He spat on the windscreen as well as throwing a piece of wood at the vehicle. 

 

 Also abusing a driver while on his skateboard 😊. 

 

 

I saw this on the news. He was on a MC, he stopped abruptly and the car following hit the MC without injuring the foreigner. 

 

Who's fault was the accident?

no fault should be given in this instance as they are both in the wrong by crossing the double solid line.

 

the mc rider's actions after are unacceptable. charged and sent to court. 

https://youtu.be/VWOZEvgR_Ek?si=R1pjSr3qp5tU8RPw

FWIW - I agree that both at fault for the initial accident and that's no way for MC rider to respond. I hope that some justice follows.

 

My pet hate however are screen captures of a monitor in landscape mode, taken in vertical mode and then adapted for news media in landscape mode - which we're expected to watch on a handheld device no more than about 6" across.  

@roo860 Thanks for the better quality video. It still has the VVS but that's something that can never be undone. 

This low life should be shown the door.

Rider was going too fast to be able to stop in time (within his lane) thereby using the left lane to avoid collision.  (Fault 1).

 

Driver of car was also travelling too fast and possibly following too close thereby unable to stop in time (Fault 2).

 

Response by rider is beyond belief.  It's bad enough to have an 'accident' but to aggrevate the situation helps no one. 

 

It was nice to see other bikers endeavouring to help rider move his bike.  I don't understand how the rider expected to lift his bike from the 'wrong' side,  the Thai helper is doing most of the lifting. 

 

Suggest Aussie rider get some more bike lessons.... Back in Australia preferably. 

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

I saw this on the news. He was on a MC, he stopped abruptly and the car following hit the MC without injuring the foreigner. 

 

Who's fault was the accident?

The rider deliberately changed lanes (whilst being very close) to get immediately in front of the car and then stopped dead, deliberately, right in front of the car.  That caused the car to, unavoidably, hit the bike.   My guess is that the bike rider is a prick and was ultimately at fault here.

 

27 minutes ago, Will27 said:

This low life should be shown the door.

I think the anger is pretty damn normal when you get smoked like that from behind. 

I can't say I'm sure I'd behave much better during the initial adrenaline rush

1 minute ago, n00dle said:

 

I think the anger is pretty damn justified when you get smoked like that from behind. "

I cant say id behave much better during the initial adrenaline rush

Look at the video, he cut in front of her.

Regardless, it was an accident and that response was way over the top. 

Just now, Will27 said:

Look at the video, he cut in front of her.

Regardless, it was an accident and that response was way over the top. 

Do you reckon I decided to comment without watching the video?

Note: I changed my wording from justified to normal. Its a fight or flight scenario. I don't believe the reaction was right, but the fact remains i suspect id be pissed and possibly react similarly in the immediate aftermath.

1 minute ago, n00dle said:

Do you reckon I decided to comment without watching the video?

Note: I changed my wording from justified to normal. Its a fight or flight scenario. I don't believe the reaction was right, but the fact remains i suspect id be pissed and possibly react similarly in the immediate aftermath.

If you think that's normal behaviour you have anger problems.

On 1/9/2024 at 7:24 PM, n00dle said:

Or does anyone else want to kick every poster that uses the sad or confused emoji in the teeth?

Nah

No anger problems..........

I've been in a situation similar to this but evasive action prevented me from being hit. 

 

My reaction? 

 

1. Parked bike at side of the road

2. Walked around the bike 3 times whilst breathing out rather loudly

3.  Quietly rode home

4.  Once home had several cold beers.

 

Outcome:  

1.  No damage to any vehicle

2. My heart got a good workout 

3.  I live to ride another day

 

You can't plan to have an accident, but you can learn skills to anticipate possible scenarios and act accordingly.  A Defensive Driving course is a good start. (Probably not available here). 

 

This incident could have been a lot worse. 

An inflammatory post and a reply has been removed.

18 minutes ago, Will27 said:

Nah

No anger problems..........

You have dug deep and found a post where I used hyperbole. Well done sir!  Time well spent. 

You sure showed me. 

Pretty much agree with all the comments on here. 

 

The Bike rider is a pr!ck and riding like one. 

It seems the rider was going too fast and was paying more attention to the blue car than the traffic in front. 

It seems the rider had to take evading action to avoid riding into the rear of the stationary car, switched lanes without warning.

The car driver, also not paying proper attention had to swerve left to avoid the rapidly slowing bike, but also switched lanes when the bike did and rear ended the bike. 

 

Fault: I'd argue 50 / 50...   

Fault is with the rider for changing lanes and stopping.

Fault is also with the driver who rear-ended the bike. 

 

Further response: Vandalism Charge for the Aussie rider.

 

 

---------

 

All of the above said - is very annoying when on a bike to see a driver place you in physical danger because of their careless actions. In this case though, the rider appears to be the trigger for the whole issue - he was riding like a pr!ck and certainly acted like one. 

Car ran into  bike in front.

Car is at fault.

14 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Car ran into  bike in front.

Car is at fault.

Correct answer.

M/C rider was at fault for crossing a solid white line directly in front of the car, and the car is also in the wrong for crossing the line. I got a 500b fine for that and it was a clear road with no other traffic around. 

2 minutes ago, Dolf said:

16 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Car ran into  bike in front.

Car is at fault.

Correct answer.

 

Thats not 'always' the correct answer...   It is often assumed that the car behind is automatically at fault when involved in a rear-end collision... but there are plenty of cases where this isn't so. 

 

In this example we have the bike suddenly changing lanes and coming to an abrupt halt (to avoid hitting the stopped car in front). 

The car following the bike also changes lanes to avoid the rapidly slowing bike, but ends up taking the same path and hitting the bike. 

Had the car, been in the left hand turn lane already, the 'crash' would have been 100% the bikes fault, but the car also changed lanes, making the driver of the car at fault for the accident. 

 

BUT... the motorcycle was also riding without care and attention...   that was the lead up, but not the crash itself which is caused by the car following too closely. 

 

While the bike rider is clearly a total d!<k....  after watching the video a few times I'd agree that while the car driver is 100% at fault for the accident itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Ralf001 said:

Car hit bike infront.

Car is at fault.. end of.

Correct. How insurance sees it.

2 hours ago, Ralf001 said:

Car hit bike infront.

Car is at fault.. end of.

 

Not 'end off'....  there are plenty of other factors at play which could imply the car is not 100% at fault simply because it was behind. 

 

The car behind isn't always 'automatically at fault' regardless of your attempt to add authoritative gravitas with 'end of'...  (*also try 'I rest my case'... or my favourite... 'full stop'... to add that additional authoritative gravitas when presenting a broken argument !!!) 

 

 

While in this case I do see the car as being 100% at fault, its only because the car also changed lanes behind the bike. 

Had the car been in the left most lane and the bike suddenly moved into the left lane then abruptly stopped it would be the bike rider who is at fault for the incident. 

 

I can also see in this case, that given the bikes erratic riding, the police could add a charge of riding without due care and attention making him complicit in the incident - I don't think that would be an unfair outcome. 

No brainer, both fault, the motorbike rider, an lucky idiot

clearly both show shocking driving/riding and road awareness skills. riding a big bike without a helmet anywhere is a bad idea, in thailand it displays particular stupidity. wearing headphones while riding a bike?  plus the biker needs needs to take an anger awareness/management course.

 

ultimately both at fault. and if the car driver's a doctor then the aussie is in real trouble.

Foreigners behaving badly has become a bit of theme in the Thai news lately.  While it must represent a tiny minority, it's not a good trend when there's a government that is only interested in sound bite policies.

 

Let's all try to avoid kicking, shoving or spitting on the locals for the rest of the month.

The Swiss flu is spreading!!!

5 hours ago, Will27 said:

This low life should be shown the door.

did they show the doctor he kicked ...... ?

Charge, ban and deport the motorbike rider. He's a loser with some serious anger and mental problems.