Keep DEATH off the Roads

Posted by: Steve Toy on 05 December 2004

It's December, the month for a greater number of drink-drivers who drive slowly and erratically, ocasionally getting in my way while I ferry punters around the countryside of Mid-Staffordshire and beyond.

Whilst I will never condone drink-driving, most of those who take the risk of getting behind the wheel of a car after a few drinks tend to keep a low profile, drive to the speed limit or below, and just let you overtake them when a safe opportunity arises...

I was given a job on Saturday night to pick up an elderly couple from a hotel in a neighbouring town at 11.30 pm. Wishing to be as punctual as possible under these circumstances I put my foot down a bit on the open road - a straight stretch of road nearly a mile long across Cannock Chase with good visibility. I came upon a car travelling at less than 50mph in this 60mph zone and overtook it without incident.

My speed probably nudged the 70 mark before I came upon a second vehicle a couple of hundred yards further up the road, also travelling below 50 mph. There was still enough straight road in front of me and still nothing was coming the other way, so I attempted to overtake this vehicle - a silver R-registration Corsa with blacked-out windows and an oversized tailpipe...

As I accelerated and pulled alongside him I soon became aware that he had also started to accelerate. I quickly realised that I couldn't out-accelerate him, and I could now see the headlamps of an approaching car in the distance. I glanced at my speedometer and its reading was just above 80, so I aborted my overtaking manoeuvre and took my foot off the accelerator with the intention of pulling in behind him. I've met idiots who can't stand being overtaken before, but this particular specimen went one stage further...

Having proved that he could out-accelerate me in his hot hatch, he then attempted to prove that he could out-brake me, and he effectively pinned me in the outside lane in the face of an on-coming vehicle.

At this point I started to panic a little and just stood on my brakes. As my speed dropped to around 30mph we were still neck-and-neck with the oncoming vehicle looming ever closer.

Finally, given that the Skoda Octavia I drive is equipped with disc brakes all round, I managed to out-brake him and pull in behind, with seconds to go before impact with the oncoming vehicle. Once I was safely behind him he sped back up to just under 50 mph.

I waited a few seconds before briefly switching on my main beams in order to see his rear number plate more clearly (it was partly covered in salt from the road). He promptly switched on his rear foglamps before slowing down to 40 mph.

As we entered a 30 mph zone his speed dropped to a little over 20 mph and he began gently weaving slightly across the central white lines.

I finally lost him at the next set of traffic lights, and I was 9 minutes late picking up the elderly couple who were waiting outside in the cold. They were very sympathetic when I told them what had happened.

I want to report the incident to the police, but as there were no witnesses I guess I'd be wasting my time - and theirs.

I'm aware that in the event of surviving a head-on collision under such circumstances, I'd more-than-likely be charged with reckless driving as my version of events would be highly implausible.

I welcome your comments chaps.

Regards,

Steve.

PS: As a rule I don't overtake vehicles that are already travelling at or above the posted speed limit on single-carriageway roads.

[This message was edited by Steve Toy on Mon 06 December 2004 at 5:58.]
Posted on: 05 December 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Well, I have to say that you did exactly what I'd do, even down to the flash of the headlights afterwards. There is no guessing of the mental state or attitude of the other driver, so avoiding the situation is usually advised. However, I can't spend my life driving as if every other motorist is an incompetent psychopath.
Glad nothing came of it, and rest assured that he'll have a crash soon enough. Or annoy a baseball bat-carrying nutter.

Tony
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Bruce Woodhouse
An alternative view?

'I was just popping home from bridge club in my grandsons car when this big Skoda came up right behind me. He'd just zoomed past the chap following me and must have been doing 70 when he came hurtling up on my tail and tried to pass. I put me foot down, well you would wouldn't you, but he still tried to overtake. I bottled out because I could see somebody coming and hit the brakes, bugger is that so did he! We nearly ended up side by side with this car still coming on the other side. Fair shook us up I can tell you, drove pretty shakily for a bit after that. Hope the guy is alright. Mind you if he stuck to the limit it wouldn't have happened. I mean, late at night, December revellers on the road etc it's not safe is it? Best to set off early I reckon rather than be rushing isn't it.'

By the way Spud, your Grandpa and i did enjoy that Emanate chap on the stereo. Bangin!


WinkerBruce
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Tony Lockhart
The motorist's job is to obey the law, not enforce it. So blocking someone by suddenly changing speed is wrong.
Quite a few 'blockers' have regretted their actions after finding out they had blocked an unmarked police car on a call.

Tony
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by paul99
A frightening story Steve.

Speed matching on over-taking is not so uncommon. It is usually revenge for you trying to overtake. I used to drive powerful cars and this did not bother me, I could always out-accelerate. In one case the driver of a 2 lire Peugeot GTI burst his engine trying to stop me overtaking.

My horror story concerns someone overtaking me on a dual carriageway (not a motorway). As he pulled alongside he matched speeds.

Up ahead on the inside lane was a van. I wanted to overtake it as it appeared to be travelling slowly. I couldn't because of the speed-matcher to my right. He had been speed matching for quite a while now.

I was used to being able to out-accelerate anything so I thought I'll just speed up and pull in front of him.

The car I had then was not so powerful. Only a 4 litre engine. His car was able to match.

It was then that I realized that the van in front of me was stationary - no hazard lights and no apparent reason to be stopped in the middle of the inside lane.

With the speed-matcher next to me I had to brake hard. I warped three brake discs stopping in time.

Another frightening situation:

On another accassion, on a motorway, I pulled into the outside lane to overtake a line of slower vehicles in the middle lane. I checked the outside lane before pulling out - all clear.

Once in the ouside lane, I checked the rear view mirror again and I was surprised to see two shoulders. A car had sprung into position behind me and was so close that all I could see was the right-hand shoulder of the passenger and the left of the driver.

The family were in the car with me. I was quite concerned. If anything goes wrong there is going to be an accident.

I couldn't pull over because of the line of slower vehicles in the middle lane. But there was a gap about six or more cars ahead. I wanted to get away from the idiot behind me. I couldn't slow down because I was afraid the tail-gater would run into me.

I sped up to get away from the tail-gater and move into the gap. Now 85 MPH, he is still right behind me, just two shoulders in the rear view.

You can guess what happened, I floored the accelerator to get out of danger. As I pulled away from the tail gater - I realized that it was an unmarked police car. There was a blue light hidden behind the radiator grille.

As the policeman said, we are going to do you for 95 MPH, you know you were going a lot faster, if you complain we'll do you for over 100 MPH.

Both of these were rather frightening incidents.

If the police or the speed cameras don't get you some lunatic driver will.

Driving is no fun these days.

Regards,

Paul.

[This message was edited by paul99 on Mon 06 December 2004 at 8:26.]
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by matthewr
"Finally, given that the Skoda Octavia I drive is equipped with disc brakes all round, I managed to out-brake him and pull in behind, with seconds to go before impact with the oncoming vehicle."

You are Alan Partridge and I claim my £5.

Matthew
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by andy c
quote:
I want to report the incident to the police, but as there were no witnesses I guess I'd be wasting my time - and theirs.


This time of year, if the police get a whiff of a drink driver they will be after them, trust me. Get the registered number and 999 it straight away. Its one thing not to prosecute the due care, but its another for the cop to go knock on a door and get a drink driver out of it.

The other thing you don't know, steve, is that someone else could have reported similar driving by the same vehicle you were invloved with, then there are two stories to listen to etc!

The problem today is there are not enough people who do ring in. Ring in, make the complaint, make ssure the cop deals with it properly (you pay their wages!), and then let the other driver know he/she was caught!

andy c!
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by BLT
Exactly the same thing happened to a friend of mine, only he wasn't so fortunate. He ended up having a head-on collision and the "blocker" drove off. Fortunately the "blocker" eventually turned himself into the police (but with, as you would expect, a different version of events). My friend was charged with "Causing an accident through dangerous driving" - a very serious offence. He was found to be "Not Proven" (the Scottish verdict which means "we think that you did it but we can't prove it"). The Judge did point out that he was unhappy with several aspects of the "blocker"'s story, but he was not formally charged. The only successful prosecution from the accident was for the poor bugger who was hit head-on by my friend - he wasn't wearing his seatbelt.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Stewart Platts
You should report the incident.How long will it be before they pull this kind of stunt on someone else? What if they do this when they're drunk or drugged?

If the Police are unable to do anything about this particular incident, they may find something else to prosecute the chav scum who think this behavior is amusing. Perhaps they are driving without insurance/tax or maybe the vehicle is defective. They could have stolen property or drugs at their houses. Getting their collar felt would be a good thing as these morons are rarely squeaky clean.

I really enjoy cycling and stay away from busy roads to avoid traffic. However, keeping to quiet country roads seems to present a different kind of danger. On two occasions cars driven at high speed by youngsters have been aimed directly at me, the car veering out of the way when it's just a few yards from me and the occupants laughing their heads off. I've lost count of the number of times a car has driven up to me and the driver has leaned on the car's horn, which is extremely startling, or the window has been lowered to permit some mindless tirade of insults from the burberry baseball cap wearing bastards. Or a car drives past and something is thrown at me. It should be perfectly legal to blow their heads apart. God how I would love to do that! One thing is definitely certain, scumbags absolutely have to say something (always mindless, usually insulting) or pull some kind of idiotic stunt. They simply cannot help it.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
I put me foot down, well you would wouldn't you, but he still tried to overtake. I bottled out because I could see somebody coming and hit the brakes,


You're kidding, right?

There is one little detail I've kept back until now: just after we entered the 30 mph zone he accelerated away from me, probably up to about 50 mph before hitting his brakes. I doubt an old codger would do that. Roll Eyes

Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Steve Toy
I have just reported the incident to the police. Given that I have no independent witness, they can do nothing other than keep a record.

They also said that they didn't have the resources to "keep an eye" on the little wanker.

Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Steve Toy
Maybe it's time to round up chavs and waste some bullets...

Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by andy c
quote:
I have just reported the incident to the police. Given that I have no independent witness, they can do nothing other than keep a record


Do you live in the Met area then?

I am amazed that they won't even speak with the person concerned. In Notts they Winker would (and should, I might add!)

No wonder you feel dissolusioned, steve.

andy c!
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
Do you live in the Met area then?



No, I live in a rural Staffordshire, a place where there are 220 yellow boxes...

Regards,

Steve.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by John Sheridan
quote:
I am amazed that they won't even speak with the person concerned. In Notts they Winker would (and should, I might add!)


that is complete and utter bullshit. I've been informed by 'the met' that it's an invasion of someone's civil liberties to go and knock on their door just on the say-so of someone who's nearly been killed by them - and I have the written statement from the officer to prove it because I didn't believe it either.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by andy c
quote:
that is complete and utter bullshit. I've been informed by 'the met' that it's an invasion of someone's civil liberties to go and knock on their door just on the say-so of someone who's nearly been killed by them - and I have the written statement from the officer to prove it because I didn't believe it either.


Hi John,
I don't agree. If investigating a complaint regarding a traffic matter entails confirming who the driver was etc there are powers in place to do that. Also the officer can go and knock on the door of the 'offending' driver to ascertain his version of events.

There are laws in place to cover the issue of interviews, and also stated cases re trespass of officers on persons private property.

I am not privvy to the policies surrounding the prosecution of offenders by other forces for traffic offences, but I am privvy to how the law works in these matters. If they choose not to investigate the matter and give you reasons for that, and you accept that, then thats your choice...

The engagement of article 8 of the human rights convention re right to privacy would not go so far as a breach of said article if the means were proved to be proportional, legal, and necessary.

and, to quote you, John, that is not utter bullshit either.

regards,

andy c!
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by long-time-dead
Steve

Glad to hear you managed to escape.

If the police REALLY wanted to do something about the plague of "chav-mobiles" that pollute the roads, they could - very easily.

If a car is modified outwith the original specification then the insurance company that holds the policy for the vehicle MUST be informed and a policy revision undertaken. If this is not done, and the vehicle is used, the policy is effectively null and void. These vehicles are driving on our roads without insurance.

There may well be a few serious enthusiasts who run modified cars and hold suitable policies but I would guess that the vast majority of "youff" don't.

Maybe the police force should worry less about the occasional speeding motorist and concentrate their efforts on ensuring that drivers are insured properly.
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Reginald Halliday
(Referring to Steve Toy's original post)
Perhaps another example of the 'I-Me-Mine' conjugation engendered by Mrs Thatcher's benificence:
I can do what I jolly well want.
You can go and get *****ed.
We don't like it.
They should do something about it, as long as 'it' doesn't apply to me because: (see 'a')

Optimistically yours,

Reginald
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by John Sheridan
quote:

If they choose not to investigate the matter and give you reasons for that, and you accept that, then thats your choice...


well given that the police (in London) don't appear to give a toss, the only other option seems to be taking the law into your own hands. Is that what you suggest we do?
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Steve Toy
Thanks for the words of support chaps Smile

quote:
Once in the ouside lane, I checked the rear view mirror again and I was surprised to see two shoulders. A car had sprung into position behind me and was so close that all I could see was the right-hand shoulder of the passenger and the left of the driver.

The family were in the car with me. I was quite concerned. If anything goes wrong there is going to be an accident.

I couldn't pull over because of the line of slower vehicles in the middle lane. But there was a gap about six or more cars ahead. I wanted to get away from the idiot behind me. I couldn't slow down because I was afraid the tail-gater would run into me.



I've heard agent provocateur stories of coppers in unmarked vehicles deliberately inciting drivers to speed in this way.

As a fairly experienced driver who often has to contend with tailgaiters, I'd never increase my speed in an attempt to get away from them, and by the same token I'd never tailgate a slow driver in an attempt to speed them up. Experience tells me that in both cases it simply doesn't have the desired effect.

I'd certainly prefer to be tailgated at 40 mph than 105 mph...

If you are being tailgated you need to double your stopping distance between you and the vehicle infront (if there is one.) Next you just touch your brake pedal. If you don't wish to reduce your speed at all you can even do this with your left foot just enough to activate the brake-light switch without actually engaging the brakes themselves.

If this doesn't have the desired effect, you then take your foot off the accelerator and allow your speed to drop very gently ( as much as whip-lash injuries can result in very lucrative claims you just don't want to take such a risk to your long term health.)

Allow your speed to drop as low as, say 40 mph and then accelerate away. If the arse-hogger gets the message by now then fine. If not, hit your brakes a bit harder.

Regarding our agent provocateur friends, I'd have accepted the 95mph ticket, and having safely deposited it in my glovebox I'd then have asked for their warrant numbers and threatened them with a complaint of perverting the course of justice - given that my actual speed was 105 mph. (I guess that they'd have to supply evidence as to my actual speed, and this would be at odds somewhat with the recorded speed indicated on the ticket now in my glovebox.)

I'd also threaten to make a formal complaint of entrapment.

Regards,

Steve.

[This message was edited by Steve Toy on Tue 07 December 2004 at 0:53.]
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Bruce Woodhouse
Steve, I know I'm being a bit argumentative here, but I do see a curious double standard to your posting.

In the initial scenario you were speeding at 80mph in a 60 zone when the incident occurred (see your quote 'as a rule I do not overtake...above the speed limit'). Did you tell that to the Police when you reported the whole event? Now you make some sensible comments about braking distance, some potentially dangerous ones about brake testing a tailgaiter, and give advice on wriggling out of a speeding fine when you are doing 105mph!

If someone is plastered on your tail I'd suggest you drive below the speed limit, wait for a suitable gap and either move over or indicate you are slowing to allow them to pass. Your yo-yo speed strategy seems most likely to inflame matters.

Need some consistency when judging driving behaviour. I think I am a good driver, but the law on speeding applies just as much to me as the Max-power Corsa.

Bruce
Posted on: 06 December 2004 by Brian OReilly
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Toy:
Allow your speed to drop as low as, say 40 mph and then accelerate away. If the arse-hogger gets the message by now then fine. If not, hit your brakes a bit harder.
[This message was edited by Steve Toy on Tue 07 December 2004 at 0:53.]


Er, hang on a minute, isn't this what the guy in the Corsa did !
Posted on: 07 December 2004 by Berlin Fritz
I think it's impotent to keep a digi cam,era at hand, if nuffink else the flash gets em worried, innit.

Fritz Der Flasher Smile
Posted on: 07 December 2004 by Steve G
quote:
Originally posted by Brian OReilly:
Er, hang on a minute, isn't this what the guy in the Corsa did !


Steven is a taxi driver and therefore probably feels the traffic laws don't apply to him.

Over the years there have been a number of threads in which he's detailed various occasions of illegal, careless or just plain bad driving - just like he's done again here.
Posted on: 07 December 2004 by Brian OReilly
quote:
Originally posted by Steve G:
Steven is a taxi driver and therefore probably feels the traffic laws don't apply to him.

Over the years there have been a number of threads in which he's detailed various occasions of illegal, careless or just plain bad driving - just like he's done again here.


Credit where it's due, though. He hasn't been involved in an accident in years of taxi driving, which is pretty impressive (sounds like he came a bit close that time though !).
Posted on: 07 December 2004 by Rockingdoc
I am assured that if Mr Toy would like to attend and give a sworn statement of the event, the Police would be happy to prosecute; him, for speeding.