do so.

Does that clarify things for you? Are you now saying it is acceptable to use it as an escape route rather than you initial blanket ban?

MrP

lightening

Well, I got pushed on to the hard shoulder on the opposit side of the road, while jamming on the breaks, it happens, nothing I could do about it, I was along side another car while overtaking and he just swerved right.

Edit... just read your post properly prospect, I ended up stopped and rejoined.

MrPudding

lightening wrote:

Well, I got pushed on to the hard shoulder on the opposit side of the road, while jamming on the breaks, it happens, nothing I could do about it, I was along side another car while overtaking and he just swerved right.

Why did you not just brake and pull back into you own lane? You should be jailed for driving on the oposite hard shoulder, that is grossly incompetant don't you know? :rolleyes:

MrP

Mitch Connor

prospect wrote:

Look,

You can make up obscure situations till the cows come home,
but,

there is NEVER and excuse to drive in the hard shoulder on the opposite side of the road, (where there can be oncoming traffic).

Worst case scenario, if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car, and rejoin the traffic when it is safe to do so.


I am simply stunned that anyone would see that driving this way is even remotely acceptable.

so....

There is NEVER an excuse to being in the opposite hard sholder, but then you give an action to take if you must be in it....

lightening

MrPudding wrote:

Why did you not just brake and pull back into you own lane? You should be jailed for driving on the oposite hard shoulder, that is grossly incompetant don't you know? :rolleyes:

MrP

There was a huge truck behind me. I felt safer to just pull in where I was force to be instead of jamming on, trying to squeez back in front of a moving artic.

Mitch Connor

lightening wrote:

There was a huge truck behind me. I felt safer to just pull in where I was force to be instead of jamming on, trying to squeez back in front of a moving artic.

MrP was being a bit sarcastic, in light of his recent posts on the subject.

homah_7ft

Strictly he didn't say you should never be in, rather that you should never be driving in it. I would imagine the van driver carried on his merry way at 85mph in the hard shoulder.

EDIT: Busy thread! I was replying to the previous post

gyppo

Tauren wrote:

so....

There is NEVER an excuse to being in the opposite hard sholder, but then you give an action to take if you must be in it....

If you re-read the post, he said drive.

MrPudding

homah_7ft wrote:

Strictly he didn't say you should never be in, rather that you should never be driving in it. I would imagine the van driver carried on his merry way at 85mph in the hard shoulder.

Oh, that is ok then. If you could just explain how you can enter it at 100kph and then come to a complete stop without driving in it, that would be great.

MrP

stipey

Surely if the OP had begun to pull out when the van was attempting to overtake the guy in the van would have leaned fairly heavily on the horn. Presumably the OP would then have heard this and realised that maybe he had made a bit of a boo-boo. If he realised he made a boo-boo he wouldn't come on here to tell us about it - because all the driving experts on the Motors forum would ridicule him/her.

Finally, if overtaking a vehicle which itself begins to move out to perform its own overtaking manouveur it may not be possible (as has already been mentioned) to brake safe in the knowledge that you won't collide with the offending vehicle. Equally it may not be possible to pull back into the lane you have just left. IMO however, if as a last resort you need to take evasive action and move into the hard shoulder on the far side of the road you should NOT attempt to continue to overtake. Double overtaking is idiotic in the extreme - what ever the reason for being in the opposite hard shoulder.

Mitch Connor

homah_7ft wrote:

Strictly he didn't say you should never be in, rather that you should never be driving in it. I would imagine the van driver carried on his merry way at 85mph in the hard shoulder.

if the car is not parked, you are driving.

Mitch Connor

gyppo wrote:

If you re-read the post, he said drive.

as MrP asks, and i say...how the hell do you get in to the opposite hard shoulder without driving in it at any point. The poster says you should be braking. If you are braking, it is pointless unless you are not parked. If you are not parked, you are driving.

vandermeyde

fair enough that you might need to use the hard-shoulder for an emergency manoeuvre if some one pulls out in front of you...I think the natural reaction in that case would be to brake or at least lift off the accelerator while you calm down from the fright and assess your options...

the fact that this dude in the van continued with his overtaking would suggest to me that he knew exactly what he was doing, highly dangerous and absolutely idiotic.

homah_7ft

Tauren wrote:

if the car is not parked, you are driving.

Yes but you may notice by the use of the word merry I was insinuating that the van driver was not executing an emergency escape but driving at high speed in the hard shoulder and continuing on that way up the road. Hey I don't know that this is actually the case but it's as likely as this scenario where the angelic van driver is forced to move into the hard shoulder for an teensy bit and carefully tiptoe in to rejoin the traffic.

MarkR

I would guess that the van would have a slower acceleration, if that was the case then the van driver would have had to start his manouver either at the same time or after the op's move out. In either case the van driver should have aborted and waited til they could see the road clearly again.

Also - we all know that a van driver would be beeping / flashing if they felt they had been cut up. As they didn't they probably knew they were in the wrong.

A point to note about reporting this to the guards, you'd be asked to come down to the station to make an official report so that it can be taken to conclusion if required

gyppo

Tauren wrote:

as MrP asks, and i say...how the hell do you get in to the opposite hard shoulder without driving in it at any point. The poster says you should be braking. If you are braking, it is pointless unless you are not parked. If you are not parked, you are driving.

I think a moot point needs to be addressed here - it was my interpretation of Prospects post that if you did find yourself in the hard shoulder as a result of taking emergency evasive action, it would be totally reckless to proceed with the original overtaking manouvre

Prospects (not Peasants ) words "if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car"
My words "dont proceed to overtake while you are there."

homah_7ft

MrPudding wrote:

Oh, that is ok then. If you could just explain how you can enter it at 100kph and then come to a complete stop without driving in it, that would be great.

MrP

By driving I mean carrying on driving instead of coming to a halt in this "emergency" situation.

lightening

gyppo wrote:

Peasants words "if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car"
My words "dont proceed to overtake while you are there."

Agreed, happened to me, did that, don't deserve to go to jail.

peasant

gyppo wrote:

Peasants words "if you must move into it, you brake and stop your car"

nope ...not my words

I would do the same, though