Car uprooted by a bollard in Dublin

Jip

It debunks nothing, dangerous driving is dangerous driving. I reckon that lane has as much legality as mother and child parking spaces.

JHMEG

old_aussie wrote: »

So, if someone drives through the warning bells and lights at a railway crossing and there is no sign saying "car will be destroyed by train" that the railways are responsible for the car being destroyed and the driver killed?

There are no similarities between a level crossing and an impaler hidden in the road.

This thread has attracted too many trolls.

questioner

would it have as much legality as disabled spaces in a private car park?

Cookie_Monster

JHMEG wrote: »

There are no similarities between a level crossing and an impaler hidden in the road.

This thread has attracted too many trolls.

you being the main one here from reading the last 11 pages.


She got what she deserved and should be persued for any costs for fixing the barrier too. Clearly she way paying no attention to her surroundings or the road to have gotten into that situation and she be done for careless driving also at the very least, not to mention the failure to comply with road signs and driving in a bus lane.

The only concession I would make is that the bollard should be painted a bright colour to make it more obvious.

questioner

JHMEG wrote: »

This thread has attracted too many trolls.

I agree, its getting pointless now and going down the its a biscuit its a bar route.

I think that scumbag and that woman driver should meet up and discuss how they have been unfairly and brutally attacked.Morons of the road unite!

mickdw

I think it is a disgrace that those things are allowed. If they are to be used, imo, the road should have very clear warnings for hundreds of metres stating rising bollards & that severe damage to car is likely.
Many people will attempt to take the bus lane if they happen to be late or for whatever reason. I can see how it could happen very easily, you see the bus & think that you will pull a quick one in behind him, many people having no idea that such rising devices actually exist. It must be some shock.
Im sure that the driver would have a case here. Sure she was braking the rules. there were some signs about cameras which would lead the driver to believe that she would likely get fined for her actions. She was willing to take that risk we can assume. There were also bus gate signs but this can mean anything from traffic lights to barriers to bollards to a system of nothing more than a white line with bus written in front of it. The driver here was quite entitled imo having seen the signs for cameras & for bus gate to assume that there was no physical barrier in place and that a fine would be the likely outcome. She has a case.

Head The Wall

Jip wrote: »

A bus lane in a private estate, who's going to give her the points, the security guards ? I doubt they have the same legal bearing as those on public roads.

Jip is implying that laws don't apply on private roads. I beg to differ, as per my case above the guards do prosecute people for driving offences on private property

Our man in Havana

Only certain offences can be prosecuted on private roads such as dangerous driving, careless driving, drink driving, no insurance etc. Unless that buslane has council backing those road-markings are no more than graffiti.

JHMEG

I'm glad her bimmer got focked up, she deserved it. She should go to prison for doing criminal damage to that bollard and attempting to break the law and drive illegally in a bus lane.

questioner

Bond-007 wrote: »

Unless that buslane has council backing those road-markings are no more than graffiti.

planning permission?

Our man in Havana

Bye laws.

BigAl81

Hey hey,

Does anyone know how the bus gets the bollard to lower? There is one of these round my way and I'd love to be able to get past it.

Is it weighted? Do they have a remote??

Go Team!

Our man in Havana

It is a remote similar to a garage opener.

Jip

For a motoring forum the attitude of some people here is beyond belief. Saying that she got what she deserved just for being in a bus lane is sickening and just plain retarded.

Run_to_da_hills

BigAl81 wrote: »

Hey hey,

Does anyone know how the bus gets the bollard to lower? There is one of these round my way and I'd love to be able to get past it.

Is it weighted? Do they have a remote??

Go Team!

Most of them operate trough an RFID remote controller built into the bus. You would have to clone the frequency on to a smilar chip but if they decide to change it you could be fooked some day.

mickdw

I am sure these things would be found to be illegal if they were fully challenged. I mean if someone is to drive the required distance behind a bus thereby driving safely etc and the bollard is flush with the road surface while in view from the drivers eye position, the driver cannot be responsible. How could someone be responsible for something that was not there until a time that it was not longer in their area of vision.

txpjl

colm_mcm wrote: »

reminds me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X34Pg9kI8lw&feature=PlayList&p=088E0456B54DF4D9&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=32

Is that water in the left front head light (1:10)?

BigAl81

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Most of them operate trough an RFID remote controller built into the bus. You would have to clone the frequency on to a smilar chip but if they decide to change it you could be fooked some day.

If a person was to be so inclined, do you think it would be possible to sit by a bollard, wait for a bus to pass, and capture the signal, and then re-transmit that signal upon request??

Go Team!

Head The Wall

txpjl wrote: »

Is that water in the left front head light (1:10)?

Good spot, now if ojnly the BMW drivers eyesight was as good

Run_to_da_hills

mickdw wrote: »

I am sure these things would be found to be illegal if they were fully challenged. I mean if someone is to drive the required distance behind a bus thereby driving safely etc and the bollard is flush with the road surface while in view from the drivers eye position, the driver cannot be responsible. How could someone be responsible for something that was not there until a time that it was not longer in their area of vision.

I would consider these devices as dangerous to car drivers as cable barriers are to motorcyclists. It may take a fatality or two to bring about their ban.

Planning should also be required as I could see them justified in certain circumstances such as preventing ram raiders smashing into supermarkets, securing car theft from private driveway etc.

Hagar

The UK Dept of Transport official view on rising bollards.

DOT wrote:

Whilst most applications will be to enable the passage of one vehicle at a time, there will be instances where two or more vehicles attempt to pass through in close succession. The system should ensure that bollards cannot rise beneath a vehicle because of the danger this would create. It is better to risk a certain amount of violation by "tailgating" vehicles, rather that put road users at risk.

Source = Link to DOT Website

A warning sign similar to these should be used.



The driver should get themselves a good solicitor.

Drummerboy08

Lads why is everyone claiming that these things are dangerous? Did the driver die?

Am I the only one who feels that if the driver of the BMW, had she read the rather large sign saying "no entry" then this wouldn't have happened? Its pure stupidity and carelessness in my book.

And I also hope her insurance company doesnt pay out either, because Its people being stupid like that that causes my insurance to be so expensive.

I think rather than claiming its the bollards fault (right, it jumped out under the car, how many times have women said that before) it should be suggested that this doll takes an eye test and an advanced driving course so she can understand what "no entry" means.

I hope its a tough lesson learned by her.

cornbb

I think what happened was an unfortunate and severe consequence of breaking a rule. A lot of people here are talking like the bollard was intentionally put there to mess up people's cars - that's not the case - it only has potential to do that sort of damage in the rare transitionary period when it's neither up nor down, but on the way up. The remote possibility of it doing damage is a side-effect of it's function, not it's function.

I think there's a possibility that putting up warning signs *might* have prevented the driver from doing that, thereby preventing headaches from everyone, but it doesn't mean that s/he isn't liable. The sort of people who tailgate buses to access areas they shouldn't be in are likely to be the sort that disregard these signs anyway.

I'm not gloating btw, I think it's a very harsh consequence of breaking of breaking a relatively minor rule, but she was the one who took the risk. It's her own fault. People shouldn't be expected to be protected from the consequences of doing things that they shouldn't.

The insurance would have to cover it. The whole point of having insurance is for when you make a stupid mistake.

That's not true. Insurance is there to protect you from the unexpected, something that is beyond your control.

fullstop

zAbbo wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BRCOV7MczU

Why do the wipers go mental in the last 2?!

MagicMarker

fullstop wrote: »

Why do the wipers go mental in the last 2?!

Wipers automatically turn on in cases of stupidity.

Or maybe they just knocked them on at the time of impact?

JHMEG

Hagar and others have shown that the risk posed by rising bollards is recognised internationally, and that none of the recommendations regarding their use were followed in this case. Specifally there were no signs warning of the bollard's presence, no warning lights, and no fail safe mechanism, all of which contributed to unacceptable levels of risk to motorists and their property.

Stark

Head The Wall wrote: »

Jip is implying that laws don't apply on private roads. I beg to differ, as per my case above the guards do prosecute people for driving offences on private property

Laws can apply differently. For example you can't be prosecuted for speeding if someone decides to put up a "5km/hr" speed limit sign on a private estate. That's because it's not a council approved speed limit so has no basis in law. If the estate owners want to give someone some sort of reprimand for breaking the estate rules, that's their own business but of course they must stay within the law with regards to what reprimand they impose.

In the case of the industrial estate, I would very much doubt you could consider the "bus lane" a bus lane in the same sense as one on a public road, ie: one that the local council is aware of and that the Gardaí have powers to fine people from driving in.

Head The Wall

Hagars link doesn't specifically state thay they are illegal, it's just The DOT's view on them. In the case here they could have done all that was legally required of them.

Still the drivers fault whatever way ye look at it

JHMEG

None of the guidelines were followed.

Stark

questioner wrote: »

On a personal note I disagree with sentiments expressed above to the effect of - even though I'm acting in flagrant and willful disregard of the law I expect you to act in complete and utter compliance with it, otherwise I'll bleat about my human rights to anyone who'll listen (stand up the ICCL). This attitude has for some bizarre reason gained quite a following, not only among those you might suspect of having it (criminals, thieves, burglars and their ilk) but amongst relatively decent members of the community as well. I do not know why this is, and I know this is off topic so I'll just register my disgust and leave it at that.

I'm sorry if the concept of punishment in proportion to the offence offends you. Death penalty for walking on the grass I say. At least we'll get rid of Wesley Crusher.

I see many drivers taking your attitude where they see say a pedestrian or cyclist committing a minor offence like jaywalking or not using a cycle lane and decide to threaten said person's life at the next opportunity when they should just leave it to the Gardaí or phone Trafficwatch or similar appropriate response.

I'll stick to my world where I get a fine for driving in a legal bus lane thank you very much.