Police procedure???

[ezzra]

Without the daily stories like this and others, i might even think that i'm living in Switzerland or Sweden or some other sane, law abiding country...

[scubascuba3]

31 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Poor driving from the motorcyclist actually....  

 

The Ops wife was in the left lane turning left. 

 

One ‘could’ present the argument that because the Op’s Wife doesn’t have 100% 360 degree visibility that she is at fault because she didn’t see the motorcyclist speeding up the inside (left side), however, the road laws exist to prevent these very issues with the understanding that visibility is never 100% or 360 degree. 

 

So often I’m left cringing as I witness motorcyclists who’ve failed to recognise an indicating slowing car, truck or lorry and the motorcycle still tries to squeeze up the inside...  Many have such low levels of observation and self preservation. 

 

 

This is one of the primary reasons I have both a forward and a rear facing dash-cam. 

 

 

 

 

Car driver didn't look properly, simple as that, allegedly indicated but how many do we see who don't indicate and just start turning

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed...   there is a common misunderstanding that the ‘shoulder’ is a motorcycle lane, its not. 

But.. Most motorcycles will ride in that lane anyway under some strange assumption that its safer. 

 

 

Yes and no. Some shoulders are clearly marked as scooter lanes, others are not.

 

IMO it is safer to ride on the shoulder, and I have 10 years of accident-free scooter riding in Thailand to prove it. Defensive driving.

 

Do you want to do a legal 90 km/hr in the right-hand lane with a pickup bearing down on your two wheels at 120 km/hr? Or would you rather be doing 130 km/hr there when a soi dog decides to amble across? Good luck with both scenarios.

 

IMO the Thai niece was in the wrong, careless driving.

[richard_smith237]

45 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Car driver didn't look properly, simple as that, allegedly indicated but how many do we see who don't indicate and just start turning

IF the car was in lane two and the motorcyclist in lane one and the car made the turn from lane 2 I’d agree with you....  

 

But, the car was in the left lane and the motorcycle on the ‘shoulder’....  

.... Unless the shoulder was a designated ‘motorcycle lane’...   but the motorcyclist was still, undertaking a turning vehicle....

= motorcyclists clearly in the wrong..... 

 

The accident ‘could’ have been avoided IF the driver was a lot more careful and alert. 

The accident ‘would’ have been avoided IF the motorcyclists was a lot more careful and alert and NOT under-taking on the left hand side of the vehicle.

 

 

 

Additionally - the Land traffic act clearly states that no vehicle shall pass another on the left hand side. 

 

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Road_Traffic_Act_BE_2522_(1979).pdf

 

 

[richard_smith237]

36 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Yes and no. Some shoulders are clearly marked as scooter lanes, others are not.

Even so... the Road Traffic Act section 45 highlights no over-taking (under-taking) on the left...

= motorcyclist still in the wrong. 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO it is safer to ride on the shoulder, and I have 10 years of accident-free scooter riding in Thailand to prove it. Defensive driving.

Same experiences here... IF tootling along at 40kmh, then of course its safer to be out of the way of vehicles passing at 80-90kmh. 

 

But, I find it much safer to be travelling at the same speed as the other traffic in the primary lane. 

 

 

I consider not having a great speed differential between myself and all the other vehicles on the road to be defensive driving..

 

 

36 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Do you want to do a legal 90 km/hr in the right-hand lane with a pickup bearing down on your two wheels at 120 km/hr?

I'd be keeping up to speed with the traffic around me (as explained above).

 

And no... I wouldn’t be sat in the right-hand lane at 90 kmh when any other vehicle is trying to pass at 120 kmh... 

I’d be in the left lane at the speed limit (or at the speed of the other traffic).

This is also why the minimum size motorcycle I’d take on a highway of riding at highway speeds. 

 

36 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Or would you rather be doing 130 km/hr there when a soi dog decides to amble across? Good luck with both scenarios.

The reason I avoid the ’shoulder’ is because of the higher risk of a soi dog running out, or gravel, litter, parked vehicles etc.. or ’things’ including cars and motorcycles emerging from a blind soi etc...

 

Using that ’shoulder’  as a riding lane IMO is lethal. 

 

 

36 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO the Thai niece was in the wrong, careless driving.

 

Was it not careless driving of the motorcyclist ????

 

The niece was making a legal turn.... indicated... the motorcyclist under-took her.

= Motorcyclist 100% at fault. 

 

--------

 

Of course, these incidents can be avoided with a greater understanding that motorcyclists will ‘break the law’ and undertake...   but that doesn’t place the motorcyclist in the ‘right' and the driver of the car in the ‘wrong’ when a car is making a left turn, has indicated and a motorcyclist still attempts to under-take (on the left) and hits the car. 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

2 hours ago, The Fugitive said:

Where my niece was turning it was a newly laid and painted dual carriageway plus wide breakdown/shoulder 'lane'. I suggested in future she should move from the left hand lane and drive within the breakdown lane for some distance to minimise the risk of being undertaken by moto's whilst making a left hand turn. Not sure of the legality of doing this but it does seem sensible.   

Yeah that's a good idea, plus almost overlooking to ensure no one there, we are in Thailand after all

Agreed.... a good defensive driving technique is to prevent the ‘potential’ and this road behaviour and understanding the flookwittery that unfolds around me has prevented an incident on many occasions..... 

 

When turning left, I try to ’stay as left as possible’ to block the inside and prevent motorcyclists from trying to undertake as I slow and start to commit to the turn. 

Yet, so many times I’m turning left and have to stop as the motorcyclist attempts to squeeze through the impossibly narrow gap I’ve left. 

 

In short - so many motorcyclists ride around oblivious to their surroundings....  but when / if an incident does occur its not automatically the car drivers fault because they ’should’ have been on the lookout more for a motorcyclists breaking a traffic law and / or riding around in a mental slumber. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Fugitive]

20 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

IMO the Thai niece was in the wrong, careless driving.

In the sense that she could have moved from the left hand lane onto the shoulder well before her left turn. She was turning left into a car sales premises i.e. NOT at a road junction. She continued in the left hand lane indicating and slowing. The road was a fast and straight dual carriageway. A truck behind her plus other traffic behind it 'concertinaed' obstructing rearwards vision. Collision speed was low (fortunately). I suspect the girl on the moto didn't connect traffic ahead slowing down with a vehicle turning left. Moto rider wouldn't have been able to see any left turn indicator.

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, The Fugitive said:

I suspect the girl on the moto didn't connect traffic ahead slowing down with a vehicle turning left.

Motorcyclists in Thailand very rarely make any interpretation of speed, positioning and indication of the traffic around them..... 

 

Just this week riding down Thonglor the trucks and cars in lane 2 (right lane) had slowed and came to a stop at a pedestrian crossing. Upon seeing this, in Lane 1 (left lane), I too slowed thinking the other traffic must be slowing to a stop for a reason...

I stopped at the pedestrian crossing.....   3 or 4 motorcycles didn’t stop... the passed up the inside of me at a decent speed, oblivious to the people who were crossing the road and nearly hit them. 

 

This was a perfect example of motorcyclists doing ‘what they want’ utterly oblivious to any other vehicle on the road - in short, dumb people with no road safety sense or training whatsoever. 

 

 

[Lacessit]

19 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The reason I avoid the ’shoulder’ is because of the higher risk of a soi dog running out, or gravel, litter, parked vehicles etc.. or ’things’ including cars and motorcycles emerging from a blind soi etc...

 

Using that ’shoulder’  as a riding lane IMO is lethal. 

 

 

 

Was it not careless driving of the motorcyclist ????

 

The niece was making a legal turn.... indicated... the motorcyclist under-took her.

= Motorcyclist 100% at fault. 

 

--------

 

Of course, these incidents can be avoided with a greater understanding that motorcyclists will ‘break the law’ and undertake...   but that doesn’t place the motorcyclist in the ‘right' and the driver of the car in the ‘wrong’ when a car is making a left turn, has indicated and a motorcyclist still attempts to under-take (on the left) and hits the car. 

 

 

As The Fugitive has explained, the rear vision of the Thai niece was obstructed by vehicles behind her, although that explanation assumes she would have been using her mirrors. IME most Thais don't. It also depends on the speed the motorcyclist was doing. I don't agree with the term "undertaking" if the shoulder is regarded as another lane.

 

If the shoulder is as lethal as you claim, how do you explain my survival on it for ten years? I am not that lucky, otherwise I would have won TattsLotto multiple times.

 

Certainly there are road hazards on the shoulder. I adjust my speed accordingly. It's called threat assessment. If necessary, I will stop behind a parked vehicle and allow traffic to clear before proceeding.

IME most main roads have a clearly demarcated lane, and I use it gratefully. Extremely rare to encounter gravel or a pothole. OTOH, the stupid <deleted> on two wheels that insist on occupying a car lane at 50 km/hr when the average car speed is 80-90 km/hr IMO are dicing with sideswipe death.

[scubascuba3]

49 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

IF the car was in lane two and the motorcyclist in lane one and the car made the turn from lane 2 I’d agree with you....  

 

But, the car was in the left lane and the motorcycle on the ‘shoulder’....  

.... Unless the shoulder was a designated ‘motorcycle lane’...   but the motorcyclist was still, undertaking a turning vehicle....

= motorcyclists clearly in the wrong..... 

 

The accident ‘could’ have been avoided IF the driver was a lot more careful and alert. 

The accident ‘would’ have been avoided IF the motorcyclists was a lot more careful and alert and NOT under-taking on the left hand side of the vehicle.

 

 

 

Additionally - the Land traffic act clearly states that no vehicle shall pass another on the left hand side. 

 

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Road_Traffic_Act_BE_2522_(1979).pdf

 

 

You've got previous of arguing until the cows come home when clearly wrong, so I'll leave it there

[seedy]

4 hours ago, pgrahmm said:

The girl was a student & I believe my wife gave her some baht as she felt sorry for her ....

We do the same - in the parking lot after all paperwork taken care of.

Always surprises them !!! 555

[pgrahmm]

I've had big bikes (Harley, Ducati, Goldwing) & small bikes - I won't ride here....

Driving our straight shot 108/Hang Dong Rd to & from CM.....It amazes me how many vehicles pull out of blind side streets by half a length without stopping/looking to clear traffic to turn & merge... Spatial awareness is not a common thing here.....

Regardless of how proficient we think we are....I use space as a buffer as much as I can....

[bbi1]

Sounds definitely 100% legit. Why would you think otherwise?

[richard_smith237]

8 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

You've got previous of arguing until the cows come home when clearly wrong, so I'll leave it there

Im not presenting an argument. I’m stating a legal fact you disagree with. 

 

… you believe a motorcyclist undertaking a car which is turning left is not wrong….

 

The law and basic road safety also suggest this is wrong. 
 

 

You simply fail to recognise the law and common sense…. 
…. But good luck next time you are riding & decide to under-take a truck thinking you are ‘in the right’ ????

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

As The Fugitive has explained, the rear vision of the Thai niece was obstructed by vehicles behind her, although that explanation assumes she would have been using her mirrors. IME most Thais don't. It also depends on the speed the motorcyclist was doing. I don't agree with the term "undertaking" if the shoulder is regarded as another lane.

Under-taking, over taking on the left, passing on the left….. whatever term, the terminology is irrelevant, the act is dangerous….  You explained why above, vision in the left blind spot is diminished. That’s why undertaking is illegal…..

 

 

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

If the shoulder is as lethal as you claim, how do you explain my survival on it for ten years? I am not that lucky, otherwise I would have won TattsLotto multiple times.

Is it safer to ride a bicycle or a motorcycle on Thailands roads ?

 

I’d argue a motorcycle is less dangerous than a bicycle on Thailands roads as the speed differential is less. 
 

For this same reason I’d argue it’s safer to be travelling ‘in lane’ at normal traffic speed, than on the shoulder at 50 kmh with more traffic passing….

 

 

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Certainly there are road hazards on the shoulder. I adjust my speed accordingly. It's called threat assessment. If necessary, I will stop behind a parked vehicle and allow traffic to clear before proceeding.

Or ride at traffic speed in the main lane.

Unless traffic speed is too fast, in which case you’re on a tiny bike on the highway which is always a danger, so yep, keeping out of the way is better. 
 

8 hours ago, Lacessit said:

IME most main roads have a clearly demarcated lane, and I use it gratefully. Extremely rare to encounter gravel or a pothole. OTOH, the stupid <deleted> on two wheels that insist on occupying a car lane at 50 km/hr when the average car speed is 80-90 km/hr IMO are dicing with sideswipe death.

Agreed…    

 

 

 

[Lacessit]

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

 

Is it safer to ride a bicycle or a motorcycle on Thailands roads ?

 

I’d argue a motorcycle is less dangerous than a bicycle on Thailands roads as the speed differential is less. 
 

 

 

 

 

I'd start chewing razor blades before I get on a bicycle here. No acceleration to escape a situation if necessary, and next to no vehicle mass. Even a scooter packs 150 kg of weight.

 

As for your assertion it's safer in the "normal" traffic lanes, we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll cite my driving record here, do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

[richard_smith237]

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I'd start chewing razor blades before I get on a bicycle here. No acceleration to escape a situation if necessary, and next to no vehicle mass. Even a scooter packs 150 kg of weight.

Agreed....   I won’t ride a bicycle on the roads here either - the primary reason why is the speed differential with every other vehicle passing me. 

 

That a the the same reason I’d rather be travelling at the same speed as the traffic around me (within reason of course) and to travel at the same speed of the traffic around me, the safest place to do that is in the road, not on the frontage. 

 

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

As for your assertion it's safer in the "normal" traffic lanes, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I'll cite my driving record here, do you have any facts to back up your opinion?

I can cite my driving and riding record here (over 20 years).... but thats just anecdotal.

Your safety record and mine are more likely a facet of ‘doing the right thing’ on the roads. 

 

There are of course times when I’d chose to ride on the shoulder and other times I’d defiantly chose to avoid it. It all depends on the size of the motorcycle and the speed at which the traffic is travelling. 

 

For example:  This road: 

I’d prefer to ride at 80kmh with the other traffic on the main road, than at 50kmh on the shoulder - there is too much risk of things pulling out from the side without looking IMO. 

But, if I felt completely unsafe riding above 50kmh or at the speed of other traffic I can understand people who prefer to ride on the shoulder... Personally, I’d be happier on a larger bike travelling at 80-100kmh (or whatever speed the other traffic is doing) than being on a smaller bike hugging the shoulder with lots of vehicles passing me at speed. 

 

 

In this example I would consider it safe to ride on the shoulder where there is good visibility to see vehicles pulling out etc. I’d do so with great caution with vehicles overtaking me, then suddenly slowing to turn left.

 

 

Here, there’s just too much going-on on the shoulder - to much risk of people, cars etc pulling out onto the shoulder, too much risk of cars parking, or stalls etc... then the road surface itself is covered in gritty debris...  IMO way to dangerous to ride the shoulder in this example. 

We can all see in the above example where the road markings (unbroken white line) also follow the entrance - vehicles should not be crossing an unbroken white line - thus, motorcycles were never intended to ride this lane. 

[richard_smith237]

An example posted on ‘Dangerous Driving Thailand’ FB page. 

https://www.facebook.com/KwaiCentre/videos/848763012969284

 

Apparently the car was indicating although thats very difficult to see from the clip (due to lighting).

 

Car turning left, motorcyclist attempts to under-take the car. 

Motorcyclist 100% at fault IMO. 

 

Meanwhile on this thread people have suggested that a car driver is accountable for the accident when turning left collects a motorcyclist which is riding up the inside.

 

.... I just can’t see how the car is at fault - certainly not in this video

 

 

[Posted because I do think the interesting discussion point how different people proportion fault / blame in an incident]

 

 

 

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed....   I won’t ride a bicycle on the roads here either - the primary reason why is the speed differential with every other vehicle passing me. 

 

That a the the same reason I’d rather be travelling at the same speed as the traffic around me (within reason of course) and to travel at the same speed of the traffic around me, the safest place to do that is in the road, not on the frontage. 

 

I can cite my driving and riding record here (over 20 years).... but thats just anecdotal.

Your safety record and mine are more likely a facet of ‘doing the right thing’ on the roads. 

 

There are of course times when I’d chose to ride on the shoulder and other times I’d defiantly chose to avoid it. It all depends on the size of the motorcycle and the speed at which the traffic is travelling. 

 

For example:  This road: 

I’d prefer to ride at 80kmh with the other traffic on the main road, than at 50kmh on the shoulder - there is too much risk of things pulling out from the side without looking IMO. 

But, if I felt completely unsafe riding above 50kmh or at the speed of other traffic I can understand people who prefer to ride on the shoulder... Personally, I’d be happier on a larger bike travelling at 80-100kmh (or whatever speed the other traffic is doing) than being on a smaller bike hugging the shoulder with lots of vehicles passing me at speed. 

 

 

In this example I would consider it safe to ride on the shoulder where there is good visibility to see vehicles pulling out etc. I’d do so with great caution with vehicles overtaking me, then suddenly slowing to turn left.

 

 

Here, there’s just too much going-on on the shoulder - to much risk of people, cars etc pulling out onto the shoulder, too much risk of cars parking, or stalls etc... then the road surface itself is covered in gritty debris...  IMO way to dangerous to ride the shoulder in this example. 

We can all see in the above example where the road markings (unbroken white line) also follow the entrance - vehicles should not be crossing an unbroken white line - thus, motorcycles were never intended to ride this lane. 

Such busy dangerous roads you show. ????

[Lacessit]

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

An example posted on ‘Dangerous Driving Thailand’ FB page. 

https://www.facebook.com/KwaiCentre/videos/848763012969284

 

Apparently the car was indicating although thats very difficult to see from the clip (due to lighting).

 

Car turning left, motorcyclist attempts to under-take the car. 

Motorcyclist 100% at fault IMO. 

 

Meanwhile on this thread people have suggested that a car driver is accountable for the accident when turning left collects a motorcyclist which is riding up the inside.

 

.... I just can’t see how the car is at fault - certainly not in this video

 

 

 

[Posted because I do think the interesting discussion point how different people proportion fault / blame in an incident]

 

 

 

"Apparently the vehicle was indicating". I've looked at the video half a dozen times, and damned if I can see any strobing of a light, front or back.

In this case, I'd agree the motorcyclist is at fault, either 100% or to a lesser extent if there is no indication. Mainly because he maintains speed instead of slowing down as the car is slowing and turning.

[BostonJoe]

If you're looking for a legal means to stand your ground next time with the Police, This is not the country to try something  like that  Remember your not in Kansas anymore 

[richard_smith237]

30 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

"Apparently the vehicle was indicating". I've looked at the video half a dozen times, and damned if I can see any strobing of a light, front or back.

In this case, I'd agree the motorcyclist is at fault, either 100% or to a lesser extent if there is no indication. Mainly because he maintains speed instead of slowing down as the car is slowing and turning.

I too struggled to see the car indicator flashing...  thats due to the lighting of the video.

The small indicator under the A-Pillar can be seen flashing which shows that the driver did indicate left.

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, BostonJoe said:

If you're looking for a legal means to stand your ground next time with the Police, This is not the country to try something  like that  Remember your not in Kansas anymore 

There is nothing wrong with standing your ground with the police here in Thailand. They are also humans and don’t always have all the information, quite commonly they don’t even know their own laws !!!... 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

Such busy dangerous roads you show. ????

Yoda ?

[Kwasaki]

5 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yoda ?

Riding the roads "May the force be with you". ????

[Iamfalang]

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

quite commonly they don’t even know their own laws !!!... 

knowing ISN'T the same as ENFORCING....

 

Where is your evidence they don't KNOW their own laws!!!!!  lol........comical, no way you know this

 

Falangs usually don't even know they are in Thailand, and most falangs don't know a Tuk Tuk from an airplane and most falangs are drunk 99% of the time and don't even know where their own passport is!!!!   lol

 

 

[richard_smith237]

5 minutes ago, Iamfalang said:

knowing ISN'T the same as ENFORCING....

 

Where is your evidence they don't KNOW their own laws!!!!!  lol........comical, no way you know this

I have a number of friends who are in the Police Force (RTP and Immigration) - we’ve had plenty of discussions over beers etc over the past 20 years or so... 

 

So, yes, I know that the Police (and Immigration) in Thailand don't always know their own laws. 

 

In many cases Westerners on this forum have a better handle on the specifics of some of Thailands laws than the average police officer. 

 

Example at hand [Fugitive’s post where his niece was hit by a motorcyclist while she was turning left]:  It would be very easy to show the policeman their laws (Road Traffic Act) and show them where they are wrong - the motorcyclist 100% at fault for under-taking (section 45 - overtaking to the left is illegal). 

 

 

It’s comical that you’d think otherwise and highlights your naivety about Thailand. 

 

5 minutes ago, Iamfalang said:

Falangs usually don't even know they are in Thailand, and most falangs don't know a Tuk Tuk from an airplane and most falangs are drunk 99% of the time and don't even know where their own passport is!!!!   lol

Projecting your own understanding and behaviour is not really relevant... 

[Iamfalang]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

It’s comical that you’d think otherwise and highlights your naivety about Thailand. 

It's comical you believe your own post.

It's comical how right I am

It's comical that I'm comical

It's comical I had conversations with police officers and they knew their laws

It's comical you would think otherwise

It's comical you think I'm naïve

 

comical indeed!!!!! lol

[Lacessit]

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I have a number of friends who are in the Police Force (RTP and Immigration) - we’ve had plenty of discussions over beers etc over the past 20 years or so... 

 

So, yes, I know that the Police (and Immigration) in Thailand don't always know their own laws. 

 

It's  apodictic officials of any stripe worldwide cannot possibly know and remember ALL the laws they are required to administer. That would require omniscience, and a perfect memory.

 

I once met a guy who claimed to remember everything. I asked him how he would know.

[kwilco]

No it's not "legit" - but what are you going to do.? Wait till it has been inspected properly and probably wait over night or be asked to do repairs before getting your vehicle back?

on the other hand, corruption in Thailand is regarded as "legit" as it oils the wheels of bureaucracy - te police officer did you a favour - or at least that's how it's regarded my 60% of Thai people.

 

The OP appears to have done the right thing though in calling the insurance company. the FIRST thing you do after an incident is ring your insurance - others can ring police ambulance but you need the insurance man to act as an intermediary between you, the authorities and the other parties involved. Without them the situation could have got out of hand.

 

In a normal functioning democracy the police report an incident and the court/judiciary then handle any fines or prosecution. In Thailand this seldom happens as the court system is quite incapable of handling minot=r motoring offences.

What happens in Thailand is the police try to "settle" the matter there and then - they apportion blame and arrange payments. This usually involves a payment to any injured parties and a "fee" of some kind to the police for their efforts. To get this on the right track it is essential that you have your insurance representative there at the scene - they normally take about 20 minutes or so to get there.

One should also bear in mind that RTP don't have any police that are fully trained in dealing with road safety or RTIs

 

I have seen quite a few incidents where a foreigner is clearly trying to argue the toss based on his interpretation of his home country's driving laws .... in the end they are just making matters worse for themselves.