Another waste of taxpayers money, procurator fiscal will never be able to get a prosecution with that video.
What officer I cut someone up? My lorry are you 100% sure it was my lorry, you 100% sure I was the driver? Let me check my diary to see if I was driving, what officer there is no way to tell what date that video was taken.
I’m not defending the driver, I think it is really bad driving but I don’t know the exact circumstances to give a cast iron view on it. What really grinds my gears is these ■■■■■■■ cameras everywhere, catching everything, thought they where only supposed to be for insurance purposes? It’s a wonder why operators even want livery anymore, I wouldn’t if I ran my own firm in case one of my drivers got youtube’d eating a bloody Apple or summit 
merc0447:
Another waste of taxpayers money, procurator fiscal will never be able to get a prosecution with that video.
What officer I cut someone up? My lorry are you 100% sure it was my lorry, you 100% sure I was the driver? Let me check my diary to see if I was driving, what officer there is no way to tell what date that video was taken.
I’m not defending the driver, I think it is really bad driving but I don’t know the exact circumstances to give a cast iron view on it. What really grinds my gears is these [zb] cameras everywhere, catching everything, thought they where only supposed to be for insurance purposes? It’s a wonder why operators even want livery anymore, I wouldn’t if I ran my own firm in case one of my drivers got youtube’d eating a bloody Apple or summit
These cameras are HD and by what I saw the index number can easily be identified with a little enhancing.
His truck driver is bang to rights Merc he video clearly shout him running through a give way at considerable speed
Also a lot of these cameras have GPS and a date and time stamp.
Carryfast:
So he supposedly knows it is a give way not a a sweeping right hand bend.But he then approaches the former in the ( still admittedly excessively fast ) way that he ( would have been ) expected to approach the latter not the former.While having pointed out the different way in which at least one local authority has chosen to layout a similar junction regards advanced warning let alone the non existent road markings in this case.In which case either we’re dealing with a suicidal psychotic driver or a cavalier incompetent council.Or at most maybe a combination of the latter combined with a case of driving without due care and attention in the case of the former. 
There is no need for a warning sign in advance of the give way, those signs are for when there is not clear visibility of the give way signs, such are here or here, not for a junction like the one being discussed where the give way can easily be seen.
This is the official guidance on the use of such signs (from Traffic Signs Manual chapter 4)
The number of signs is irrelevant anyway, if that driver had been there once he had probably been there dozens of times before, I’m sure he was perfectly aware of the road layout, but for some reason on this occasion he didn’t take heed of it. I doubt a massive flashing sign saying “warning junction ahead - slow down” would have made any difference.
Glen A9:
Carryfast:
So he supposedly knows it is a give way not a a sweeping right hand bend.But he then approaches the former in the ( still admittedly excessively fast ) way that he ( would have been ) expected to approach the latter not the former.While having pointed out the different way in which at least one local authority has chosen to layout a similar junction regards advanced warning let alone the non existent road markings in this case.In which case either we’re dealing with a suicidal psychotic driver or a cavalier incompetent council.Or at most maybe a combination of the latter combined with a case of driving without due care and attention in the case of the former.
There is no need for a warning sign in advance of the give way, those signs are for when there is not clear visibility of the give way signs, such are here or here, not for a junction like the one being discussed where the give way can easily be seen.
This is the official guidance on the use of such signs (from Traffic Signs Manual chapter 4)
0
The number of signs is irrelevant anyway, if that driver had been there once he had probably been there dozens of times before, I’m sure he was perfectly aware of the road layout, but for some reason on this occasion he didn’t take heed of it. I doubt a massive flashing sign saying “warning junction ahead - slow down” would have made any difference.
I think you’ve defeated your own argument.The guidelines provided there regards advanced warning seem to be based on prevailing speed limits,as would be expected.Not so called ‘visibility’ of give way signage put too close to the junction,as in this case.
While assuming it is supposedly all about ‘visibility’ then feel free to explain the difference in the example of the A272 which I posted in which the straight approach is no different as is effectively the junction…Let alone the issue of the worn out road markings on the junction itself.
As for the idea that the driver was well aware of the give way and the junction ahead and just chose to ignore it his defence in that case would obviously be a plea of insanity.As opposed to a plea of guilty to driving without due care and attention while in mitigation the local highways authority are done for negligence.
Glen A9:
Carryfast:
So he supposedly knows it is a give way not a a sweeping right hand bend.But he then approaches the former in the ( still admittedly excessively fast ) way that he ( would have been ) expected to approach the latter not the former.While having pointed out the different way in which at least one local authority has chosen to layout a similar junction regards advanced warning let alone the non existent road markings in this case.In which case either we’re dealing with a suicidal psychotic driver or a cavalier incompetent council.Or at most maybe a combination of the latter combined with a case of driving without due care and attention in the case of the former.
There is no need for a warning sign in advance of the give way, those signs are for when there is not clear visibility of the give way signs, such are here or here, not for a junction like the one being discussed where the give way can easily be seen.
This is the official guidance on the use of such signs (from Traffic Signs Manual chapter 4)
0
The number of signs is irrelevant anyway, if that driver had been there once he had probably been there dozens of times before, I’m sure he was perfectly aware of the road layout, but for some reason on this occasion he didn’t take heed of it. I doubt a massive flashing sign saying “warning junction ahead - slow down” would have made any difference.
I think you’ve defeated your own argument.The guidelines provided there regards advanced warning seem to be based on prevailing speed limits,as would be expected.Not so called ‘visibility’ of give way signage put too close to the junction,as in this case.
While assuming it is supposedly all about ‘visibility’ then feel free to explain the difference in the example of the A272 which I posted in which the straight approach is no different as is effectively the junction…Let alone the issue of the worn out road markings on the junction itself.
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=123357#p1917832
As for the idea that the driver was well aware of the give way and the junction ahead and just chose to ignore it his defence in that case would obviously be a plea of insanity.As opposed to a plea of guilty to driving without due care and attention while in mitigation the local highways authority are done for negligence.
Carryfast:
I think you’ve defeated your own argument.The guidelines provided there regards advanced warning seem to be based on prevailing speed limits,as would be expected.Not so called ‘visibility’ of give way signage put too close to the junction,as in this case.
No, read it again, the visibility (or lack of) to require such a warning is dependant on the speed of traffic.
The table says for a road with traffic over 50mph a sign should be used if clear visibility is below 150 metres, which it clearly isn’t at Tomich.
While assuming it is supposedly all about ‘visibility’ then feel free to explain the difference in the example of the A272 which I posted in which the straight approach is no different as is effectively the junction…Let alone the issue of the worn out road markings on the junction itself.
A better solution there would be to cut the trees back so the give way sign on the nearside is visible from a greater distance. Or maybe there is just a high number of accidents due to people driving badly.
As for the idea that the driver was well aware of the give way and the junction ahead and just chose to ignore it his defence in that case would obviously be a plea of insanity.As opposed to a plea of guilty to driving without due care and attention while in mitigation the local highways authority are done for negligence.
Only the driver will know why he did what he did. I doubt he was deliberately trying to run the car off the road, so it seems most likely that he didn’t see the approaching traffic for whatever reason. It’s basically a SMIDSY - except truck vs car rather than the usual car vs motorbike/bike.
Whats all the fuss about its only one sweaty sock trying to kill another sweaty sock christ if the referendum had gone the right way we would probably be at war with them right now over the oil !!!
amamdada:
Whats all the fuss about its only one sweaty sock trying to kill another sweaty sock christ if the referendum had gone the right way we would probably be at war with them right now over the oil !!!
Don’t talk like a pratt !! Oil at the price it is at the moment ain’t worth fighting over 
Glen A9:
Only the driver will know why he did what he did. I doubt he was deliberately trying to run the car off the road, so it seems most likely that he didn’t see the approaching traffic for whatever reason. It’s basically a SMIDSY - except truck vs car rather than the usual car vs motorbike/bike.
I think the truck was approaching the junction at a speed which wouldn’t possibly have allowed it to stop regardless which suggests something more than just a SMIDSY.
I agree that at the speed he was approaching looked like he had no intention of stopping, but I doubt that was due to lack of knowledge of the road layout. I think it is very unlikely that that was the first time that the driver had driven on that road.
Glen A9:
I agree that at the speed he was approaching looked like he had no intention of stopping, but I doubt that was due to lack of knowledge of the road layout. I think it is very unlikely that that was the first time that the driver had driven on that road.
the dude made a simple mistake,most likely mirror/door pillar blindspot to the detriment of the car which wasn’t exactly hanging about,local driver,local truck,no doubt knows the road like the back of his hand etc.simple mistake that fortunately didn’t kill anybody,though no doubt the car driver killed his y fronts…any truckie has,and easily could do exactly the same thing.he wasn’t slowing down enough as he saw what looked like a clear droad,and would know just how fast to take it.simple oversight on the trucks part,but simple to the effect that even the holymolys on here must have nearly hit someone from a blind spot before.mabey not in such spectacular fashion,but itl just as easy happen to you.
He,s been looking through the trees and missed the car
