C.I.E. to be sentenced to-marrow, what could they get?

Run_to_da_hills

Would they get a fine?

Mossy Monk

Do please elaboarate on this.

Rb

Yes

funk-you

Cat AIDS?

-Funk

Rb

No

Rb

Maybe?

Keano

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Do please elaboarate on this.

Over the Navan school bus incident in 2005.Story

robinph

To-marrow?

Keano

:rolleyes:

Edit: It's back.

Run_to_da_hills

Im glad that the driver is acquitted.

Manic Moran

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Im glad the driver is cleared of all responsibility.

Not sure I'll agree with that. If anyone is primarily responsible, it's the driver, from what I'm reading.

From RTE's description of the trial.

He told the jury of seven men and six women that at 4.17pm as the bus rounded a bend near the village of Kentstown, the driver applied the brake.

The vehicle shuddered and when he applied the brakes again, the rear of the bus swung around 'in the words of a witness, like a gate'.

As I understand it, the ABS system was in a state of disrepair. Whoopdie-do. It's an emergency driver's aid, it's not a fundamental part of the vehicle. It's like saying you're not responsible for the crash because the indicator bulb had blown and the person behind you didn't know you were turning, or it's not your fault you got lost because your GPS system went down. It's certainly not in the same league as "The steering wheel came off the column." People have been driving buses without ABS for years. A properly driven vehicle should only find itself in need of ABS if it gets out of control in the first place. When's the last time you put the ABS on your car to work? Why was the bus driven in such a way that it was reliant on ABS to avoid the accident?

Are the companies also guilty of contributing to the accident? Yes. But unless there is some information as to the accident I am not aware of, finding the driver completely innocent of any wrongdoing is the wrong answer.

NTM

xOxSinéadxOx

Keano A Legend wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Edit: It's back.

waheeeyyyyyy!!!

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Run_to_da_hills

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not sure I'll agree with that. If anyone is primarily responsible, it's the driver, from what I'm reading.
From RTE's description of the trial.

He was handed a defective vehicle by his employer who knowingly kept a blind eye to it.

Guy:Incognito

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He was handed a defective vehicle by his employer who knowingly kept a blind eye to it.

He does have a point though. If your abs light was on in your car in the morning, meaning you had no abs, would you crash on the way to work because of it?

Run_to_da_hills

Stekelly wrote: »

He does have a point though. If your abs light was on in your car in the morning, meaning you had no abs, would you crash on the way to work because of it?

You could crash depending on the circumstances. The Navan bus was in the "right" time and place to crash with defective ABS brakes, ie road conditions were unfinished. Had the ABS brakes worked correctly he may have been able to take control of the bus again..

The ABS warning lights did not exist in these busses because the bulbs were removed. Was the driver made aware of this?

Manic Moran

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

You could crash depending on the circumstances. The Navan bus was in the "right" time and place to crash with defective ABS brakes, ie road conditions were unfinished. Had the ABS brakes worked correctly he may have been able to take control of the bus again..

So what?

It is the driver's job to be aware of the road conditions and to drive in a manner which takes those conditions into account, be it loose gravel from road construction or black ice from the cold. Deliberately driving in a manner which results in reliance on a driver's safety aid is unwise and foolhardy.

You are correct, he may have been able to take control of the bus again had the ABS worked. Hence there is some culpability to be found on the part of the maintenance companies. But he should never have lost control in the first place.

NTM

Run_to_da_hills

Manic Moran wrote: »

But he should never have lost control in the first place.

He may not have had the brakes been working properly :rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

He may not have had the brakes been working properly :rolleyes:

I have seen nothing to indicate that the brakes were not working properly.

ABS is a safety device, like a parachute worn by a jumpmaster who accidently falls out of an airplane. It's there to provide a second chance if you screw up and allow yourself to get into a position where having the thing may be your only chance to get out of the situation you got yourself into in the first place. It is not supposed to be the first line of defence.

NTM

Run_to_da_hills

Manic Moran wrote: »

I have seen nothing to indicate that the brakes were not working properly.

ABS is a safety device, like a parachute worn by a jumpmaster who accidently falls out of an airplane. It's there to provide a second chance if you screw up and allow yourself to get into a position where having the thing may be your only chance to get out of the situation you got yourself into in the first place. It is not supposed to be the first line of defence.

NTM

It also goes down to road surface; we are told that the road had inadequate warnings on the surface condition. The road had yet to be prepared for its final surface.and the pre surface it had may not have had inadequate adhesion for any vehicle in such an emergency situation ABS or not.

Manic Moran

Perhaps I put a greater responsibility upon a driver in the general role of driving a vehicle than you do, but I feel that looking for road signs shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of the job of the driver to determine road conditions. Are you not supposed to check an intersection before passing through a green light? I mean, the sign says all you need, right? A driver's got a set of eyes, he's got a set of ears, and he's got some form of feeling. If the road surface is poor, he may be able to see the loose surface, hear the chippings bouncing off his undersurface or the difference in road noise from the new surface, or possibly feel any roughness. Again, these surface signs are a sort of "Hey, dummy!" convenience.

NTM

Run_to_da_hills

As with every fatal accident a judge in court will take a load of factors into consideration and work out a precentage of responsibility on each factor as a contributory cause. i.e. Road condition, bus maintenance (Ie.ABS not working) weather, third party involvement, driver awareness, and also the fact that there was no seat belts provided (Not required at that time). To put the whole blame on an individual i.e. the driver is not right.

sdanseo

ABS isn't a legal requirement I'm fairly sure. Has to be at least some fault resting with the driver.

marco murphy

It is the driver's job to be aware of the road conditions and to drive in a manner which takes those conditions into account, be it loose gravel from road construction or black ice from the cold. Deliberately driving in a manner which results in reliance on a driver's safety aid is unwise and foolhardy.

I suggest you read the contributions to the case by the driver regarding the run up to the accident.

Manic Moran

To put the whole blame on an individual i.e. the driver is not right.

I agree. But to say that the driver should be let off scott free whilst focusing on the maintenance companies and the road works, when the person ultimately responsible for the safe arrival of the bus, and who was the person in most control over what happens to that bus, is the driver is similarly wrong.

Poblachtach wrote: »

I suggest you read the contributions to the case by the driver regarding the run up to the accident.

This is the best I've found.

http://www.sundaybusinesspost.com/breakingnews/ireland/mhgbmhcweyau/
and
http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/12905532?view=Eircomnet

Was there something else not mentioned? Nothing in there tells me the driver should be entirely absolved. He said he knew there were roadworks in the area, and still managed to hit the site faster / braked harder than his unassisted brakes could deal with.

NTM

Sherifu

Rb wrote: »

Yes

Rb wrote: »

No

Rb wrote: »

Maybe?

All of the above.

Run_to_da_hills

Bus Eireann is fined 2 Million. That is the same as the state fining itself It will eventually come out of our pockets with an increase in bus fares.

Aren't C.I.E and Bus Eireann two seperate organisations?

Run_to_da_hills

Deleted User wrote: »

Aren't C.I.E and Bus Eireann two seperate organisations?

C.I.E oversees the three companies i.e Bus Eireann, Dublin Bus and Iarnrod Eireann. Its an umbrella group.