Jump to content

Stomp - Car Accidents

Raymondism

By Raymondism,
in General Car Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Opel17

Opel17

6th Gear

This is not an accident, but "Hope this rider is able to see this and contact the stomper as a witness if he needs legal action against the driver."

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/biker-signals-for-driver-to-turn-on-headlights-who-tries-running-over-him-instead

 

 

Biker signals for driver to turn on headlights -- who tries running over him instead

Posted on 02 December 2014 | 3,535 views | 11 comments

 

 

This article is contributed by the Stomp Team.

 

A driver tried to repay a motorcyclist who signalled for him to turn on his headlights, but not in the way you would expect.

 

A video uploaded by Singapore Reckless Drivers shows the aggressive driver forcing the biker towards the wall instead.

 

The clip was recorded by a passing motorist, who said: "Hope this rider is able to see this and contact me as a witness if he needs legal action against the driver."

 

It is unclear where and when exactly the incident happened.

Can the stomper [for the sake of public safety] report this incident to TP immediately ? This is a very dangerous act on the road. I am sure TP can take actions, without the rider making a report.

  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Darryn

Darryn

Turbocharged

Heh....unfair generalisations, assumptions and accusations - but just for the fun of prognostication and story telling here's my take on the accident

 

1. Driving home after a short sleep / piak piak hotel 69 / all nighter - still inebriated

2. "Run Away" to avoid alcohol test - still get in trouble for accident but less than if get arrested for DUI (which is what I think is the benefit of good sound proofing in a Lexus and a kind judge)

3. Scratch Mark in the road "5m long" = speeding

4. Pretty hard to turn turtle in a TT = speeding

  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Blackyv

Blackyv

Turbocharged

Who's at fault here? Collision after cab tries to avoid another car along PIE-

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/whos-at-fault-here-collision-after-cab-tries-to-avoid-another-car-along-pie

 

He is appealing for witnesses in the event anyone has captured something more than his car's dashboard camera did.

Obviously taxi fault, didn't check blind spot and turn out...

  • Praise 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
ER-3682

ER-3682

Supersonic

Obviously taxi fault, didn't check blind spot and turn out...

Agreed,1st,he followed too close to the road hogger,2nd,he flashed his lights to the road hogger,make the driver angry [mad] ,but he should choose to hit the road hogger,at least he still say,the car in front suddenly braked for no reason[taxis should have camera],instead of hitting the car in the next lane[innocent victim],imagine the vehicle on the taxi's left is a motocycle,the rider will be badly injured or [angel] .

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Chucky2007

Chucky2007

Turbocharged
(edited)

Who's at fault here? Collision after cab tries to avoid another car along PIE-

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/whos-at-fault-here-collision-after-cab-tries-to-avoid-another-car-along-pie

 

He is appealing for witnesses in the event anyone has captured something more than his car's dashboard camera did.

100% taxi driver at fault. Even if the taxi camera captured the licence plate of the car that jammed brake, the taxi didn't keep a safe distance. Moreover taxi took action to changed lane.

 

TP will ruled that the accident wouldn't have happened if the taxi hasn't:

 

1.Followed too close and keep safe distance.

2.taxi didn't decide to change lane regardless of what happened.

 

The accident car can claim 100% of his damage from taxi.

 

I personally have no sympathy to the taxi. If he hasn't high beam in such irritating manner, and keep a safe distance, and just change lane, this accident wouldn't have happened in the first place.

Edited by Chucky2007
  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1fast1

1fast1

Supersonic

100% taxi driver at fault. Even if the taxi camera captured the licence plate of the car that jammed brake, the taxi didn't keep a safe distance. Moreover taxi took action to changed lane.

 

TP will ruled that the accident wouldn't have happened if the taxi hasn't:

 

1.Followed too close and keep safe distance.

2.taxi didn't decide to change lane regardless of what happened.

 

The accident car can claim 100% of his damage from taxi.

 

I personally have no sympathy to the taxi. If he hasn't high beam in such irritating manner, and keep a safe distance, and just change lane, this accident wouldn't have happened in the first place.

 

Also, if the taxi driver *had* to collide into somebody, at least he should've had the consideration to go right up the arse of that brake-checking Sunny rather than taking out an "innocent bystander". :D

  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Chucky2007

Chucky2007

Turbocharged
(edited)

 

Also, if the taxi driver *had* to collide into somebody, at least he should've had the consideration to go right up the arse of that brake-checking Sunny rather than taking out an "innocent bystander". :D

100% agree. If that's my car that hit by taxi.. I will f**k him upside down instead of going stomp and appeal for witness.

 

A lot of times I take taxi.. always wonder why the taxi driver like to high beam and horn others. Really uncalled for and asking for road rage accidents to happen.

Edited by Chucky2007
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nzy

Nzy

Twincharged

 

Also, if the taxi driver *had* to collide into somebody, at least he should've had the consideration to go right up the arse of that brake-checking Sunny rather than taking out an "innocent bystander". :D

 

The taxi rather hit the side of another car so his insurer got some chance of pushing some of the blame to the other driver ma. Rear end the Sunny means he got no chance to win already.

  • Praise 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
Vid

Vid

Hypersonic

Who's at fault here? Collision after cab tries to avoid another car along PIE-

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/singaporeseen/this-urban-jungle/whos-at-fault-here-collision-after-cab-tries-to-avoid-another-car-along-pie

 

He is appealing for witnesses in the event anyone has captured something more than his car's dashboard camera did.

 

What is there to even consider? 100% taxi fault for not checking when changing lane. Cam car is innocent victim.

 

But between Nissan and Taxi, I would say Nissan is a blardy jerk. Hogging lane 1 and jam brake causing the accident. Should submit to TP for dangerous driving and causing accident.

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Chucky2007

Chucky2007

Turbocharged

 

What is there to even consider? 100% taxi fault for not checking when changing lane. Cam car is innocent victim.

 

But between Nissan and Taxi, I would say Nissan is a blardy jerk. Hogging lane 1 and jam brake causing the accident. Should submit to TP for dangerous driving and causing accident.

submit TP also no case la.. the Nissan simply says a cat suddenly dashed out of centre divider or the car behind keep high beam and he thought the ttaxiis warning him that he thought his car is driving without tyres..etc.. some damn excuse will do.

 

Anyway whatever happened to the idiot Nissan.. if the taxi hasn't done what he did, this video wouldn't exist in the first place.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...