Video: New Zealander collides with Thai motorcyclist going the wrong way on bridge in Rayong

[Kieran00001]

10 minutes ago, Spidey said:

If the blame is apportioned, both insurance companies pay out apportionately.

 

Well done, and in doing so they negate their need to pay, as I did just say.  Are you actually looking for an argument?  You must be ever so bored!

[Spidey]

Just now, Kieran00001 said:

 

Well done, and in doing so they negate their need to pay, as I did just say.  Are you actually looking for an argument?  You must be ever so bored!

How does it negate their need to pay? Both pay.

[Spidey]

2 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I don't think the bike riders insurance company would like you working for them, just to throw all their potential savings from the claim into the wind just because of what you reckon.  Great contribution though, clearly you're a thinking man.

Yes, I'm a thinking man and I spent 10 years investigating accidents.

[Kieran00001]

Just now, Spidey said:

Yes, I'm a thinking man and I spent 10 years investigating accidents.

 

LOL, I believe you, really I do!  Like an accident investigator would miss the fact that the car driver doesn't react until he hits it, like they would just ignore that and put all blame on the biker, hilarious stuff!

[CharlieH]

Lets not get "personal" please or the entire conversation gets "binned"

[overherebc]

I just, 5 minutes ago, watched on Thai news another super-brain try to get his bike between a large truck on the left and a car on the right, all going the same direction.

Only problem was the bike was X centimetres wide and the gap was probably X minus 30 centimetres. Only one loser.

[transam]

1 minute ago, overherebc said:

I just, 5 minutes ago, watched on Thai news another super-brain try to get his bike between a large truck on the left and a car on the right, all going the same direction.

Only problem was the bike was X centimeters wide and the gap was probably X minus 30 centimetres. Only one loser.

I hope you know who don't read that, the truck and car may have a ploblem here....?

[overherebc]

14 minutes ago, transam said:

I hope you know who don't read that, the truck and car may have a ploblem here....?

Mmmmm, not sure if the truck driver or car driver was a kiwi.

Looks suitably ashamed though.

Edited September 20, 2018 by overherebc

[CharlieH]

7 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Mmmmm, not sure if the truck driver or car driver was a kiwi.

Looks suitably ashamed though.

Sorry, at first glance I thought that was "trumps hair piece" ?

[overherebc]

54 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

Sorry, at first glance I thought that was "trumps hair piece" ?

Well, it's a wooden-top.

[shan777]

On ‎9‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 12:57 PM, TVGerry said:

The motocyclist is to be blamed for his own death. But seriously, he's dead, he paid the ultimate price for his stupidity. It's a tragedy for his family. Only a real d**k would want compensation from the dead person's family.

the car should have insurance of its own.

[richard_smith237]

14 minutes ago, shan777 said:

On 9/18/2018 at 12:57 PM, TVGerry said:

The motocyclist is to be blamed for his own death. But seriously, he's dead, he paid the ultimate price for his stupidity. It's a tragedy for his family. Only a real d**k would want compensation from the dead person's family.

the car should have insurance of its own.

 

Looking at it very coldly... The NZ guy will take a loss... he will have to pay for a rental while his car is fixed (month? more), or if written off he will not get the full 'replacement' value of his car...

 

Why should the innocent party take such a hit for someone else's stupidity?... 

 

So... IF the bike rider had not died and was not hurt in anyway but still managed to damage the NZ guys car to the same degree it would require time to be fixed or was written off... what would we think then? that the Motorcyclist should pay for the rental etc... 

 

One of the issues I have with driving in Thailand is that the people drive carelessly and in a number of cases not held responsible for the financial implications of their carelessness.

 

I've never had insurance that includes a rental car or a loaner should my car ever be off the road as a result of someone else (someone elses fault)... but if it were I would be demanding that they pay for a rental of a similar car....  I'm not sure how I'd get along with it... but I'd be pushing like hell for it. 

[overherebc]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Looking at it very coldly... The NZ guy will take a loss... he will have to pay for a rental while his car is fixed (month? more), or if written off he will not get the full 'replacement' value of his car...

 

Why should the innocent party take such a hit for someone else's stupidity?... 

 

So... IF the bike rider had not died and was not hurt in anyway but still managed to damage the NZ guys car to the same degree it would require time to be fixed or was written off... what would we think then? that the Motorcyclist should pay for the rental etc... 

 

One of the issues I have with driving in Thailand is that the people drive carelessly and in a number of cases not held responsible for the financial implications of their carelessness.

 

I've never had insurance that includes a rental car or a loaner should my car ever be off the road as a result of someone else (someone elses fault)... but if it were I would be demanding that they pay for a rental of a similar car....  I'm not sure how I'd get along with it... but I'd be pushing like hell for it. 

Very few have, have no regard for or just plain don't understand what responsibility means.

Wish I knew the answer.

[metisdead]

A troll post and a reply has been removed. 

[Catkiwi]

10 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

No, unlike you I don't feel like I can work out all the contributing causes of an accident from looking at a dashcam video, hence my call for an investigation, it is you who wants to hang someone, not me, have you at least worked that much out yet?  Did you even think to consider that the driver may have been drunk and were they not they may have had reactions that allowed them to avoid hitting them?  The first thing that should be done in any fatal accident is take blood tests of all the drivers involved.

No excuses for the clown riding in the wrong direction. Forget all of your investigations and just accept the fact that - that was the root cause of the incident. Contributing causes may include the Kiwi being pissed or tired or whatever but if the wrong direction clown wasn't doing what he has probably done a thousand times, driving in the wrong direction, there would have been no incident and he may have lived another day to ride in the wrong direction again. Case closed!!!

Edited September 20, 2018 by Catkiwi
tropo

[oldlakey]

6 hours ago, Catkiwi said:

No excuses for the clown riding in the wrong direction. Forget all of your investigations and just accept the fact that - that was the root cause of the incident. Contributing causes may include the Kiwi being pissed or tired or whatever but if the wrong direction clown wasn't doing what he has probably done a thousand times, driving in the wrong direction, there would have been no incident and he may have lived another day to ride in the wrong direction again. Case closed!!!

But but but

[Kieran00001]

8 hours ago, Catkiwi said:

No excuses for the clown riding in the wrong direction. Forget all of your investigations and just accept the fact that - that was the root cause of the incident. Contributing causes may include the Kiwi being pissed or tired or whatever but if the wrong direction clown wasn't doing what he has probably done a thousand times, driving in the wrong direction, there would have been no incident and he may have lived another day to ride in the wrong direction again. Case closed!!!

 

So you would happily close a case involving a drunk driver just because the person they happened to kill this time would have died had they been drunk or not, very helpful for all the rest of us, its not like they would ever drink drive again, is it?

[Sydebolle]

This sentence explains it all:

The family of the dead motorcyclist do not intend to pursue the case. 

 

Until that chances I fear that Thailand will remain at the shorter end of the humanity stick. 

[Catkiwi]

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

So you would happily close a case involving a drunk driver just because the person they happened to kill this time would have died had they been drunk or not, very helpful for all the rest of us, its not like they would ever drink drive again, is it?

I think you are missing my point so no need for any further comment from me.

[Kieran00001]

21 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

I think you are missing my point so no need for any further comment from me.

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

[oldlakey]

12 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

[Kieran00001]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

 

I have no idea what that means.

 

 

[oldlakey]

10 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I have no idea what that means.

 

 

Thats not my problem

[Ks45672]

12 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The guy came over a blind hill on the wrong side of the road 

I don't see how any blame can be attributed to the guy who was driving correctly 

 

[Kieran00001]

2 minutes ago, Ks45672 said:

The guy came over a blind hill on the wrong side of the road 

I don't see how any blame can be attributed to the guy who was driving correctly 

 

 

Any of the examples I gave previously; having been drunk, asleep, on the phone, etc.

[Ks45672]

Just now, Kieran00001 said:

 

Any of the examples I gave previously; having been drunk, asleep, on the phone, etc.

If he had been drunk or guilty of any shadow of negligence the BIB would not have ignored it  especially in a case where a Thai national died vs a foreigner

 

It's not like he is some Thai hi-so who will get special treatment like the Redbull kid.... 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

42 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

13 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Wasn't your point that you felt there is no need for an investigation as it is clear that the motorcyclist was mostly to blame?  Mine is that even if the car driver is just 1% to blame, that blame should be noted and the driver, if necessary, charged so as to negate the chances of them making the same mistake in the future.

The solution is in their own hands, if they insist on ghost riding so be it

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by richard_smith237

[oldlakey]

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

Well any death should be investigated, but this is Thailand not the real world

Thousands of investigations each year 5555555 OK if you say so

It sounds like you are expecting actions from the Thai authorities akin to what happens in a nanny state

If the population want to continue to hasten their own demise who are we to interfere

As I have said "SO BE IT"

[overherebc]

7 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

I still think that the point Kieran00001 is making on a 'case' basis is pointless as the blame and cause of the incident is impossible to mistake given the video evidence. 

 

However, from a perspective of preventing further incidents the point Kieran00001 makes carries validity in that should the NZ driver have been found to be driving under the influence of alcohol or other 'skill altering' substances, or proven not to have been driving with due attention, or any other issue which may have resulted in his potential to react, then any potential finding of an investigation may act as a preventative measure towards further incident. 

 

In this case its clear there was no opportunity for avoidance, but that may not always be the case. 

 

It is for this reason that I now understand why Kieran00001 has been so stubborn with his comments. He is right. If involved in an incident and if an investigation were to 'find something' which could prevent another incident and is handled correctly we are all potentially in a safer place when on the roads.

 

There is a bigger picture. Its clear the outcome and blame (morally and legally) would not be altered in this case, but there exists the potential to prevent further 'grey area' incidents from future occurrence. 

 

I believe this to be the point Kieran00001 has been trying to make, but in the light of forum weighted opposition (myself included) the light of his argument has not been given the opportunity to shine in balanced minds. 

 

 

 

 

 

All the above is true but really only has any impact where changes made by law or are given as ideas for improvement will have attention paid to them by the majority of drivers/riders.

[overherebc]

2 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

Well any death should be investigated, but this is Thailand not the real world

Thousands of investigations each year 5555555 OK if you say so

It sounds like you are expecting actions from the Thai authorities akin to what happens in a nanny state

If the population want to continue to hasten their own demise who are we to interfere

As I have said "SO BE IT"

??

Stop posting what I'm posting at the same time.

??