Almost crashed on BKE.

[Nicholas]

Wow, that was really close. You are very lucky to be able to learn from this incident without causing any harm to anybody, including yourself.

 

Next time might not be as lucky, drive safe.

[Furrynadz]

 

 

Edited July 30, 2014 by BabyBlade

[Wt_know]

drive safe and move on ... life is stressful enough already

Edited July 29, 2014 by Wt_know

[1fast1]

(Licence plate image deleted)

Is this really warranted?

 

I feel it is unnecessary to humiliate this guy with a licence plate image, especially when it's against forum rules plus you can't actually prove that he's lying about the HP.

 

Disliked with name and post reported for mod attention.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Turboflat4

[SGCMsmallcar]

Actually I started slowing but I saw that car too close I swerved. I was actually driving slowly for lane one cos of speed camera. Whew. I will keep safer distance next time. I tot front car was just avoiding road hogger.

 

Pls look far while driving. As far as the car stop on the right, I dun think they will do it purposely unless their car breakdown cannot move. Drive defensively. No point honk them when their car cannot move at all.

 

 

I managed to view the video again. At 0.26 which lane 2 is clear. U should not hog lane 1 by driving slowy. if u filter into lane 2 when lane 2 is clear, u would not put yrself in this danger situation. Drive defensively pls.

 

 

Edited July 29, 2014 by SGCMsmallcar

[1fast1]

Is this really warranted?

 

I feel it is unnecessary to humiliate this guy with a licence plate image, especially when it's against forum rules plus you can't actually prove that he's lying about the HP.

 

Disliked with name and post reported for mod attention.

So ironic! I disliked with my name and even posted attesting to the fact, and in addition to the two praises (thanks guys, that means a lot), I get a dislike.

 

I wouldn't mind the dislike, as long as the person had the balls to put their name to it. But guess what? It's anonymous. Why am I not surprised?

 

Anyway, the comment appended to the dislike was:

 

Comment: is sympathising right?

Who's "sympathising" here? I am merely calling furrynadz's post out to be an unwarranted piece of dickery. Doesn't mean I automatically side with the thread starter. In fact, it should be clear from my earlier post that I think he could have been more alert when driving. Sorry I can't direct this reply more personally to whoever actually wrote it, but that's what happens when you have gutless people disliking others anonymously.

Edited July 29, 2014 by Turboflat4

[Toothiewabbit]

So ironic! I disliked with my name and even posted attesting to the fact, and in addition to the two praises (thanks guys, that means a lot), I get a dislike.

 

I wouldn't mind the dislike, as long as the person had the balls to put their name to it. But guess what? It's anonymous. Why am I not surprised?

 

Anyway, the comment appended to the dislike was:

 

 

Who's "sympathising" here? I am merely calling furrynadz's post out to be an unwarranted piece of dickery. Doesn't mean I automatically side with the thread starter. In fact, it should be clear from my earlier post that I think he could have been more alert when driving. Sorry I can't direct this reply more personally to whoever actually wrote it, but that's what happens when you have gutless people disliking others anonymously.

 

 

Hope my 5 points make it up

[1fast1]

Hope my 5 points make it up

Thanks bro.

[The_Bear]

So ironic! I disliked with my name and even posted attesting to the fact, and in addition to the two praises (thanks guys, that means a lot), I get a dislike.

 

I wouldn't mind the dislike, as long as the person had the balls to put their name to it. But guess what? It's anonymous. Why am I not surprised?

 

Anyway, the comment appended to the dislike was:

 

 

Who's "sympathising" here? I am merely calling furrynadz's post out to be an unwarranted piece of dickery. Doesn't mean I automatically side with the thread starter. In fact, it should be clear from my earlier post that I think he could have been more alert when driving. Sorry I can't direct this reply more personally to whoever actually wrote it, but that's what happens when you have gutless people disliking others anonymously.

Added another 5 dislike for posting of number plate.

 

But re-looking at the video, TS apparently had the phone elsewhere, probably in his hands prior to the incident. He nearly killed someone because he was not paying enough attention to the situation. I don't expect him to implicate himself by admission but it seemed that the phone appeared to be placed back to it's charging position after the close call.

[1fast1]

Added another 5 dislike for posting of number plate.

 

But re-looking at the video, TS apparently had the phone elsewhere, probably in his hands prior to the incident. He nearly killed someone because he was not paying enough attention to the situation. I don't expect him to implicate himself by admission but it seemed that the phone appeared to be placed back to it's charging position after the close call.

Is it possible that the TS might have initially placed the HP insecurely causing it to be dislodged by the sudden swerving? The HP might have fallen into the footwell, which means that it has to be recovered to prevent an even more dangerous scenario (like the phone getting stuck under the accelerator). TS might then have placed the HP into a more secure location to prevent a recurrence. This accounts for the change in the backlight image.

 

Alls I'm saying is that it's a long stretch to go from the fact that the phone changed position (clearly undeniable) to saying the TS definitely held the phone in his hands prior to the incident. I'm no lawyer but I seriously doubt that footage will stand up in a court of law as evidence of handphone driving.

 

Yes, TS can be accused of many things quite legitimately. He could've paid more attention to the car in front of him and driven more defensively overall. He could've kept to another lane from the start. He could've anchored his phone better so it wouldn't become a distraction or even a lethal projectile in the worst case scenario. But I don't think one can reasonably insist on him having held onto his HP without better evidence or an admission from him.

 

And no matter what, it doesn't justify someone else posting his licence plate in public like this (and I'm certain you agree with this).

[So_nice]

Img deleted

 

 

As much as u dun like him, I dun think there is a need to post his car plate for all to see.

 

And yes, I disliked ur post.

Edited July 29, 2014 by So_nice

[TVT]

I don't know if anyone realised. Bloody TS is playing with his handphone. He dropped his handphone onto something and there is a reflection on the windscreen captured by his camera.

 

 

 

Sorry, at what timing on the video you saw TS play handphone? I viewed it many times but didn't find it leh....

 

I saw it too.

 

Timing ??

[Nonpareil]

One thing I like to ask, who came up with this idea to stop right where they are, after an accident, instead of flitering to the side of the road to resolve any issue?

As with TS video, this stopping on the road causes hazard for everyone! Also would anything change, in terms of evidence, if you just move to a safer spot like the side of the road?

Its just retarded. I've only seen it practiced here so wondering why do it...

[1fast1]

One thing I like to ask, who came up with this idea to stop right where they are, after an accident, instead of flitering to the side of the road to resolve any issue?

As with TS video, this stopping on the road causes hazard for everyone! Also would anything change, in terms of evidence, if you just move to a safer spot like the side of the road?

Its just retarded. I've only seen it practiced here so wondering why do it...

It *is* retarded.

 

This is the wording from the AA website:

 

For non-injury accidents, you can move the accident vehicles to a safe place if the accident vehicles are obstructing traffic or if is posing a hazard to other road users. For accidents with injury/death, vehicles are not to be moved unless instructed by the police. Use vehicle breakdown signs, lights, reflectors to warn other road users of the accident.

The problem is: what is a "non-injury" accident? What if some idiot comes out clutching his neck after a 5km/h bump? He's probably trying to scam the insurers, but technically, he does report an injury.

 

Also, even in clear-cut non-injury cases, many Singaporeans are kiasu enough to want to capture images of the vehicles right after the collision just so they can cover themselves and there won't be any "twisting of words". I don't agree with inconveniencing others by doing this, but considering how screwed up our motor insurance oversight is, I can understand their reasons for trying to protect themselves as much as possible. In my opinion, the dumbass insurance companies are quite happy to decree a 50-50 liability in everything except crystal clear-cut cases just to wash their hands of a case and - hey - *everybody* profits. Except the drivers, of course.

[Jellandross]

(Licence plate image deleted)

 

 

Disliked. How will you feel if others intrude into your privacy like you did here?

[RadX]

ok folks.

 

Lesson learnt. Move on and drive safely

[BabyBlade]

Just to add on, post by Furrynadz amended. There is no need to post TS's Facebook account or his plate number. We are not HWZ.