SMB driving experts...

Status
Not open for further replies.


Audi driver goes on like a complete tit and shouldn't have been so aggressive, it was disgraceful, but it was the man in the van initially who was wrong.

The whole purpose of these things is you wait in both lanes, get to the end and merge in turn. That way the traffic doesn't unnecessarily bank back further, and it actually moves quicker than when people are desperately trying to cut across from the beginning.

Wish people would just drive to the end and then merge in turn, then no one would be "jumping the queue". It's the f***ing morons who pull across way too early who result in people being able to jump the queue.

Obviously doesn't excuse her behaviour, mind, but people's inability to understand merge in turn in the uk is frustrating at best.

Patch said:
Mirror. Signal. Manoeuvre. Possibly the most basic rule of driving. Each step is predicated on having successfully carried out the previous one.

She attempted to change lanes when it was clearly unsafe to do so. Stupid cow.
Click to expand...
It's not changing lanes when it's merge in turn like.
 
THExpress said:
Anyone watched this one?

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1920082454895711&id=1705270913043534
Click to expand...
Seen this before. The bloke claimed his indicator was on so he had right of way :rolleyes:
People need to be retested as they forget/don't know the rules

haway said:
Audi driver goes on like a complete tit and shouldn't have been so aggressive, it was disgraceful, but it was the man in the van initially who was wrong.

The whole purpose of these things is you wait in both lanes, get to the end and merge in turn. That way the traffic doesn't unnecessarily bank back further, and it actually moves quicker than when people are desperately trying to cut across from the beginning.

Wish people would just drive to the end and then merge in turn, then no one would be "jumping the queue". It's the f***ing morons who pull across way too early who result in people being able to jump the queue.

Obviously doesn't excuse her behaviour, mind, but people's inability to understand merge in turn in the uk is frustrating at best.


It's not changing lanes when it's merge in turn like.
Click to expand...
But someone already merged in turn. She floored it to the cones thinking she could be "cheeky" and nick that extra space. She was dangerous
 
Last edited:
safcforever said:
Seen this before. The bloke claimed his indicator was on so he had right of way :rolleyes:
People need to be retested as they forget/don't know the rules


But someone already merged in turn. She floored it to the cones thinking she could be "cheeky" and nick that extra space. She was dangerous
Click to expand...

But IMO merge in turn is at the point where the cones cut across. E.g. if someone decides to "merge" 300 yards before the cones then that clearly isn't "merging" if 30 cars go past them, because how can the cars at the end know someone let someone in 300 yards back.

Merge in turn is that you get to, quite literally, where the two lanes become one and you merge. That is what everyone should be doing. Nobody should be jumping lanes earlier.

Now, clearly it wasn't 300 yards in this case, it was about what, 40? and if I was her I wouldn't have done what she did - but you should be merging at the end.

I agree she is a total helmet, and has behaved inappropriately aggressively. Personally, if I was the van, I wouldn't have let the first car in when he did, would have waited until the two lanes were coming to merge and would then have let a car across. It's pretty simple that cars should queue in both lanes.

My bias here is I find it infuriating when you have two lanes coming off a roundabout, and cars only use the left hand lane, despite it being a merge in turn (e.g. the A690 in Durham before they put the lights in at Gilesgate) and this results in the roundabout being blocked up for everyone. All the cars should be getting right to where the lanes become one before merging, IMO. Clearly it's different when it's not stationary/ slow moving traffic.

Patch said:
Mirror. Signal. Manoeuvre. Possibly the most basic rule of driving. Each step is predicated on having successfully carried out the previous one.

She attempted to change lanes when it was clearly unsafe to do so. Stupid cow.
Click to expand...

In cases where the lanes merge due to roadworks or it's a lane closing in a 30 zone etc. and you have "merge in turn" signs then neither car has right of way over the other. In all other circumstances (e.g. a motorway changing from 3 to 2 lanes) then what you say is correct.
 
Last edited:
haway said:
But IMO merge in turn is at the point where the cones cut across. E.g. if someone decides to "merge" 300 yards before the cones then that clearly isn't "merging" if 30 cars go past them, because how can the cars at the end know someone let someone in 300 yards back.

Merge in turn is that you get to, quite literally, where the two lanes become one and you merge. That is what everyone should be doing. Nobody should be jumping lanes earlier.

Now, clearly it wasn't 300 yards in this case, it was about what, 40? and if I was her I wouldn't have done what she did - but you should be merging at the end.

I agree she is a total helmet, and has behaved inappropriately aggressively. Personally, if I was the van, I wouldn't have let the first car in when he did, would have waited until the two lanes were coming to merge and would then have let a car across. It's pretty simple that cars should queue in both lanes.

My bias here is I find it infuriating when you have two lanes coming off a roundabout, and cars only use the left hand lane, despite it being a merge in turn (e.g. the A690 in Durham before they put the lights in at Gilesgate) and this results in the roundabout being blocked up for everyone. All the cars should be getting right to where the lanes become one before merging, IMO. Clearly it's different when it's not stationary/ slow moving traffic.



In cases where the lanes merge due to roadworks or it's a lane closing in a 30 zone etc. and you have "merge in turn" signs then neither car has right of way over the other. In all other circumstances (e.g. a motorway changing from 3 to 2 lanes) then what you say is correct.
Click to expand...

I think you need to watch the beginning of the video again to watch the 3 cars who do merge before the cam car. They've done in with space to spare because if you do go right to the end then you don't always get let in. The way they did it was fine and the 2 Audis should have just merged a few yards further down behind the cam car while the traffic was moving slowly. You cannot merge in turn right at the bollards like you say as it simply doesn't work as the left lane don't always let the right in. It's more sensible to get into place a couple or so cars back and stop the bottleneck at the cones from happening and keep the traffic flow constant through the cones.

It wasn't 40 yards as the merge in turn sign was no more than 3 cars ahead when the Silver Fiesta finally pulls over and then when you see the 1st Audi appear. You can also see barriers on right even at 2 yards long would mean it's probably about 20 yards if 2 yards each. Both Audis will have clearly seen the 3 cars merging ahead so will have known they were queue jumping by driving faster over the next 20 yards. You see the front of the 2nd Audi when the cam car is just about at the merge in turn sign.

As I said earlier, what do you suggest should happen with merge in turn if you think the cam car was wrong by not letting the Audi in? Do you always allow 5 from the right and then 3 from the left? Because 5 cars move from the right should the next 5 in the right then merge again with the next 3 from the left due to the extra 20 yards or so?

The Audis were selfish self important twats taking advantage of the fact the Silver Fiesta changed lanes 10 yards earlier, it's as simple as that. A considerate driver in the 1st Audi would have driven along slowly and simply tucked in behind the cam car a few yards further along. Just because there is 20 yards of clear lane ahead doesn't mean you should nip down it in the hope of jumping a car or 2. The opinions on here not seeing this just show why it's a f***ing pain at times driving on the roads because people think they have more of a right of way than others.
 
MackemX said:
I think you need to watch the beginning of the video again to watch the 3 cars who do merge before the cam car. They've done in with space to spare because if you do go right to the end then you don't always get let in. The way they did it was fine and the 2 Audis should have just merged a few yards further down behind the cam car while the traffic was moving slowly. You cannot merge in turn right at the bollards like you say as it simply doesn't work as the left lane don't always let the right in. It's more sensible to get into place a couple or so cars back and stop the bottleneck at the cones from happening and keep the traffic flow constant through the cones.

It wasn't 40 yards as the merge in turn sign was no more than 3 cars ahead when the Silver Fiesta finally pulls over and then when you see the 1st Audi appear. You can also see barriers on right even at 2 yards long would mean it's probably about 20 yards if 2 yards each. Both Audis will have clearly seen the 3 cars merging ahead so will have known they were queue jumping by driving faster over the next 20 yards. You see the front of the 2nd Audi when the cam car is just about at the merge in turn sign.

As I said earlier, what do you suggest should happen with merge in turn if you think the cam car was wrong by not letting the Audi in? Do you always allow 5 from the right and then 3 from the left? Because 5 cars move from the right should the next 5 in the right then merge again with the next 3 from the left due to the extra 20 yards or so?

The Audis were selfish self important twats taking advantage of the fact the Silver Fiesta changed lanes 10 yards earlier, it's as simple as that. A considerate driver in the 1st Audi would have driven along slowly and simply tucked in behind the cam car a few yards further along. Just because there is 20 yards of clear lane ahead doesn't mean you should nip down it in the hope of jumping a car or 2. The opinions on here not seeing this just show why it's a f***ing pain at times driving on the roads because people think they have more of a right of way than others.
Click to expand...
What needs to be taken into consideration is the cam will be middle of the vehicle. That doesn't do the gap much justice. When I watch the videos back on them the near misses don't look as bad.
She wears trying to use her car as a shield and could be seen as trying to force the van off the road
 
soapster said:
agreed but he could see what she was doing, so it would not be right for him to continue as the consequence was a collision. so his route was not clear. both at fault. pig headedness set in on both

people should not anticipate kindness as a sign of weakness
Click to expand...

She was trying to force herself into his personal space, if he tried that on her in a pub he'd be f***ing locked up.
 
haway said:
In cases where the lanes merge due to roadworks or it's a lane closing in a 30 zone etc. and you have "merge in turn" signs then neither car has right of way over the other. In all other circumstances (e.g. a motorway changing from 3 to 2 lanes) then what you say is correct.
Click to expand...

Not being funny here but can you please quote the bit of the highway code where it says that neither lane has right of way? For me, it's quite clear that the geezer in the van has the right of way.

I'm Spartacus said:
She was trying to force herself into his personal space, if he tried that on her in a pub he'd be f***ing locked up.
Click to expand...

Had he been the aggressor in this and been caught on her dash cam dishing out the abuse then I bet he would have been hung drawn and quartered by social media (and probably the coppers too).
 
Last edited:
safcforever said:
What needs to be taken into consideration is the cam will be middle of the vehicle. That doesn't do the gap much justice. When I watch the videos back on them the near misses don't look as bad.
She wears trying to use her car as a shield and could be seen as trying to force the van off the road
Click to expand...
Aye you are right as the dash cams can be quite misleading with distance due to distortion etc. Here's where it happened in the Google maps link below.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9...4!1s-APuu4YE4Y8LnIgPIcvk9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The car on the street view is probably where the silver Ka(?) is fully in the left lane after merging as it's the 1st line after the zig zags where it completed pulling into the left lane. The Merge In Turn sign is at the 1st lamp post on the left and the cones start 2 white lines after the end of the railings on the right.

If you move along street view and also look around, it's not much of a distance if you match where the cars are at certain times. Given the 1st Audi appears and in just over 5 seconds it starts to change lanes to get ahead of the silver fiesta shows traffic was still moving slowly through the cones. Could the 1st Audi not have just merged after the cam car a few seconds later without going past seeing as they could have all still merged easily while moving but just in a different and correct order?

The 2nd Audi appears as the dash car comes to the lampost at the end of the bus stop so even less distance to the start of the cones yet she wants to be ahead after now seeing 4 cars merge into the left in front of 3 others.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Patch said:
Not being funny here but can you please quote the bit of the highway code where it says that neither lane has right of way? For me, it's quite clear that the geezer in the van has the right of way.



Had he been the aggressor in this and been caught on her dash cam dishing out the abuse then I bet he would have been hung drawn and quartered by social media (and probably the coppers too).
Click to expand...

Absolutely, she was 100% at fault. Aggression has no place on the roads. Dracula must have had some lovely teabags the morning after :lol:

If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and if necessary take a quick sideways glance to make sure you will not force another road user to change course or speed. When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other road users and when clear, move over.
 
Last edited:
Her Ivory Tower said:
Yes exactly, you've illustrated my point which was that SHE crossed HIS path, not the other way around. He never crosses the line. Her path was not clear because it contained the cones, however HIS path was clear, UNTIL she crossed into his lane and caused an obstruction for him and in fact, he was then forced to stop which is when she got out and started gobbing off.

She is entirely at fault because:

1. He had already taken his "turn" at allowing a car (the Ford) to merge and had therefore complied with the signs and the HWC.

2. She crossed the road markings into his lane, willfully trying to cause an obstruction in what would otherwise have been a clear route for him. If there had been an accident then it is always the driver who crossed their line who is at fault.

3. She failed to stop when she reached the cones when her route was no longer clear and instead carried on with reckless and dangerous driving causing damage to the cones and her car. What if there had been a pavement next to her and she sent those cones flying into innocent pedestrians? What is the cones concealed a hole or uneven camber that caused her car to flip out of control into other vehicles or pedestrians? Could have have caused injuries not unlike Westminster Bridge. But she didn't give a fuck about anything but herself.
Click to expand...

he sped up failing to allow her to merge.

he also decided, he had taken his turn, and decided where this finishing line was, for merging. where he decided this line was, was way before the cones. he had no right to make that decision. he should have just allowed her in.

point 2 and 3 I agree, but they happen because of failure to have patience at point 1
 
Patch said:
Not being funny here but can you please quote the bit of the highway code where it says that neither lane has right of way? For me, it's quite clear that the geezer in the van has the right of way.



Had he been the aggressor in this and been caught on her dash cam dishing out the abuse then I bet he would have been hung drawn and quartered by social media (and probably the coppers too).
Click to expand...
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.infsq.co.uk/2011/02/merge-in-turn/amp/

Article has relevant rules in. In cases of slow moving traffic the HA say you should merge in turn. As I said, I agree the woman was being a dick and wouldn't have done that myself, she was close enough to the end: but the principle is correct that when in slow moving traffic and one lane is closed you are obliged to merge in turn. If she had been reasonable and someone was refusing to let her in (not in the circumstances where she has driven an extra 30 yards or whatever) and they clipped her wingmirrow, they would be responsible for the accident.

And from someone who got clarification from the HA:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=1505317
6th para down - vehicle in front has priority not the one in the non closed lane.
 
Last edited:
I can understand his frustration at having let someone in already. However, both were driving aggressively.

Would have just let her in myself and avoided the chuff on. Not worth the complete waste of time or getting annoyed about.
 
haway said:
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.infsq.co.uk/2011/02/merge-in-turn/amp/

Article has relevant rules in. In cases of slow moving traffic the HA say you should merge in turn. As I said, I agree the woman was being a dick and wouldn't have done that myself, she was close enough to the end: but the principle is correct that when in slow moving traffic and one lane is closed you are obliged to merge in turn. If she had been reasonable and someone was refusing to let her in (not in the circumstances where she has driven an extra 30 yards or whatever) and they clipped her wingmirrow, they would be responsible for the accident.

And from someone who got clarification from the HA:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=1505317
6th para down - vehicle in front has priority not the one in the non closed lane.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's any obligation whatsoever. The highway code states that merging is recommended and it talks about getting into the lane as directed. If you're already in that lane then it's the other driver who is responsible for managing their manoeuvre safely.

For the record, I totally understand the benefits of merging in turn and i respect it from both sides. However, if I'm the one merging in then I will indicate in plenty of time and wait to be allowed in. I don't feel i have any right to be allowed in and if i have to wait 10 cars then so be it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top