Video: Impatient driver goes for gap that wasn't there and pays the penalty

[little mary sunshine]

17 hours ago, LennyW said:

Not much karma for the taxi driver, after all he was at fault.

Wrong....Anyone speeding like this idiot is

 completely at fault.....common sense trumps

 written law!

[LennyW]

9 minutes ago, little mary sunshine said:

Wrong....Anyone speeding like this idiot is

 completely at fault.....common sense trumps

 written law!

Luckily the police see it differently.

[colinneil]

35 minutes ago, LennyW said:

Luckily the police see it differently.

Luckily the police see it different   

The police see it from whoever parts with the most money.

[TKDfella]

13 hours ago, nauseus said:

Attached link is the closest I can find.

 

Section 40 most relevant, then sections 43 (a. d, probably b and particularly h), section 67, section 69 (g), section 70 (junction).

tlaw0140_5.pdf

Yes, good one! Section 71 says that drivers on the 'principle roadway' have right of way so that would suggest that a 'slip' road is inferior.

[theoldgit]

Flame removed

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, LennyW said:

 

No, it was not measured at 144 or anything else, it was guestimated by yourself using many assumptions, this does not make it measured or factual, no matter how many times you repeat it. 

Fairly measured, calculated and explained. What assumptions are you on about? you sound angry like the truck driver!  

[funandsuninbangkok]

11 hours ago, 007cableguy said:

Not sure if this video from another camera which shows the front of the accident has been posted before
 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

 

 

From this angle looks like truck's fault 

[rixalex]

The angle and the speed that the truck is coming at means that he would have only appeared in the taxi driver's side mirror briefly a second or two before impact. Even the most vigilant mirror and over-the-shoulder checker would have had little chance of seeing this idiot coming.

[Ace of Pop]

Recon those who find Blingy Truck Man not at fault must be of MeMe attitude themselves


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Ron19]

That is another thing, I have not seen anything at all about the condition of the occupants of the pickup, unusual.

[farcanell]

7 hours ago, gigman said:

Yes .!!!! you're right mate.

Most of those who dare to judge should study Traffic rules again .

Common sense is another think but if we will use only common sense then I prefer not to drive...

Taxi did not use blinker , could also let pass then merge, or stop if necessary merging to another line.

Speed is not the issue. here . Rules first!

 

p.s from last momment ..Taxi driver is already officially charged of causing accident after they watched video.

 

I think you should be the one studying the traffic rules... the blue chunk of scrap metal, broke more regulations than the taxi... and committed more serious infractions of the code

 

no one (or not many) is really suggesting that that the taxi driver is not partially responsible... he is, ergo its right that he be charged ( but out of interest, can you direct us to the article or info corroborating this?)

 

but... that the taxi driver may have been charged, may well be due to the fact that he is alive and talking, vs unconscious or dead, as may be case with the idiot driving the chunk of scrap metal, that wasn't really designed for flight, even if he was attempting to reach a speed comparable with some aircraft take off speed.

 

"speed is not the issue" ... right.... that's why we were all brought up with the saying " speed kills"... duh... what an ignorant comment

[TKDfella]

4 hours ago, rixalex said:

The angle and the speed that the truck is coming at means that he would have only appeared in the taxi driver's side mirror briefly a second or two before impact. Even the most vigilant mirror and over-the-shoulder checker would have had little chance of seeing this idiot coming.

Not sure I agree. The taxi is well back and at that point should have been looking at what was coming. Having said that, the truck driver should have slowed seeing that a taxi was emerging from the left and in addition to that it was clear on the back pointing video that the truck was in among that small pocket of traffic with nowhere to go at that speed. Slowing was his only option. Wow, the number of spins the truck took before it hit the ground...

[Puccini]

16 hours ago, berybert said:

Are you aware of how dangerous it is to slow donw on a motorway slip lane ?

Once you have slowed down there is no chance to get back up to speed, Meaning you will be joining the road going so slow you are likely to get smashed up the rear. Also cars behind on the slip road have to slow meaning a total mess.

This is the reason the slip lane has priority on joining the main road.

 

Are you talking about Thailand when you say that "the slip lane has priority on joining the main road"? 

[wgdanson]

On 3/7/2017 at 8:58 AM, sumrit said:

Must have been too busy when you got your 5 year licence you will next time....................unless they're too busy again . That's where I saw it, but my mate said their TV was faulty when he went there.

 

Several years ago (probably more than ten) I seem to remember that there was a 'Thai Highway Code', I think pinned somewhere on Thai Visa but is appears to have been removed. It was a very basic Highway code but I know undertaking rule was in there.

So please, what if I am on a two lane highway, speed limit 90, on the left hand lane and there is a 'tosser' tootling along at 50 on the right hand lane, what do I do? Go up his arse tooting my horn and flashing lights, or break the law and 'undertake'.

[wgdanson]

3 hours ago, farcanell said:

 

I think you should be the one studying the traffic rules... the blue chunk of scrap metal, broke more regulations than the taxi... and committed more serious infractions of the code

 

no one (or not many) is really suggesting that that the taxi driver is not partially responsible... he is, ergo its right that he be charged ( but out of interest, can you direct us to the article or info corroborating this?)

 

but... that the taxi driver may have been charged, may well be due to the fact that he is alive and talking, vs unconscious or dead, as may be case with the idiot driving the chunk of scrap metal, that wasn't really designed for flight, even if he was attempting to reach a speed comparable with some aircraft take off speed.

 

"speed is not the issue" ... right.... that's why we were all brought up with the saying " speed kills"... duh... what an ignorant comment

Why do you refer to a Toyota Revo as a 'chunk of scrap metal'?

[wgdanson]

8 hours ago, funandsuninbangkok said:

From this angle looks like truck's fault 

Most definitely, the truck goes into the taxi. The fact that the taxi was not indicating is immaterial. Must you indicate that you are entering the motorway from the slip road....is there any alternative?

[farcanell]

16 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Why do you refer to a Toyota Revo as a 'chunk of scrap metal'?

Ah.... because I saw the "after incident" photo ( that post needs reading in conjunction with my post immediately beforehand)

 

before incident, it was just fine.... screaming along like it was painted red.

 

as to your other post (257).... when faced with this situation, you reach out with your left hand, and using your thumb, vigorously rub your Buddhist safety amulet (unless it's fake... then that tactic doesn't work, apparently)

[wgdanson]

Just now, farcanell said:

Ah.... because I saw the "after incident" photo ( that post needs reading in conjunction with my post immediately beforehand)

 

before incident, it was just fine.... screaming along like it was painted red.

 

as to your other post (257).... when faced with this situation, you reach out with your left hand, and using your thumb, vigorously rub your Buddhist safety amulet (unless it's fake... then that tactic doesn't work, apparently)

Oh dear, I've got a Vigo and think it is safe? I cannot rub the amulet with my left hand as I am holding my phone with it. lol

[farcanell]

4 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Oh dear, I've got a Vigo and think it is safe? I cannot rub the amulet with my left hand as I am holding my phone with it. lol

Toyota are looking into after market extendable wing attachments... stay tuned

[gemguy]

Well...speeding is a large factor and  reason for the accident....however, you do see the taxi cab merging / drifting into the lane that the pickup is already in while the pick up truck has / had the legal right of way.

The taxi is required to give right of way when blending into a merging lane regardless of how fast any other vehicle is traveling and already in the existing lane at the time while merging into the main lane.

I surmise the driver of the cab was driving like most Thai drivers and doing as he please while not exercising any defensive driving decorum while the Pickup truck driver is also not exercising any defensive driving decorum, at all.

The combination of the 2 drivers not exercising any defensive driving decorum caused the accident.

If the pick up driver was not speeding and the same event happened then who would you be quick to blame.

[stevenl]

You are rather clueless.

No, he is right. If you can't merge safely you have to stop at the start of the slip road.

sent using Tapatalk

[stevenl]

So please, what if I am on a two lane highway, speed limit 90, on the left hand lane and there is a 'tosser' tootling along at 50 on the right hand lane, what do I do? Go up his arse tooting my horn and flashing lights, or break the law and 'undertake'.

Undertake, which is allowed anyway.

sent using Tapatalk

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Undertake, which is allowed anyway.

sent using Tapatalk
 

90MPH  gimme a brake!

[gemguy]

2 hours ago, wgdanson said:

Most definitely, the truck goes into the taxi. The fact that the taxi was not indicating is immaterial. Must you indicate that you are entering the motorway from the slip road....is there any alternative?

YES,..as in YES....Although Thai drivers simply do as they please all too often there is this thing called right of way.

When any driver is merging their motor vehicle into an occupied lane then they are required to give right of way until COMPLETLY SAFE to merge while the person already in the lane has right of way .....

Those rules and regulations and laws are universally adopted in near every country and I would be 99.9999 percent certain they are adopted here in Thailand AND SUPPOSED TO BE PART OF CIVILISED DRIVING DECOROM...lol

Without them, then there is no way to legally determine who was or is at fault because if you could be a fly on the wall or eye in the sky, so to speak, you can see the taxi driver did not abide by the law and did not exercise due caution and or defensive driving conduct.

The taxi driver did what most Thai drivers commonly do and simply went ahead and did what he wanted to do while relying on everyone else observing what he was / is doing and expects everyone else to accommodate his driving maneuver while the pick up truck was driving the same way and thinking the same way and also at fault.

So, in effect, you have 2  drivers with a:  ME FIRST.....GIVE WAY TO WHAT I AM DOING ....type of driving attitude and ...WHAM...an accident happens.

In this case, If I was Judge Roy Bean , Law West of the Pecos, I would penalise the both of them equally and put both of them in prison for 2 years for their reckless driving conduct while neither of them gets to eat any Som Tum for 2 years while in prison, as Som Tum on their Brains and permanently cluttering up their thoughts is what really caused the accident, regardless of what you see in the video...lol

Cheers

Edited March 8, 2017 by gemguy

[stevenl]

90MPH  gimme a brake!

Which has nothing to do with the post I was replying to.

sent using Tapatalk

[Artisi]

12 hours ago, Briggsy said:

The front view shows the accident was 87% the fault of the pick-up and 13% the fault of the taxi. Had the pick-up driver driven responsibly there would have been no incident at all.

and if the taxi driver had driven responsibly and applied a little bit of pre-thought before driving into a lane already containing a vehicle when there wouldn't have been an incident.

[gemguy]

35 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Undertake, which is allowed anyway.

sent using Tapatalk
 

True ..that is correct ...But what ever you do, you do it with exercised caution and always practise defensive driving decorum...rather than make matters worse and stubbornly do what you want to do and in part start the evolution of an accident that can and often does SUDDENLY happen...in less than 2 or 3 seconds when you have 2 or more drivers stubbornly thinking they are right and the other guy is wrong.

Be the smart guy and back off and give the bozo that is recklessly driving around you or in front of you plenty of clearance....  so that YOU do not end up embroiled in an otherwise avoidable accident while hindsight always tells you that YOU, as in YOU yourself,  are also at fault for NOT practising defensive driving decorum....while you are lying there in the hospital and crippled up for the rest of your life and bitterly blaming the other person for the accident that could have been avoided had you been totally alert and practising defensive driving decorum....as that works in your favor when practised.

 

You see how the Thais drive: They literally drive right up to and into an accident because of their driving attitude and driving conduct. 

 

Cheers

Edited March 8, 2017 by gemguy

[farcanell]

1 hour ago, gemguy said:

Well...speeding is a large factor and  reason for the accident....however, you do see the taxi cab merging / drifting into the lane that the pickup is already in while the pick up truck has / had the legal right of way.

The taxi is required to give right of way when blending into a merging lane regardless of how fast any other vehicle is traveling and already in the existing lane at the time while merging into the main lane.

I surmise the driver of the cab was driving like most Thai drivers and doing as he please while not exercising any defensive driving decorum while the Pickup truck driver is also not exercising any defensive driving decorum, at all.

The combination of the 2 drivers not exercising any defensive driving decorum caused the accident.

If the pick up driver was not speeding and the same event happened then who would you be quick to blame.

The pick up driver is, without any doubt, breaking the law of the land, on many counts.

 

many counts... too many counts.... listing them against the land traffic act just takes too long... his actions are indefensible.

 

when you are breaking the law, especially to this extend, you don't have much recourse to protection under the law

 

the taxi drivers lawyers, on the other hand, could plead the taxi driver out on a 1000 baht fine.

 

i surmise, that anyone defending the shear recklessness of the idiot who turned his car into a hunk of scrap metal, must also of a similarly stupid and reckless nature

 

however.... as no one wishes to site law.... <deleted>... section 43... D,E... and most importantly H.... read 43H, and just stop for a minute and consider the shear force required to take a perfectly good pickup, and turn it ( momentarily airborne) into a hunk of scrap metal.

 

i really really hope the driver of that pickup lives... because I want him to live with the consequences of his totally reckless, negligent, dangerous, stupid driving (I probably could have thrown a few extra adjectives in there... but why bother... you no listen!)

Edited March 8, 2017 by farcanell

[gemguy]

5 minutes ago, farcanell said:

The pick up driver is, without any doubt, breaking the law of the land, on many counts.

 

many counts... too many counts.... listing them against the land traffic act just takes too long... his actions are indefensible.

 

when you are breaking the law, especially to this extend, you don't have much recourse to protection under the law

 

the taxi drivers lawyers, on the other hand, could plead the taxi driver out on a 1000 baht fine.

 

i surmise, that anyone defending the shear recklessness of the idiot who turned his car into a hunk of scrap metal, must also of a similarly stupid and reckless nature

 

however.... as no one wishes to site law.... <deleted>... section 43... D,E... and most importantly H.... read 43H, and just stop for a minute and consider the shear force required to take a perfectly good pickup, and turn it ( momentarily airborne) into a hunk of scrap metal.

 

i really really hope the driver of that pickup lives... because I want him to live with the consequences of his totally reckless, negligent, dangerous, stupid driving (I probably could have thrown a few extra adjectives in there... but why bother... you no listen!)

I do not disagree with what you are say ...but we , as in many people here are analyzing the cause of the accident and all the factors involved and it is clear BOTH drivers caused the accident and in this case more or less equally caused by both of them.

As I said before in a previous post: Had the driver of the pick up not been speeding at all and doing nothing wrong you can see the taxi driver recklessly merged into the lane without any regard to the flow of traffic while he is driving the way all too many Thai drivers drive and doing what ever suits them regardless of the rules and regulations and laws.

You see this practised on a regular basis while I surmise that the overwhelming majority of Thai drivers have no idea at all what right of way means and its importance concerning defensive driving conduct.

In this case the right of way law was totally ignored by the taxi driver, so definitely he is also at fault .

Talk about the perfect combination of bad timing concerning both drivers recklessly endangering one another and those around them.  

[sumrit]

23 hours ago, AlexRich said:

No, he indicated and moved into the only lane available to him, as the filter lane simply runs out of road. The traffic on that lane he was entering should have let him through ... the truck could have done so easily if it had been travelling at the same speed as other traffic ... the blue truck driver simply had no business travelling at that speed. Some on here appear to believe that if you are in a lane then you have the right to travel as fast as your heart desires and have no obligation to allow cars on the filter lane to join the road - and that is quite simply wrong. The taxi, on this occasion, is innocent.

Have you bothered to watch the video of the accident, posted in this thread, that was taken from the opposite direction?

It clearly shows that there was loads off space on the inside (to the left) of the taxi driver. There was no need for the taxi driver to attempt to move to his right when he did so, he could have safely carried on in his own lane until the pick up had passed and there was a safe space to move in to. It appears that the Taxi driver attempted to change lanes before he needed to because he never bothered to look to see if that lane was clear.