PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Motorway incident
MFM
post Thu, 7 Sep 2017 - 07:53
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 5 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,550



I drove behind another car on the motorway this morning who opened his window, emptied a can of drink which sprayed all over my car, then threw the can out of the window which hit my car at 70mph leaving a nice deep mark on my front bumper with the paint taken off.

I pulled up alongside him gesticulating to pull over but he just shrugged and sped off. Not only that, but I have probably never seen anyone with such atrocious driving skills. Weaving in and out of traffic without indicating, driving right up the backside of other cars and undertaking and squeezing into gaps where other motorists have to brake to avoid a collision.

I reported him to the police who weren't interested in the slightest. They just said to go through my insurance. I rang my insurance who said it would go down as a fault claim as there's little chance they'd be able to recover the costs from the 3rd party insurer.

What a just world we live in...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Thu, 7 Sep 2017 - 07:53
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
fedup2
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 08:30
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,343
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Member No.: 10,873



QUOTE (MFM @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 09:04) *
QUOTE (glasgow_bhoy @ Sun, 10 Sep 2017 - 23:34) *
How come you were managing to keep up with him if he was driving in the manner described above?


I do find a lot of the questions in this thread bizarre. I think a lot of you spend way too much time on here looking for conspiracies. Makes me scared to post anything in the Speeding section if I ever need to as all the time is spent satisfying your own fantasies rather than concentrating on what was asked.


What did you ask?It seems to have got lost in the bullying.

Why not answer some of the questions YOU have been asked then folk can be properly informed to give an answer.

This post has been edited by fedup2: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 08:37
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MFM
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 10:19
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 5 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,550



QUOTE (fedup2 @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 09:30) *
Why not answer some of the questions YOU have been asked then folk can be properly informed to give an answer.


You mean make up answers to your strange loaded questions just so you can shut up already? Lol

You sure know how to overstay your welcome in a thread.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
oldstoat
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 12:58
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
From: Up north
Member No.: 25,505



With regards to Fedup's post I can actually see where he is coming from

You post
I drove behind another car on the motorway this morning who opened his window, emptied a can of drink which sprayed all over my car, then threw the can out of the window which hit my car at 70mph leaving a nice deep mark on my front bumper with the paint taken off.

So question 1. Was that the first interaction with this other vehicle? I ask because you then post

I pulled up alongside him gesticulating to pull over but he just shrugged and sped off.

Which makes your next statement seem as if you had been interacting either by being close or just watching, whilst being behind. But your statement, begs the question, if his driving had been so appalling, how is it that you where still behind the car?

Not only that, but I have probably never seen anyone with such atrocious driving skills. Weaving in and out of traffic without indicating, driving right up the backside of other cars and undertaking and squeezing into gaps where other motorists have to brake to avoid a collision.

If this other driver had, and by implication, he must have been ahead of you at all times, otherwise you could not have observed his poor driving, how did you end up behind him? I presume you drove in a proper manner and therefore would have been left far behind by this idiot.

this idiot driver must, by their stupid driving, have made progress and increased any distance between you and them. So the fact that a can thrown from this idiot could have hit your car, must mean you had somehow (whilst driving perfectly correctly) kept within a distance that allowed this incident to occur

This post has been edited by oldstoat: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 13:07


--------------------
Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MFM
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 14:36
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 5 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,550



QUOTE (oldstoat @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 13:58) *
So question 1. Was that the first interaction with this other vehicle?


I was in the outside lane and saw him coming up behind me, so moved into the middle lane to let him past.

QUOTE (oldstoat @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 13:58) *
Which makes your next statement seem as if you had been interacting either by being close or just watching, whilst being behind. But your statement, begs the question, if his driving had been so appalling, how is it that you where still behind the car?


After he moved past me, I returned to outside lane and was behind him. At this point he was tailgating the vehicle in front of him even though there was nowhere for that vehicle to go. He then swerved to the inside line trying to undertake the vehicle in front of him, couldn't get past so moved back behind the same vehicle in the outside lane. Seeing the way he was driving, I kept my distance at which point he stuck his arm out of the window, emptied his can of drink and then proceeded to throw it out which then hit my car.

At this point I closed the gap and signaled for him to move over, which he did, which is when I pointed out for him to pull over. He obviously didn't, and then sped off in the middle lane and continued his antics. Just because I wasn't right behind him from then on does that mean I couldn't see the way he was driving? Also since it's a busy motorway he made slow progress and I was watching him for a good while after.

I really hope that answers your questions(fedup2 not included) as that's the whole story. Sorry there isn't a more dramatic twist fedup.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
oldstoat
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 18:00
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
From: Up north
Member No.: 25,505



thanks that does clarify things and makes the sequence clear cheers you are now in fact changing your story.

original post stated the driver was

Weaving in and out of traffic without indicating, driving right up the backside of other cars and undertaking and squeezing into gaps where other motorists have to brake to avoid a collision.


This means he must be making progress in traffic because vehicles where braking to allow them in.

now you state

He then swerved to the inside line trying to undertake the vehicle in front of him, couldn't get past so moved back behind the same vehicle in the outside lane

They are mutually exclusive statements

This post has been edited by oldstoat: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 18:10


--------------------
Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spandex
post Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 22:56
Post #46


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 9 Oct 2016
Member No.: 87,665



QUOTE (oldstoat @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 19:00) *
They are mutually exclusive statements

Surely one statement describes his driving over the entire period MFM observed him, while the other describes a specific incident. He's saying the driver undertook on a number of occasions and on one occasion failed to undertake, isn't he?

I suppose it's possible that MFM is drip feeding us information because he actually caused the whole incident. But then it's also possible the whole thing is made up and he wasn't even in his car that day. It's even possible he can't actually drive and doesn't own a car.

In summary, if you don't believe everything he's telling you, why do you believe any of it?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MFM
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 07:10
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 5 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,550



QUOTE (Spandex @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 23:56) *
QUOTE (oldstoat @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 19:00) *
They are mutually exclusive statements

Surely one statement describes his driving over the entire period MFM observed him, while the other describes a specific incident. He's saying the driver undertook on a number of occasions and on one occasion failed to undertake, isn't he?

I suppose it's possible that MFM is drip feeding us information because he actually caused the whole incident. But then it's also possible the whole thing is made up and he wasn't even in his car that day. It's even possible he can't actually drive and doesn't own a car.

In summary, if you don't believe everything he's telling you, why do you believe any of it?


Yep indeed. I have nothing better to do with my time than make up stories like this. Oh and the nice new mark/dent I have on my front bumper was actually caused by me reversing up a one way street at 120mph where a polar bear was chasing me and caught up, round house kicked my front bumper and then had babies on my bonnet. It seems this would be a much more believable story to some of you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
samthecat
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 07:29
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 260
Joined: 21 Apr 2016
Member No.: 83,881



QUOTE (MFM @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 08:10) *
Yep indeed. I have nothing better to do with my time than make up stories like this. Oh and the nice new mark/dent I have on my front bumper was actually caused by me reversing up a one way street at 120mph where a polar bear was chasing me and caught up, round house kicked my front bumper and then had babies on my bonnet. It seems this would be a much more believable story to some of you.


That would be a more interesting story, you could keep a cub as a pet! If you don't want it you could give it to me, I'd build it an igloo in the back garden and call him Boris.

I have nothing more to add.


--------------------
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 08:04
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 27,704
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



This thread is bizarre.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
oldstoat
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 08:17
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
From: Up north
Member No.: 25,505




Surely one statement describes his driving over the entire period MFM observed him, while the other describes a specific incident. He's saying the driver undertook on a number of occasions and on one occasion failed to undertake, isn't he?


The point I am getting at, is that at all times this vehicle MUST have been in front of the OP, otherwise how could he observe the bad driving, undertaking vehicles who brake to let them in. yet when the final manouver is made the victims car ends up directly in front of the OP.

If I was undertaking cars and forcing my way in I would have presumed that my car would be at least two or three cars ahead of the OP's, since I was already ahead of the OP, and had forced my way in front of other vehicles.


--------------------
Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 08:22
Post #51


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 6,846
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:04) *
This thread is bizarre.

*It's Day 6 in the Big Brother Thread, and MFM thinks he's seeing polar bear cubs on his bonnet. Meanwhile in the Diary Room Fedup tries to polish his latest piece for Infowars."


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MFM
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 08:46
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 481
Joined: 5 Oct 2012
Member No.: 57,550



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:04) *
This thread is bizarre.


You're telling me. It seems by the end of it I'll have to compensate the model driver in front of me for not driving more like a cock.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 11:09
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 17,909
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (MFM @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:46) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:04) *
This thread is bizarre.


You're telling me. It seems by the end of it I'll have to compensate the model driver in front of me for not driving more like a cock.


Quite right too.
Dunno what you were thinking of driving on a motorway where the nutters go to play rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 11:30
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 780
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (oldstoat @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:17) *
The point I am getting at, is that at all times this vehicle MUST have been in front of the OP, otherwise how could he observe the bad driving, undertaking vehicles who brake to let them in.


Mirrors?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mickR
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 22:12
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,048
Joined: 5 Jan 2007
From: England
Member No.: 9,919



QUOTE (666 @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 12:30) *
QUOTE (oldstoat @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 09:17) *
The point I am getting at, is that at all times this vehicle MUST have been in front of the OP, otherwise how could he observe the bad driving, undertaking vehicles who brake to let them in.


Mirrors?


I've come across many an old stoat that couldnt be bothered to use their mirrors.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 23:36
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,102
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



and drivers behaving in the way described by MFM don't usually make much progress do they? Not in a timescale enough
for him not to have witnessed all of the behaviour he describes; particularly on a busy M-way.
Much like the ***** that fly past me at 50 in a 20 zone; they're still the car in front of me when I reach the red light 400m
ahead; got nowhere.


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 12:50
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 37,592
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



The irony he is that using just the tiniest bit of thought your full description of the events is near enough identical to how I'd imagined it, I guess some posters can't imagine what they can't see beyond the end of their nose.

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 12:51


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fedup2
post Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 13:56
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,343
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Member No.: 10,873



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 13:50) *
The irony he is that using just the tiniest bit of thought your full description of the events is near enough identical to how I'd imagined it, I guess some posters can't imagine what they can't see beyond the end of their nose.


Lets use he same principal on other help threads it will save asking alot of 'Bizarre' questions all unnecessary,we can just use our imagination as to what happened.Shame we dont do what we did in the old days and use facts and have no fear of asking for them without ridicule which is the only entry by most on this thread by most,unlike some who genuinely wanted to help,but only armed with the WHOLE and acurate facts.Something that the OP has been very slow and selective with.











Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
oldstoat
post Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 16:41
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,290
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
From: Up north
Member No.: 25,505



and drivers behaving in the way described by MFM don't usually make much progress do they? Not in a timescale enough
for him not to have witnessed all of the behaviour he describes; particularly on a busy M-way.
Much like the ***** that fly past me at 50 in a 20 zone; they're still the car in front of me when I reach the red light 400m
ahead; got nowhere.


But according to MFM this driver was making progress until he ended up in front of the OP, so by logic, he must have been behind all the time till the incident, where he pulled up in front of the OP, so that is a strawman argument


I've come across many an old stoat that couldnt be bothered to use their mirrors

I do not spend my days looking in my rear view mirror, I tend to look at what is going on IN FRONT. Glance in rear or look in rear if making a change of position.

I cannot see how all the supposed observed miscreants manouvers would have been visible to the OP, unless he was in front for the whole time.

I am at no point saying that what happened to the OP was excusable or was warrented, Fedup2 in his original post asked a question, which albeit phrased slightly obsurely, boiled down to a simple question. Had the OP done anything in the timeframe, that may have caused the miscreant to behave the way they did. That simple question has not been answered, due to the welter of other sillyness.

I have no probs with the OP telling it the way they say they saw it. But To the OP, to clear up any confusion.

Did you at anytime whilst observing this miscreant, either in your rear view mirrors or in front, do anything, apart from drive in a safe manner, that would then have caused the miscreant to behave the way they did by throwing the can out?

This post has been edited by oldstoat: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 16:43


--------------------
Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Neil B
post Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 19:18
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 18,102
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Member No.: 16,671



QUOTE (oldstoat @ Wed, 13 Sep 2017 - 17:41) *
and drivers behaving in the way described by MFM [b]don't usually make much progress do they? Not in a timescale enough
for him not to have witnessed all of the behaviour he describes
; particularly on a busy M-way.
Much like the ***** that fly past me at 50 in a 20 zone; they're still the car in front of me when I reach the red light 400m
ahead; got nowhere.[/b]

But according to MFM this driver was making progress until he ended up in front of the OP, so by logic, he must have been behind all the time till the incident, where he pulled up in front of the OP, so that is a strawman argument

No, simply no.
QUOTE (oldstoat @ Mon, 11 Sep 2017 - 13:58) *
I presume you drove in a proper manner and therefore would have been left far behind by this idiot.

this idiot driver must, by their stupid driving, have made progress and increased any distance between you and them.

How far?
MFM's description is entirely plausible; why is he being interrogated?

The description itself tells us the alleged offender wasn't making the drastic progress you imagine.

QUOTE (mickR @ Tue, 12 Sep 2017 - 23:12) *
I've come across many an old stoat that couldnt be bothered to use their mirrors.

Or the 'quote' button.


--------------------
17/10/11.

Sme f yu may have nticed I dn't currently have a letter ' ' n my keybard!!!!

S if I appear t be talking mre gibberish than nrmal then that's the answer - the missing 'o' --<<<< Aha, clever eh!? (reserve on-screen keyboard)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Saturday, 24th February 2018 - 08:10
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.