Driving Fail Viewers Edition #45 | Mirror, Signal......Crash 

thank you for the link to carvertical sir, this helps me a lot. Great stuff indeed.

Just yesterday morning I was waiting in the right to go to the third exit on a roundabout, the first exit was backed up to my right on the roundabout and a car graciously left a gap, but where I was positioned I couldn't see approaching traffic on the inside. Cars behind me started to beep, one even snaked around and went through the gap from my left, so I decided to forge ahead and a car on the inside of the roundabout had to brake sharply for me. I've had it said to me by lots of contacts to ignore people beeping - they won't be the one getting hit, I just felt under pressure.

@@gamerknown yeah I agree wholeheartedly. Pressure from other motorists is such a huge factor in how people behave on the roads. When I used to be a van driver, I was driving out of London on a dual carriageway with a 20mph speed limit, enforced by speed cameras. It's impossible driving on it without feeling pressured to go faster. You've got taxis, scooters, other motorists undertaking/ overtaking you to get past, only to slow down for the cameras. I found myself to be doing 25/30 in between and then slowing down too, just from the pressure. I wouldn't do that now but it's an observation I made.

Nah, impatience is just a byproduct. The root of all evil on the road is a callous, selfish disregard for others which is itself typically born from an arrogant sense of entitlement.

Same for India

On the other hand, the driver only had to wait 50 yards for the road markings to change - some patience required, but hardly a lot!

I do wonder what speed the cyclists ared travelling in that clip, and how would Ashley know. Its looks very borderline.

@@stevenrix7024 If it was done out of impatience, then that's not good. However, I still don't see a good reason to wait other than to prove you have the patience to do so. Overtaking earlier like that ensures any other cars waiting behind our cammer have a better chance to perform a safe overtake as there's more road.

I assume there is general policy somewhere about how far double white lines extend after corners. My guess would be that it's this long to both allow for oncoming vehicles to be aware of and ready to anticipate overtakes and to give the overtaking vehicle more time to properly observe. I do agree that the length here seems excessive though. But I guess it would seem more important at ~40mph speeds, and with a larger vehicle to overtake. Tl;dr: The line length shouldn't be changed but it's only this long for benefits at higher speeds.

@@bigcreator Not really the relevant factor here though. It looks to be a 60mph road so they could be doing 20mph and it wouldn't change much about what I'm saying. I would say they do seem to be going over 10mph though

Not only that, but their view ahead is a bit different compared with those ultra wide-angle cameras.

The squirell was clearly lost, the driver should have given it directions.

Tufty was a red one, so can't be that one's ancestor. Gawd, both showing our age, when was Tufty last on tv?

I've had multiple professional drivers do exactly that - they start moving back the moment the drivers seat is past me. Like they have no idea what's behind their seat.

It's the dog putting its paws over its eyes and thinking he can't be seen syndrome.

Lets hope the registered keeper got an NIP.

all the same, that's why I don't loiter in somebody's blind spot like the rover was when the fedex van came over.

​@@kenbrown2808The Land Rover was being overtaken by the van, hardly staying in the vans blindspot.

@@hicky62 now you made me go back and rewatch, and yes, in that particular case, the rover wasn't even in the blind spot when the van started coming over. still a good reminder not to linger in blind spots, though.

@kenbrown2808 I had to watch it again to make sure. You're right, though. Don't linger in a blindspot.

Thanks for sending in!

The car should take priority every time, but some politicians who live in London where cars are hated decided to hate cars even more, with the intent being to smash them all up... So many near misses to my rear when attempting to follow these new "rules" that I've stopped bothering unless the pedestrian is actually in the road already.

i feel the rule change was more for a legal point of view that now if a vehicle hits a pedestrian it is fully the vehicles fault if they could have given priority. (not the vehicles fault if a pedestrian runs out on the road deliberately to get hurt by a car). the problem with the rule change is how many pedestrians know to go read a highway code and update them selfs on the new rules just as much the drivers should be doing it. i will drive taking priority but where i see a pedestrian ready to cross the road, i will be prepared to stop if i begin to turn into that junction. and as a pedestrian, i will stand back from the kerb to let traffic flow and cross behind them when its safe if the road has no crossing.

​@douglasreid699 So you literally don't follow the new rule when you're in a vulnerable situation, which shows how silly the rule is. It is also impossible to determine if a vehicle could have given priority because nobody is expecting people to walk out unless it's a pedestrian or zebra crossing.

@@illegalopinions4082 1. Rule is a should, so if you see a pedestrian waiting to cross you should give way, its going to be obvious if you drive looking for it. And i choose not to take the priority as a pedestrian. Where does it say you have to take it to cross at a junction? Its not a stupid rule, its people not updating their skills which is stupid, because there is no need to have no retesting, its individual choice to update your own skills. Now i seen more videos about it, and driving experience of some people taking the priority, i find if you slow down and be more cautious you can allow for it and not get rear ended. Its sudden stops to allow for it that causes accidents.

@douglasreid699 I'll believe it's not stupid when you don't wait for traffic to pass before crossing. The fact it's a should and not a must only further reinforces that.

09:35

Hard to tell... Some idiots do seem to think they only need to give cyclists room until their driver's seat as passed. I've seen that with several "professional" drivers over the years. On the other hand, some people seem to think it's funny or their right to drive their cars into cyclists. Had one the other day slow to match my speed, then swerve suddenly at me... And then got pissed of at me when his driving actions resulted in me hitting his car 🤦

Hopefully that was reported to the police. Drivers like that need their licence removing.

@@tin2001 The answer to the drivers who get pissed off when you hit their car is that they were driving close enough for their car to be hit. If they continue ranting, ask them if they'd like to explain to the police why their car was that close.

As a car driver I’d like to see more cyclists carrying hammers 😀

​@@shm5547 Enforcement requires effort. Police people are allergic to work.

I watch them for the comments and when a submitter is called out for purposely heading into danger you end up with the standard “It was my right of way and they should’ve stopped” type comment 🤦‍♂️ Plus it is nice to ask them to watch this channel for tips to improve their driving 👍

2:20 dug himself into a hole purposefully. The car parked in front had put his reverse lights on before cammer started moving.

@@pj1758 lol if you think that was done on purpose, you should watch the others

Couldn't agree more. The country is overrun with these people now.

Nearly everyone on the road seems to be a psychopath nowadays...

Aren’t Psychopaths & narcissists very similar 😂 … labelling people is very easy to do tbh ? Am sure you are pretty perfect in your attitude everyday 😂 … NOT 😂

I do find the end of that particular clip hilarious, the radio going "weeeee" which is exactly how I envisage that Audi driver after going over the speedbump at the speed they were going 😅 Joking aside, it's not an uncommon thing and I dread when the default 20mph comes into force in Wales how incidents like this may well get worse 😕 I hope not but I have little trust in the driving population to actually do the right thing

​@@WansbeckBikecamunfortunately most of them are in government

My pet hate is waiting for those that take and an age reversing into space. Just drive straight in and look carefully when reversing out, easy.

Yeah, but boot access can make nose in more practical

@@frogsplorerrather have the inconvenience of walking round the car than the inconvenience of an insurance claim.

@@carlarrowsmithnot so easy when you have two SUVs on either side.

@@DavArc626 Not in my experience, people take an age to reverse in, especially in multi storey car parks. I'm sure you have some statistics to justify the claim.

When I first started watching these, I'd find myself trying to make involuntary shoulder or side mirror checks. It's worn off now, mostly.

Entitlement Ring #2 activated 😉 If you aren't sure what I am talking about...something I came up with ages ago but have only recently started to share with people Fun (made-up) fact: Did you know that the Audi logo is called “The Four Rings Of Entitlement”? Entitlement Ring 1 - Never queue behind another vehicle. Just drive your way up to the front and barge in. If anyone complains you can beep your horn and use hand gestures Entitlement Ring 2 - Never be late for an appointment as the speed limits do not apply. Don’t worry about speed cameras, they are taking a picture to upload to a “nice driving” website Entitlement Ring 3 - Who needs to know where you are going when you know. Don’t waste money changing unnecessary bulbs by never using the indicators Entitlement Ring 4 - The outside lane of the motorway is reserved purely for Audi drivers. You can remind people of this fact by consistently flashing your headlights at them while approaching at speed from behind and if they don’t move you can get really close behind. Any accident is the other drivers fault as they shouldn’t be in *your* lane

@@smilerbob oh that's good. 😂😂, I shall remember this the next time I see an Audi

@@picklestheswift When you remember then you will start to imagine the individual rings lighting up depending on what they are doing

@@smilerbob The sad thing is, there are people out there who really believe this.

@@TestGearJunkie. Indeed there are and to be honest, I didn’t really notice them that much and in fact it was more BMW or Mercedes drivers that were the worst. However, more recently (the last 24 months-ish) the Audi drivers have really started to shine through hence the name I made up for the badge And since then most seem to activate at least one of them when I see them

You are assuming the police will do something!

Even when the Police are minded to pursue poor driving, there is still the CPS to get through, and then the court system - the court system often dismisses cases where there is no physical harm even where the driving is well below the standard required. That means that the police only pursue the most egregious cases, as otherwise they won't result in a conviction and just be a waste of resources.

@@hugheskevi Ah, the Criminals Protection Service; the number of times I've seen videos on those Interceptor type shows where the police bust a gut to catch someone, only to be let off with "not enough evidence", even though there's clear video footage of it. I know more than one cop who has left the service due to this sort of thing 😡

Karma is such a rare and wonderful thing nowadays...

​@user-mi6ri6in7dIf only they were out on the streets instead of trawling the internet looking for hurty words the RECORD NUMBER of police officers would surely be enough.

Reasons to be additionally cautious.

If you can't see while driving then you shouldn't be driving. Pull over and walk to the local store to get some sunglasses.

Ah, the charter for 20mph roads. Not that they're all bad.

While generally I'd entirely agree, the whole point of a parking lot with lots of shops around it is for people to load their car with purchases, many of which go into the boot.

So much this. Also it means your visibility isn’t reduced by the high backs many vehicles now have.

@@Landrassa1Much rather have the inconvenience of walking round to the back of the of the car than the inconvenience of dealing with an insurance claim.

@@TheGiff7 It's not the inconvenience of walking around, it's the literally not having space to load up when your car is back to back with another car.

@@Landrassa1park slightly further forward? Honestly, it’s not that complicated. You could even pull slightly out of the space before you load if you really can’t get access when you return to your car.

Audi Q5 or Q7?

Well, since the most obvious culprit has already been mentioned I'm going to have to go for BMW, 3 series? Really any of them though.

Range Rover

A3

OK, so the answers to the most bloody obvious quiz of the year are: 1. Audi. 2. Q5. LeFrez got it right first time, first guess. I swear they give people an asshole test when they go to an Audi dealership. Only assholes can buy one and the bigger the asshole the bigger/faster one they will sell you.

Oh gosh. The congestion there would take up a whole dinner conversation.

@@b3108 Indeed. Try six hours on an express bus (Victory Liner) to get the 95 km from Pasig to Dau (Mabalacat). It's ok once on the NLEX, but getting to there can be a nightmare! In fairness, it is better now that the Skyway is open, however the EDSA is still garbage. I have a Toyota Innova, but refuse to drive in Manila.

One thing to keep in mind in the Philippines is that there are no rules. The other thing to keep in mind is that the local driver will do something stupid; in 12 years of living here (and I have a 7-seat people mover and a motorcycle), they have yet to disappoint me! That's why they kill 36 people per day on the roads here.

2:50 Eynsford, Kent a favourite for Sunday Cyclists

grey should of been squished

The police don't do anything

@@markj.a351 That depends on where you live. Ours are excellent. Gotta try. They can't do anything if it's not reported.

@@suznet so a place for people to enjoy their hobby on the roads they pay for? What is the issue?

Yeah what was the risk here?

It hasn’t improved then? I learned to drive around there so I know that but well, or used to.

@@MartinParnham Nope, still used regularly by people with the eyesight of Mr Magoo (the roadsigns are very clear) and who got their licences from cereal boxes (or got someone else to take their test).

I’m not sure I understand on this one, I’m f you look at the broken road markings he followed it to that lane.

Don’t get me started on the box junction. I’m glad the traffic lights are timed properly otherwise it would be chaos.

@@damedusa5107 The white car may well be able to join the lane but the dash cam car is ahead and the white car should have allowed him to complete his legal move into the left lane, then joined behind. They should not be trying to effectively undertake the dash cam car to get in front

that one is particularly long but i think sometimes people instinctively put their foot down on the accelerator

It didn't look like they touched any pedal they just stopped driving 🤷‍♂️

Ashley is obviously out of the loop 😂

Also, they’re a van driver so they can “do anything” because reasons.

@@thorin4406 as a driving instructor he's not allowed to obtain a copy of the Highway Code White Van Driver Special Edition, so he's excused

I call them "bucket lights" - bucket = pail = "Park Anywhere I Like" 😋

@@ArminGrewe 🤣👍 I must've missed that one, they probably keep them next to the Audi / BMW editions. They're basically the same except all instances of the words "mirror" and "signal" have been crossed out 🤭

6:17 was truly horrifying. You could be coming the other way, do nothing wrong, and have a head on. Utterly unbelievable.

Mini roundabout only asks that you give way to the immediate right, there's also nothing that says you need to leave the roundabout open

@@AlexTunstall Do you block roundabouts because the book says you can?

@@AM2K2 I drive around all day looking for roundabouts to block, yeah

@@AlexTunstall general good driving is not to go through a give way (which roundabouts are) when the exit is not clear

@@Gobtik absolutely right my friend - though looking at the van, they entered the roundabout and prevented the cars from going around the roundabout. By doing so they also got too close to the cars to drive around them. Tricky situation, but I'd say it's 50/50 in that

Don't worry. The mercedes has since had it's indicator bulbs removed.

Is that LV14 UVO - or LV14 UVD?

@@wessexdruid7598 LV14 UVO, Toyota Rav4

They crossed the solid line. Fail. If you think the road markings are incorrect, take it up with the relevant authorities.

@@TestGearJunkie. I said, it was an infraction. Forget for a moment that "they broke the rules", was it objectively unsafe?

@@ianmason. Doesn't matter. Like I said, take it up with the council if it bothers you that much. Me, I'm not in any hurry that I can't wait a second or three.

@@TestGearJunkie. That doesn't answer the question, which leads me to believe that you're taking a little thrill at tutting at someone for "breaking the rules" rather than being concerned with the big issue which is "Is it safe?".

@@ianmason. The big issue, if you end up in court, is "Is it legal" - still, you do as you please, and so will everybody else regardless, it would seem. Anyway time for an early night, sleep well.

the US model Escort was even worse. they were a 2 ton car with a 65 bhp 2 liter engine with a cast iron block and aluminum heads. made for a delicate engine that was worked way too hard.

@@icouldbewrongicouldberight I think you "couldberight" on that one😂

Agreed. It was perfectly safe.

@@pocky1scot1 But still illegal. Take it up with the local council if it bothers you that much.

@@TestGearJunkie. You're commenting this everywhere - it isn't that serious. You sound like a highway code virgin, bet you bring it up in real life too 🤣

Poople already have to wait a long time for their tests, that would make the wait even longer

@@DemiGod.. other industries manage it fine, and with more tests you would require more capacity - obviously could not be brought in overnight otherwise you have people on decades old licences that are basically never checked for competency as laws change

I previously had strong viewpoints about driving being a privilege not a right, and that we should have a 1 strike and you're out type rule for serious offences of drink driving or dangerous driving...anyway my conclusion was if you start taking licences away, people will just drive without them. Meaning more uninsured drivers on the road. If caught you could send them to prison but that will cost tax payers a lot of money, possibly mean kids go to child services plus when they get out of prison they'll struggle to get a job and then need to sign on costing tax payers even more.

They couldn’t cope with the constant number of repeat tests. They can’t cope as it is.

@@TheVanderfulLife trouble with that is I'm not sure "oh people will break the law anyway" is an overly good reason not to do something in theory once you have been driving a few years, and with a retest that focusses on legal aspects that have changed in the last decade as well as basic road craft and situational awareness it should not be hard to pass it, the purpose being similar to how just about every other certification to operate machinery that has the potential to kill people tends to require periodic re-assessment people drive without a license now, or after a ban, and when caught.. the penalty is a driving ban assuming they are caught the other alternative is to significantly increase the chance of being caught, which means a lot more policing of traffic laws, which isn't going to happen either "we can't do anything about poor driving standards as it could cost money" isn't really the right way to think about this, yes cost/benefit does have to be considered, but "oh people will just break the law if we do this" isn't a reason not to consider it - its a reason to also ask "how is this policed?" and "how do you deal with those who fail?" the second point could well be a case of having a time period, say two months, to retake and pass, so its not "bugger, failed.. now what?" but a chance being provided to do something about it

Please ensure you are on Horn Replacement Therapy

That completely leaves out when the viewer's own reversing lights came on, though... (Granted we can't see them, so it's definitely not completely clear either way)

Except you have No idea how long the viewer was in reverse showing his intentions. Given that the viewer started te reverse less than a second after the Peugeots reverse lights came on the viewer had almost certainly shown their intention first and was doing full observations as the lights reverse lights came on. On top of that you just agreed that the cammer started to move first so again the Peugeot should have given way to the viewer already manoeuvre. No matter how you cut it up this was at absolute worst a 50-50 to the viewer. They also noticed and fixed for t while the Peugeot just kept going for it. I hope your observations on the road are better than RU-vid.

@@pocky1scot1 A good reason never to drive forwards into a bay. Reverse park every time, that's my rule.

Trailer..?

@@TestGearJunkie. It's possible that Ashley has one of those hitch mounted bike carriers, since I saw him recently carrying one, on one of his recent driving fail vids.

Would be different if cyclemikey was there, he has had lot of drivers fined with points on their licenses.