[anb]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

it seems the i10 was quite far behind and the Hexa slows down, suspends the overtake manoeuver and moves back into the lane well before the i10 is anywhere in the frame. One may argue that the Hexa is still over the line, however it is not impeding the oncoming traffic which in this case was an i10.
.

No,the Aria was driving through the middle of the road, the main reason for the accident

Originally Posted by JithinR

Not to forget the auto driver who is enjoying the road at his own (or rather the Autos slow pace) prompting vehicles behind him to attempt dangerous overtakes.

The auto was riding decently through the left side. It was the Polo who was sticking to the centre line when there was a vehicle trying to overtake.

[anandhsub]

Originally Posted by sandsun7

A car, I suppose a grand i10 is pushed off the road by a SUV attempting to overtake another vehicle in the opposite direction. The driver loses control and bangs into another car following the SUV.
Did the driver of the grand i10 panic too early which caused him to veer off the road? This also shows how important it is to have properly leveled road shoulders on highways.

It looks like the Polo was trying to overtake the auto and the Hexa/Aria was trying to bully him and overtake both the Polo and the auto at the same time.

If I were the Grand i10 driver I would have just slowed and allowed both to overtake the auto safely. But looks like he just maintained his speeds and the Hexa wasn't willing to abandon the overtake until the last minute.

Overall while it is only the Hexa driver was at fault if the i10 had practiced more defensive driving could have come off without an incident.

And yes the shoulder needs to be wider to allow for safer overtakes.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by AirbusCapt

This idea of trying to extract money is frankly illegal. No matter who hits whom, the owner of each vehicle is expected to repair from his insurance, thats why insurance is bought. Trying to extract a no claim bonus from the other party is wrong.

That is nonsense. If we damage somebody's property, we are liable to compensate them. Insurance is simply a scheme to protect us from difficult-to-afford compensation. Comprehensive insurance, covering damage to one's own vehicle, is not even mandatory: only third party.

Are not most small scrapes (and this was ugly, but not major) settled by the exchange of cash? Even a symbolic amount. Nothing "illegal" about it. Purely practical and sensible. Many of us would rather just pay up for small damage anyway, without involving insurance at all.

[Yieldway17]

Originally Posted by AirbusCapt

Regarding a NCB, if a coconut falls on your parked car windshield and breaks it, will you ask the coconut tree owner to pay for your damages? Or claim it from your insurance? Will the tree owner pay for your NCB?
And who are we to judge if Rs 1000 is chump change?

If the coconut tree is in a parking lot of an establishment and is a designated parking area, yes, the parking lot owner is the one responsible.

I do not like the suing culture of the US but that culture brings some clear thought and responsibility to the business owners and everyone that if they cause something due to their negligence, they will be sued for multiple times the result, so they go above and beyond to make sure they are not negligent. Badly designed parking lot causing damage to your car? You can definitely sue the establishment through your insurance and get the money.

US is a bit extreme end and we are actually on the other extreme where there is no responsibility and owning up to anything by anyone. Some idiot rear ends my car, I'm supposed to go through insurance, yes, true. But my insurance company is supposed to get the insurance company of the one at fault pay to them the amount. Actuarial and pooling of risk is only a part of vehicular insurance, they are supposed to sue and recover money from those at fault too and they are fully entitled to it.

If we don't find fault for negligent accidents and not hold them responsible, it can very well be a lawless land.

[JReacher13]

Drunken driving on New year's Eve

Accident at 00:30 in the video. This is in hyderabad. Apparently the guy is drunk, crashed an apartment wall in a narrow lane and not even remorseful. Only minutes before there were kids and women of that apartment outside. Glad that they went inside.

https://youtu.be/uOTDCZfSgIU

Apparently both Telugu states have recorded highest liquor sales on new year's Eve. Police need to be commended for working through out the day and for setting up check points throughout the city.

[StopUnderrides]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

I feel the i10 panicked and went off into the "shoulder" (or lack of it), too fast, unnecessarily and then decided to come back up without slowing down. If anything this just highlights how defensive driving skills are not taught and how road design in India is a joke. Also, the importance of having ESC although not sure to what extent it would've helped here.

You are bang on! The i10 should have braked first before going onto the shoulder(if needed). Then continued braking before pulling off the shoulder.

[binoybnair]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

I believe this has NOTHING to do with the Hexa trying to overtake. The clause that they quoted is totally irrelevant and they have mindlessly put the blame on the "bigger vehicle" here (?).

I feel the i10 panicked and went off into the "shoulder" (or lack of it), too fast, unnecessarily and then decided to come back up

Isn't the main culprit here the very poorly designed road itself ?? I can see that there is a good few inches drop from the edge of the road to the dirt on the roadside. Imagine if it was a two-wheeler instead of a car. There is no way you can remain upright on a two wheeler if your wheel drops off that ledge. Shouldn't the road contractors/ NHAI be held accountable and made to pay for this? How long are we going to overlook this lackadaisical attitude from the highway authorities and contractors?

[MotoBlip]

Originally Posted by anb

No,the Aria was driving through the middle of the road, the main reason for the accident

Attachment 2252500

My dad has a very interesting approach to such situations, he stops the car steadily (obviously talking care not being rear ended) in the middle of the lane such that the car attempting to overtake is forced to push back to his shoulder.

If he does indeed crash, we'd all know whose fault it really was since our car was already stationary and if he still manages to overtake, well, good for him.

This technique works wonders against your average insouciant driver and I have also adopted the same. Would advise to use it only at city speeds, and with utmost precaution on rural roads.

[RaghuVis]

Originally Posted by MotoBlip

My dad has a very interesting approach to such situations, he stops the car steadily (obviously talking care not being rear ended) in the middle of the lane such that the car attempting to overtake is forced to push back to his shoulder.

If he does indeed crash, we'd all know whose fault it really was since our car was already stationary and if he still manages to overtake, well, good for him.

This technique works wonders against your average insouciant driver and I have also adopted the same. Would advise to use it only at city speeds, and with utmost precaution on rural roads.

Please please tell your dad to never ever do this from today onwards no matter what the speed. Roads are not just about how much you are in control. There are so many things happening around us every second which are totally out of our control. stopping on the middle of a road is the most illogical thing to do. You are endangering not just your lives but many others who are never expecting a car to stop in the middle of the road.

[PrasannaDhana]

Originally Posted by MotoBlip

If he does indeed crash, we'd all know whose fault it really was since our car was already stationary and if he still manages to overtake, well, good for him.

The objective is to making sure to avoid a crash by all means. The objective is definitely not making sure that we are not at fault after one.

Stopping in the middle of a road is a big NO!

You know what is the best way to manage impatient drivers tailing you? - It is by letting them pass the heck away from you.

You don't gain anything by losing a few seconds.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Ah, yes... I still occasionally practice what I call passive-aggressive braking on tailgaters but this is absolutely the best answer...

Originally Posted by PrasannaDhana

You know what is the best way to manage impatient drivers tailing you? - It is by letting them pass the heck away from you.

Keep dangerous drivers away from you: better to have them in front than behind!

[MotoBlip]

Originally Posted by RaghuVis

Please please tell your dad to never ever do this from today onwards no matter what the speed. Roads are not just about how much you are in control. There are so many things happening around us every second which are totally out of our control. stopping on the middle of a road is the most illogical thing to do. You are endangering not just your lives but many others who are never expecting a car to stop in the middle of the road.

You are right about that, but it’s not like he does this on the highway or anything. Yes, it’s a big no no on roads with high speed limits but in situation where the only option is to move left off the road to give way to an incoming car performing a dangerous overtake, it’s better to slow down or stop(with care) rather than going off the road(at which point its difficult to predict car dynamics). I have only ever seen him do this on street roads so never thought of it as wrong.

Unrelated:
Was never meant to deal with tailgaters, if you have someone tailgating you, as other have suggested, it’s best to get out of their way.

[AirbusCapt]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

That is nonsense. If we damage somebody's property, we are liable to compensate them. Insurance is simply a scheme to protect us from difficult-to-afford compensation. Comprehensive insurance, covering damage to one's own vehicle, is not even mandatory: only third party.

Are not most small scrapes (and this was ugly, but not major) settled by the exchange of cash? Even a symbolic amount. Nothing "illegal" about it. Purely practical and sensible. Many of us would rather just pay up for small damage anyway, without involving insurance at all.

This very attitude is the reason for unnecessary fights and road rage. I suggest you read up the law before making final judgement on calling out nonsense.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by AirbusCapt

This very attitude is the reason for unnecessary fights and road rage.

This very attitude is the way many tiffs get settled amicably. As for knowing the law, I repeat that comprehensive insurance is not even mandatory.

It's different in other countries. In GB, you get out of the car, exchange name, address and insurance details, nobody admits fault (because that's a term of the insurance) and you get back in again. It's then in the hands of the insurance companies. However, even allowing for difference in economies, even taking a car into a repair shop is much more expensive than it is here. I regard the odd knock as one of the overheads of driving, and being, myself, an imperfect driver. That's just me. Your opinion and methods may well differ.

[venkyhere]

Regarding the grandi10 v/s Hexa "who blinks first" video :

The blame is shared

1. Hexa is attempting to 'stack-overtake' both the polo and the auto. Not correct. He hasn't darted back quickly enough into his portion of the road even after seeing oncoming traffic.

2. The grand i10 guy has not even attempted to brake , instead, he thinks he can mud-road his way out of the mess, without sacrificing speed.

3. The morons who designed, built and signed-off this road - where is the shoulder ?

What clearly happened was, as a result of 1,2,3 above, the inside of the front left wheel, 'caught' itself tram-lined with the vertical surface of the road edge and any attempts by the grandi10 driver to 'steer' were not effective - until a point where the wheel 'found' itlself without a tram-line edge rubbing it, and broke itself free to the steering input (which is way too aggressive by now, because the guy was turning his steering and it was not responding, making him try harder) and since it's way to much, the car fishtailed, obviously there was another corrective steering input which was again adding to the problem, and eventually went and slammed against the poor innocent victim (was it a car?) who was quietly minding his business. There is only 1 victim here.