the maoster:
switchlogic:
Blimey, I can’t begin to imagine how tedious people who send in these non events are. I watched the whole of that video and there was almost nothing worth recording let alone downloading and sending on to someone!
The first clip where dash cam car is turning right I’d bet my house on the fact that he was turning right without indicating yet still managed to summon up moral outrage that someone had dared to impede his God given right to absolutely anything he wanted.
No mate, you can hear the ticking of the indicator.
It´s the amount of outrage that makes me laugh though, as though this has never happened to anyone ever before. BOOM, up at 20 thousand feet for a minor infraction that happens every single day thousands of times.
Keep calm and drive on.
dieseldog999:
Carryfast:
How can he see ‘ahead’ of the trees when the trees are blocking the view through the bend and he hasn’t got the required superman x ray vision.Let alone the principle of don’t overtake on hazard lines which are effectively the same thing as solid lines regarding the rule don’t overtake at junctions etc.That’s why we use hazard lines to differentiate …hazards where of course we should not overtake.Although the thick zb’s who marked the road obviously don’t know it. 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
BECAUSE.
the trees arnt completely blocking the view,and,he,and anyone driving with a bit of gumption,can easily judge speed and distance to work out that if nothing comes round the bend for a set period of time then they cant be driving in the hidden zone of the trees using the oncoming traffic as a general guide,hence he overtook at exactly the right time without any drama or fuss.
its called safe overtaking.
no doubt chance in a million miss marples could be sitting in her broken down micra but you would have noticed the oncoming traffic stopping,and even so,you would see it miles away and be able to stop and pull back in front of one of the herberts.
Let’s get this right you’re saying that he knew that there was nothing approaching in the opposite direction hidden by the trees etc when he started the overtake at 1.10 ?.Bearing in mind that for most of that time anything that had gone behind the trees would have been hidden before it by the approaching truck in the opposite direction at 1.03 - 1.09.You know the one that this hero on a mission almost took the mirrors off,if the other driver hadn’t rightly gone for the kerb,because he can’t keep the thing between the lines.If not hidden by the approach to the left hand bend at 1.02- 1.05 or a combination of both.
Which leaves the inconvenient question of overtaking on hazard lines which are obviously there for a reason the limited visibility being one ( rule 127 ) not to mention the unarguable issue of junctions/lay by there ( rule 167 ).IE rule 127 and rule 167 are obviously combined at that point making the end of the solid lines meaningless.
Although to be fair the muppetry is just as bad in the case of the road planners who obviously can’t make their mind up whether it’s ok to overtake on the approach to blind bends and at junctions.In which case why bother with the hazard lines when might as well make it a free for all by removing them too and the return markings on the basis of might as well leave it for drivers to decide to stay on the wrong side of the road wherever they feel like it and for as long as they dare. 
After watching the video,the driver crossed the double white line with the trailer with total disregard for the law,I would give him 3 points for that and 10 for a great overtake
Legal or not it was completely unnecessary. The driver is a ■■■
Let’s get this right you’re saying that he knew that there was nothing approaching in the opposite direction hidden by the trees etc when he started the overtake at 1.10 ?.Bearing in mind that for most of that time anything that had gone behind the trees would have been hidden before it by the approaching truck in the opposite direction at 1.03 - 1.09.You know the one that this hero on a mission almost took the mirrors off,if the other driver hadn’t rightly gone for the kerb,because he can’t keep the thing between the lines.If not hidden by the approach to the left hand bend at 1.02- 1.05 or a combination of both.
Which leaves the inconvenient question of overtaking on hazard lines which are obviously there for a reason the limited visibility being one ( rule 127 ) not to mention the unarguable issue of junctions/lay by there ( rule 167 ).IE rule 127 and rule 167 are obviously combined at that point making the end of the solid lines meaningless.
Although to be fair the muppetry is just as bad in the case of the road planners who obviously can’t make their mind up whether it’s ok to overtake on the approach to blind bends and at junctions.In which case why bother with the hazard lines when might as well make it a free for all by removing them too and the return markings on the basis of might as well leave it for drivers to decide to stay on the wrong side of the road wherever they feel like it and for as long as they dare.
[/quote]
well to simplify.
you can see the road is 100 percent clear.
theres nothing regarding road markings to prohibit any overtaking.
he overtook properly and without mishap with perfect timing,job done and really no need for a fanny with a dashcam to be wanting their 2 mins of youtube fame. 
It really is absurd that some on here think the drivers overtake was fine and quite normal. Do you think the said driver would have made the same decision if he knew a traffic car was following him? I somehow doubt it but if he did he would definitely be pulled in further up the road.How much time do you actually think it saved? A couple of minutes at most but probably not even that.
Was it worth the risk? Absolutely not.These drivers get away with these poor decisions for so long then one day when it all goes wrong they blame everyone but themselves if they are still alive.
jakethesnake:
It really is absurd that some on here think the drivers overtake was fine and quite normal. Do you think the said driver would have made the same decision if he knew a traffic car was following him? I somehow doubt it but if he did he would definitely be pulled in further up the road.How much time do you actually think it saved? A couple of minutes at most but probably not even that.
Was it worth the risk? Absolutely not.These drivers get away with these poor decisions for so long then one day when it all goes wrong they blame everyone but themselves if they are still alive.
By the time he got to Burbage lights they would all be behind him . A trip past Lomas’s yard to see the line of wrecked units shows that they don’t all get it right .
There’s no need for what he did. I hope his employers see this video and take action. All.it takes is someone in a sports car or a motor bike coming in oposits direction at speed and he’s stuffed.
Taking over 1 car 2 at at push yes.
And I wouldt mind but further along there’s some traffic lights and I imagine he’d be sat there on a red light and all traffic just catch up with him anyway.
Slow and steady wins the race.
Although I do hate these dash cam police
.i meam.they get all pent up over minor things. Some incidents arnt even worth stressing over
I’d love see how good there driving is
Though most likely legal, I wonder if he’d have done that on his C+E test, and if so, whether he’d have passed.
ezydriver:
Though most likely legal, I wonder if he’d have done that on his C+E test, and if so, whether he’d have passed.
I reckon most of us would struggle now to pass a test after 30 or 40 years on the road! 
I remember at Tilcon when we used to have a driver assesser come every so often from head office and go out with each driver, he jumped in with one of our longest serving drivers and told him to just drive normally. Crawling up the hill out of Ashbourne in the Gardner engine Foden eight legger and out comes the flask for a brew; “Always reckon to sup a cup or two up here” and I believe the assesser wasn’t too impressed! 
Pete.