…not saying he did have the wrong attitude and that he denied everything, I just meant it was just suggested earlier, and could possibly be the ‘more to it’.
Hiya near jct 15 …M6 at stoke the ministery/police have closed a layby because drivers are exiting the motorway
going round the rounabout pulling to the left lane them smacking into the back of parked lorries in the layby.
I think 5 people have been killed in the last 12 months…are drivers just not looking where they are
going these days…its always cars…I was told this has happened on the A55 near the A55/A494 with the same
problem… drivers come out of the circular loop road, pull to the left into the layby.SMACK. no deaths there.
John
nickyboy:
This rings similar with the Fowler Welch crash where he hit the bus stopped in lane one, the bus driver was charged even tho the truck hit him. It was deemed his fault as he had continued to limp the bus along at very low speed after it had broken down twice before instead of using the shoulder.
I’m sorry but I don’t see any real similarity between a bus driver knowingly limping up a motorway in a vehicle he knew was unfit to be driven and a lorry driver parking to unload in a situation that whilst not ideal is also not by itself particularly dangerous.
tachograph:
nickyboy:
This rings similar with the Fowler Welch crash where he hit the bus stopped in lane one, the bus driver was charged even tho the truck hit him. It was deemed his fault as he had continued to limp the bus along at very low speed after it had broken down twice before instead of using the shoulder.I’m sorry but I don’t see any real similarity between a bus driver knowingly limping up a motorway in a vehicle he knew was unfit to be driven and a lorry driver parking to unload in a situation that whilst not ideal is also not by itself particularly dangerous.
I’m talking about the responsibilites of the driver not the situation itself. While you cant account for other peoples actions as a driver it is your responsibility to park your vehicle safely.
tachograph:
delboytwo:
the accident happen hereenter these in google
54.918007,-1.954107
if you look at the map the place he was delivering was the first property fell cottages
Are you sure that’s the right place Del ?
Whilst not being an ideal place to park that certainly doesn’t fit the perception I had from the description “just after a blind summit, on a bend, against double white lines”.
No, that’s not the location. Those co-ords take you to a straight bit of road about 400 yards away. Move your street view south about 400 yards to a slight right hand bend and that’s the crest of a small hill and on a bend, presumably where it happened as they are called Fell Cottages.
del949:
and had I been making a delivery to those cottages I would have been tempted to park there if reversing in was a problem.
WADR Del, imho that makes you a complete fool. There is no way I would even consider stopping there in anything bigger than a van (to either turn in or park fully on that bit of rough ground before the entrance). A small hill crest it may be (travelling South) but it is double white lines, a blind crest (in as much as you can’t see what is coming the other way) and to some extent a blind corner due to the trees as well, plus let’s not ignore the fact it’s a national speed limit road. If he’d continued another 50 yards he would’ve been clear of the blind crest, the bend and the double white lines.
Once again, I’m not trying to excuse the van driver in any way but in light of the street view images I can understand more why the judges were harsh.
Whatever happened to stopping in the distance you can see… Who goes over a blind summit in low sun at nearly 60MPH… 
Condolences to the family, but it sounds like it was inevitable if he drives like that. 
Rob K:
tachograph:
delboytwo:
the accident happen hereenter these in google
54.918007,-1.954107
if you look at the map the place he was delivering was the first property fell cottages
Are you sure that’s the right place Del ?
Whilst not being an ideal place to park that certainly doesn’t fit the perception I had from the description “just after a blind summit, on a bend, against double white lines”.
No, that’s not the location. Those co-ords take you to a straight bit of road about 400 yards away. Move your street view south about 400 yards to a slight right hand bend and that’s the crest of a small hill and on a bend, presumably where it happened as they are called Fell Cottages.
Yes I meant the cottage/workshop.
Anyway it is the correct place, British Metalcraft Workshop.
Rob K:
del949:
and had I been making a delivery to those cottages I would have been tempted to park there if reversing in was a problem.WADR Del, imho that makes you a complete fool. There is no way I would even consider stopping there in anything bigger than a van (to either turn in or park fully on that bit of rough ground before the entrance). A small hill crest it may be (travelling South) but it is double white lines, a blind crest (in as much as you can’t see what is coming the other way) and to some extent a blind corner due to the trees as well, plus let’s not ignore the fact it’s a national speed limit road. If he’d continued another 50 yards he would’ve been clear of the blind crest, the bend and the double white lines.
Once again, I’m not trying to excuse the van driver in any way but in light of the street view images I can understand more why the judges were harsh.
It’s not an ideal place to park but I can’t see why the lorry driver would have been held responsible for the accident.
Presumably the lorry would have been parked on the same side of the road as the cottage approximately where I’ve marked on the picture, driving without due care maybe, but to be held responsible for another driver running into the back of the lorry seems extremely harsh to me.
tachograph:
Presumably the lorry would have been parked on the same side of the road as the cottage approximately where I’ve marked on the picture, driving without due care maybe, but to be held responsible for another driver running into the back of the lorry seems extremely harsh to me.
I was (wrongly) under the impression that parking where you had a solid line centre line on your side was a ‘must not’ in the Highway Code. Well, it IS a ‘must not’ but there are exceptions in rule 240 for “except to pick up or set down passengers, or to load or unload goods” so in actual fact he had every right to stop there as far as that rule goes and I do now agree with you that his sentence was harsh. Personally I wouldn’t have stopped on the carriageway there regardless of the legalities as it was asking for trouble.
Let’s not forget that the street view pics don’t show a true picture of what a car/van driver would see. The height of the camera on them is more inline with what you’d see out of the window driving an FH or similar and the brow of the crest isn’t quite visible even at this height. If he was in a light van then his view ahead would be even more restricted (not that any of this is relevant as he clearly wasn’t looking out of the winscreen anyway 
).
Hiya …now… how dangerious is it stopping on a mororway for a accident. three lanes of standing traffic
and you know full well traffic is driving detween 50mph and 80mph straight into the back of you.
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE STOPPED ON A MOTORWAY…its happened to all of us
its just many of us have got away with not having the crash.
3300John:
Hiya …now… how dangerious is it stopping on a mororway for a accident. three lanes of standing traffic
and you know full well traffic is driving detween 50mph and 80mph straight into the back of you.
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE STOPPED ON A MOTORWAY…its happened to all of us
its just many of us have got away with not having the crash.
If you read this again,
journallive.co.uk/north-east … -31028901/
you will see that the driveway was full of snow and blocked with cars, so the driver IMO parked on the road,
To me it looks like the lorry driver is paying the price of another drivers stupidity, that road is open enough to see a car easily enough in daylight the sun in your face. To miss a truck with its hazards on. Quiet simply the van driver was not driving to the conditions on the road.
What if the lorry driver had been reversing into the entrance for the property?
Im trying to put myself in this guys shoes. If i was delivering there without ever being there before what would i do. If it looks awkward or dodgy ive always been a stop outside get a lay of the land type of driver. I would never drive into a situation where i could end up on youtube video.
So it looks like i would having been going to prison for 2 years aswell, lorries are big vehicles you do not have a lot of options on where you park and are limited on where you can turn. Is this guy supposed to park 100metres down the road walk back assess the situation in the yard, then reverse back into double whites to do his reverse into the yard?
Id be extremely interested in the type of lorry it was.
To me its a ■■■■■■■ joke and it baffles me how someone can go to jail for 2 years for doing his job.
merc0447:
Im trying to put myself in this guys shoes. If i was delivering there without ever being there before what would i do. If it looks awkward or dodgy ive always been a stop outside get a lay of the land type of driver. I would never drive into a situation where i could end up on youtube video.So it looks like i would having been going to prison for 2 years aswell, lorries are big vehicles you do not have a lot of options on where you park and are limited on where you can turn. Is this guy supposed to park 100metres down the road walk back assess the situation in the yard, then reverse back into double whites to do his reverse into the yard?
Id be extremely interested in the type of lorry it was.
To me its a [zb] joke and it baffles me how someone can go to jail for 2 years for doing his job.
i think its was a 9 ton flat bed
merc0447:
Im trying to put myself in this guys shoes. If i was delivering there without ever being there before what would i do. If it looks awkward or dodgy ive always been a stop outside get a lay of the land type of driver. I would never drive into a situation where i could end up on youtube video.So it looks like i would having been going to prison for 2 years aswell, lorries are big vehicles you do not have a lot of options on where you park and are limited on where you can turn. Is this guy supposed to park 100metres down the road walk back assess the situation in the yard, then reverse back into double whites to do his reverse into the yard?
Id be extremely interested in the type of lorry it was.
To me its a [zb] joke and it baffles me how someone can go to jail for 2 years for doing his job.
Whether you like it or not you can do your job as well as you can but one small mistake can lead to you going to jail, it doesn’t matter if you set out to do it or not. Those drivers charged with causing death by dangerous driving when involved in an accident were just doing their job but one wrong decision whether its following the vehicle in front too closely or glancing at a map or taking your eyes off the road for a few seconds, we’ve all done it but at the wrong time it can have far leading consequences.
At the end of the day, we weren’t there, we don’t know what the road conditions were like, we don’t know what the view was like when the sun was low, all we can do is speculate.
Looking at the road itself it goes up hill in a SSE direction so it would have had to be early morning for the sun to cause any issues, and even then using the sun visor would have been more than sufficient to block out most of the brightness. If it had been afternoon/evening, well then I call BS on the whole thing, the sun would have been behind the tree’s to the right of the road.
How do the judges/investigators know it was the sun blinding the van driver that caused his unfortunate death, not like they could ask him. It just seems like a easy simple excuse to put the blame on the truck driver.
Reading the above article and further news on the subject, the van driver was as much at fault as the truck driver. In fact I’d go as far to say that, had the van driver been driving at a speed appropriate to the conditions on the road, he’d still be alive now. Speeding and an icy, snowy winters day with the sun reflecting off the snow is just asking for trouble. If it hadn’t been a truck there, he’d of hit something else almost certainly.
madmossy:
How do the judges/investigators know it was the sun blinding the van driver that caused his unfortunate death, not like they could ask him.
… is a good point. 
Surely the van driver shouldn’t have being doing that kind of speed if he was blinded by the sun.
madmossy:
Looking at the road itself it goes up hill in a SSE direction so it would have had to be early morning for the sun to cause any issues, and even then using the sun visor would have been more than sufficient to block out most of the brightness. If it had been afternoon/evening, well then I call BS on the whole thing, the sun would have been behind the tree’s to the right of the road.How do the judges/investigators know it was the sun blinding the van driver that caused his unfortunate death, not like they could ask him. It just seems like a easy simple excuse to put the blame on the truck driver.
Reading the above article and further news on the subject, the van driver was as much at fault as the truck driver. In fact I’d go as far to say that, had the van driver been driving at a speed appropriate to the conditions on the road, he’d still be alive now. Speeding and an icy, snowy winters day with the sun reflecting off the snow is just asking for trouble. If it hadn’t been a truck there, he’d of hit something else almost certainly.
Quite - and if the road goes in a reasonably straight line over a few miles, the van driver would have been bothered by it a time or two before so it wouldn’t have been a surprise on this section of road where the truck was.
madmossy:
How do the judges/investigators know it was the sun blinding the van driver that caused his unfortunate death, not like they could ask him.
You would hope, with a fatal incident, that this would be properly determined and taken into account, along with all the other factors, in order to determine where the responsibility (in other words blame) lies. In this instance the trucker didn’t seem to do anything that any reasonable person might not have done and although that road doesn’t look particularly dangerous on streetview, his actual positioning must have contributed to the unfortunate outcome, otherwise he wouldn’t be guilty. I don’t understand though how the charge was careless driving if he was parked, however dangerously. Seems like it could’ve easily happened to anyone.