News1 min ago
DRIVING WITHOUT DUE CARE AND ATTENTION
I was driving in lane 1 when i came up to 2 cars (a Renault and a large 4 door) driving in lane 2 traveling at approximately 60-65mph so i proceeded to maneuver from lane 1-2-3 i was doing around 65-70mph, i had thought for a second about just undertaking but decided that it was too DANGEROUS. As i brought my front bumper along side the rear bumper of the rear of the 2 other cars i was aware of a A bmw mini-white/cream in lane 1 approaching us but still a distance away, so i continued to OVERTAKE the cars in lane 2 as i pulled along side the lead cars i check my mirrors and could see the 4 doors headlights still in lane 2 and the mini's headlights still in lane 1 driving faster then me maybe 80-85mph undertaking the 4 door not yet level with the 4 door, i continued in lane 3 until i was clear of the Megane and checking my mirrors ALL the time as you do in a van ALL the time so you are aware of your surroundings, the road in front was clear for as far as i could see but more cars were coming up a distance behind us,so as i was clear of the megane and could see NO cars other than the megane in my mirrors i indicated left and could see it flashing on the road and checked my mirrors again and started my maneuver from lane 3 - 2 as the white line appeared in the center of my windscreen so did a the mini. IT WAS TOO LATE , we collided my n/s/f wheel and her o/s/f door, my wheel collapsed i swerved right and hit the central reservation the mini hit the n/s crash barrier the megane missed us both and the n/s barrier and went down the banking. NO ONE WAS HURT. The M1 shut for 3 hours and police took statements and advised me they might do ME for driving without due care and attention, due to the statements. on the 8/1/10 a letter from police arrived BUT I'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG and i have to do a wareness course that I pay £150-£200 for or MAYBE go to court . ANY ADVISE ? please
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
Youre in the wrong you were in lane 3 it was your resposibilit
Its like a domino effect youre in lane 3 so you have to ensure lane 2 and lane 2 has to ensure lane 1.You didnt.
Its like a domino effect youre in lane 3 so you have to ensure lane 2 and lane 2 has to ensure lane 1.You didnt.
23:52 Sat 09th Jan 2010
yeah but the mini and megane drivers both saying the mini had already completed her maneuver from lane 1-2 but megane driver is also saying that i then hit her and she spun in the road after impact with me and he hit her and then crashed through a fence - but he doesn't have ANY impact damage on his car only scrape marks down n/s as he scrapped a tree on the embankment and there is no fence at that part of the embankment , So surly he's not a credible witness
Youre in the wrong you were in lane 3 it was your resposibility to ensure that you could manouvere safely -you didnt so your wrong clear cut and i wouldnt make a mountain out this.
Its like a domino effect youre in lane 3 so you have to ensure lane 2 and lane 2 has to ensure lane 1.You didnt.
You know the craic -take yer slap and get on with it -least no-one was killed!!!
Its like a domino effect youre in lane 3 so you have to ensure lane 2 and lane 2 has to ensure lane 1.You didnt.
You know the craic -take yer slap and get on with it -least no-one was killed!!!
could you explain one part please.
"the road in front was clear for as far as i could see but more cars were coming up a distance behind us,so as i was clear of the megane and could see NO cars other than the megane in my mirrors"
So where exactly did you think the mini had gone at this point, just disappeared? surely you must have realised if you can't see it then it's in a blind spot somewhere.
"the road in front was clear for as far as i could see but more cars were coming up a distance behind us,so as i was clear of the megane and could see NO cars other than the megane in my mirrors"
So where exactly did you think the mini had gone at this point, just disappeared? surely you must have realised if you can't see it then it's in a blind spot somewhere.
Have I understood this right?
You were in lane 1 travelling faster than 2 vehicles in front of you in lane 2.
You manouvered your way to lane 3 to overtake.
Q. If lane 1 was clear why were 2 cars in lane 2 when they were not overtaking anybody?
You notice that way back in lane 1 there is car number 3 being driven at speed.
When you have safely overtaken cars 1 & 2 you mirrored, signalled then start to manouver your way into lane 2.
Bang. Car 3 has appeared alongside and slightly in front of you. Therefor car 3 was also manouvering into lane 2. One could argue that as car 3 was forward of you then car 3 was there before you. Resulting in you being at fault.
Q. If road in front was clear (you not say which lanes) why was car 3 moving into lane 2?
As Chuck asks did car 3 disappear? you knew it was somewhere, but obviously you did not know where.
If car 3 was overtaking a vehicle in lane 1 and lane 3 was clear in front of you then you could have stayed in lane 3 a little while longer.
I would bite the bullet and takes whatever comes your way.
On a different note. If you had split youre question into sections (like I have) it would have been easier to follow the chain of events.
You were in lane 1 travelling faster than 2 vehicles in front of you in lane 2.
You manouvered your way to lane 3 to overtake.
Q. If lane 1 was clear why were 2 cars in lane 2 when they were not overtaking anybody?
You notice that way back in lane 1 there is car number 3 being driven at speed.
When you have safely overtaken cars 1 & 2 you mirrored, signalled then start to manouver your way into lane 2.
Bang. Car 3 has appeared alongside and slightly in front of you. Therefor car 3 was also manouvering into lane 2. One could argue that as car 3 was forward of you then car 3 was there before you. Resulting in you being at fault.
Q. If road in front was clear (you not say which lanes) why was car 3 moving into lane 2?
As Chuck asks did car 3 disappear? you knew it was somewhere, but obviously you did not know where.
If car 3 was overtaking a vehicle in lane 1 and lane 3 was clear in front of you then you could have stayed in lane 3 a little while longer.
I would bite the bullet and takes whatever comes your way.
On a different note. If you had split youre question into sections (like I have) it would have been easier to follow the chain of events.
Drisgirl is correct .
As you were in the fast lane , prior to any lane changing it is you who is responsible for ensuring the inner lane is Actualy clear.
Even though the other car did " by your account " brake one traffic act , the fact you drove into an occupied lane and collided with a vehicle in that lane , means you did not enusre that lane was clear.
As two seperate drivers from two seperate vehicles state the other vehicle had completed its lane change and was therefore in the lane prior to your impact , this makes you liable. " sadly the undertaking and speeding offences " have no relavence to the charge you may face. even though it reads like an accident waiting to happen
As you were in the fast lane , prior to any lane changing it is you who is responsible for ensuring the inner lane is Actualy clear.
Even though the other car did " by your account " brake one traffic act , the fact you drove into an occupied lane and collided with a vehicle in that lane , means you did not enusre that lane was clear.
As two seperate drivers from two seperate vehicles state the other vehicle had completed its lane change and was therefore in the lane prior to your impact , this makes you liable. " sadly the undertaking and speeding offences " have no relavence to the charge you may face. even though it reads like an accident waiting to happen
What you haven't said (and may not know, ) was if the mini driver is to be prosecuted as well.
I can see the situation, two dumbos in lane two instead of lane one where they should have been, you are in lane one and go to overtake then correctly in lane three, when some smart-elbow comes charging up the inside, undertakes them and then pulls out into lane two travelling a lot faster than you. However, I suspect the police will take the view that if you knew somebody was behaving like an idiot, it does not absolve you from not taking that into account, when you pulled back into lane two - you should have made sure you knew where it was before you pulled back in. They may still prosecute the Mini driver!
I can see the situation, two dumbos in lane two instead of lane one where they should have been, you are in lane one and go to overtake then correctly in lane three, when some smart-elbow comes charging up the inside, undertakes them and then pulls out into lane two travelling a lot faster than you. However, I suspect the police will take the view that if you knew somebody was behaving like an idiot, it does not absolve you from not taking that into account, when you pulled back into lane two - you should have made sure you knew where it was before you pulled back in. They may still prosecute the Mini driver!
indeed middle lane drivers who do not go to the inner lane when it is clear to do so are a pain and this incident does show WHY this should be done.
however it has not been established if the inner lane was to become the exit point for another motorway or not as some are . hence why i did not comment on this.
however it has not been established if the inner lane was to become the exit point for another motorway or not as some are . hence why i did not comment on this.
all 3 lanes we're clear at the point of impact , THANK YOU to every body i am going to borrow the money to take the driver awareness course as i believe that any improvement is worth it to improve road saftey and althought i still believe i was correct in everything i did on that eventfull night , i might learn something thanks again to everyone
1 to 16 of 16
Latest Posts
High Street Sales Slumpm Government...
News2 mins ago
News7 mins ago
ChatterBank12 mins ago