Jeep hit heifer

Damo810

rangler1 wrote: »

Some one said that they've had a few near scrapes......thought It was you.
Neighbour had 4 cows killed/put down a few years ago, so I'm probably more aware than any of you, he's never put a cow on the road since, luck runs out eventually, no one expects to find the whole road blocked and no warning

There was a clear warning here though. 'Luck' won't run out if the proper procedures are carried out and people on the roads aren't lunatics.

J.O. Farmer

rangler1 wrote: »

Some one said that they've had a few near scrapes......thought It was you.
Neighbour had 4 cows killed/put down a few years ago, so I'm probably more aware than any of you, he's never put a cow on the road since, luck runs out eventually, no one expects to find the whole road blocked and no warning

Nobody expects to find the whole road blocked but surely it's at least driving without due care and attention if you don't realise it's a possibility. A driver should expect the unexpected. In this case it was cattle on the road but the road could be blocked by anything such as an accident that had happened just previously. Would the jeep driver have accepted responsibility if somebody ran into the back of his jeep when he stopped after hitting the heifer because somebody else didn't expect him to be there.

JerCotter7

Just as a matter of interest has anyone quoted the law protecting the farmer? I know people are quoting the rules of the road but they aren't worth the paper they are written on.

C4d78

Don't know which is worse the Guard or the IFA guy. You'd expect some common sense from an alleged representative of farmers.
From this logic farmers should build an underpass to every section of the farm that crosses a road. Wow, that's incredible advice.
Why do we pay a sum to IFA for this kind of nonsense. I sometimes wonder...

hargo

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

Markcheese

Not all wrong but by the same logic what warning did you give that you were driving up the road, it is a public highway ,(in Irish bothar meaning a cow way),the cows have as much right to be using the road as you in your car...
Having said that I know of farmers that still just let the cows off down the road ,bends, night or day .

sheebadog

hargo wrote: »

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

Email, memo, phone call?

whupdedo

This thread reads like the turkeys voting against Christmas, we have 1 side of the story and I'm sorry, but an old man waving a stick doesn't constitute safe droving
How many cows were you moving op and isn't the recommended quota for moving cattle 1 person to 9 cows
also how far away from the gate was your father? Was the heifer not on the road until after the jeep passed your father, surely he should wait for the road to be clear before opening any gates, that's how I read the situation
And just because 99 percent of posters here would like to agree with you and make you feel really good about yourself, the reality is you probably will be found at fault, remember the insurance company will err on the side of caution, its easier to pay for a bumper than to go to court with the risk of losing a case which will cost multiples of thousands

frazzledhome

sheebadog wrote: »

Email, memo, phone call?

We cross at the same times daily and have nearly all the motorists trained.

J.O. Farmer

whupdedo wrote: »

This thread reads like the turkeys voting against Christmas, we have 1 side of the story and I'm sorry, but an old man waving a stick doesn't constitute safe droving
How many cows were you moving op and isn't the recommended quota for moving cattle 1 person to 9 cows
also how far away from the gate was your father? Was the heifer not on the road until after the jeep passed your father, surely he should wait for the road to be clear before opening any gates, that's how I read the situation
And just because 99 percent of posters here would like to agree with you and make you feel really good about yourself, the reality is you probably will be found at fault, remember the insurance company will err on the side of caution, its easier to pay for a bumper than to go to court with the risk of losing a case which will cost multiples of thousands

Where did you get the 1 person to 9 cattle figure. 1 in front and 1 behind on the road and the person moving the cattle as the op had should be sufficient to move all the cattle anyone has if they can keep them moving and under control.
These are cattle not school children and even then I think the ratio will be higher.

sheebadog

frazzledhome wrote: »

We cross at the same times daily and have nearly all the motorists trained.

They get out of the cars in the morning and it's almost a social occasion. Different story in the evening though.

DMAXMAN

interesting article in the farming independent today about same. thought it well worth reading

thehouses

hargo wrote: »

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

The OP stated:
"Anyway he was letting them out when he thought there was no traffic coming."

To me that means that the jeep was going too fast for the road.

Also a more recent post from the OP states:
"FBD man was out this morning to have a look at scene of incident and said that there was nothing else we could have done, why driver didn't stop or slow down we don't know."

whupdedo

thehouses wrote: »

The OP stated:
"Anyway he was letting them out when he thought there was no traffic coming."

To me that means that the jeep was going too fast for the road.

Also a more recent post from the OP states:
"FBD man was out this morning to have a look at scene of incident and said that there was nothing else we could have done, why driver didn't stop or slow down we don't know."

The FBD man's opinion is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, he wasn't their and his opinion doesn't mean squat

moy83

whupdedo wrote: »

The FBD man's opinion is about as useful as a chocolate fireguard, he wasn't their and his opinion doesn't mean squat

If it went to court whose word would the judge be likely to give most weight to ? Farmer , driver , guard or FED man I wonder ....

Farmer Pudsey

hargo wrote: »

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

First of all at present weather is good and visibility is very good. Like I pointed out earlier I have experience of trying to slow traffic down at the scene of an accident with a hi-vis coat to say that drivers ignore you is an understatement. Should Op's father and mother have Hi-vis vests, coats yes and flags yes however the driver it seems did not attempt to slow down at any stage. In your case the farmers is wrong where he has no one in front of cattle. However in this case OP had nearly all the boxes ticked. But it seem driver choose to ignore. Moving cattle is tricky business and on most farms labour is a scarse resource nowadays.

whupdedo wrote: »

This thread reads like the turkeys voting against Christmas, we have 1 side of the story and I'm sorry, but an old man waving a stick doesn't constitute safe droving
How many cows were you moving op and isn't the recommended quota for moving cattle 1 person to 9 cows
also how far away from the gate was your father? Was the heifer not on the road until after the jeep passed your father, surely he should wait for the road to be clear before opening any gates, that's how I read the situation
And just because 99 percent of posters here would like to agree with you and make you feel really good about yourself, the reality is you probably will be found at fault, remember the insurance company will err on the side of caution, its easier to pay for a bumper than to go to court with the risk of losing a case which will cost multiples of thousands

I think you are trying to troll there is not specification as to number of animals /labour unit. You are showing ageism in your attitude to OP parents. If I drove up to a garda checkpoint and decided not to stop as guard was sixty years old I know exactly what would happen. Cattle can be reluctant to move accross a road so you have to give them time, They also can be spooked and I would not stand in front of a bunch of spooked cattle. It is not a simple matter of opening a gate and cattle will parade across a road like models on a catwalk

whupdedo

moy83 wrote: »

If it went to court whose word would the judge be likely to give most weight to ? Farmer , driver , guard or FED man I wonder ....

Well seeing as In an irish court of law a guards word is taken as gospel, i would say guard

Farmer Pudsey

whupdedo wrote: »

Well seeing as In an irish court of law a guards word is taken as gospel, i would say guard

Not exactly if the insurance company decide to fight the case( and FBD as the main farm insurance company has a history of fighting such cases it took and won the case on accidents on land to the supreme court) it would hire an engineer to deliver a report on the site and his opinion would weight on a higher level than a guard. The driver would have to get same so the class of opinions would be adjucitated on by the judge.

yourpics

I had an accident where a farmer pulled out of a side road in front of me. He got the guard to side with him. Then he got an engineers report, it didnt help his case so he got a different engineer. Plus he had 3 "witnesses" onboard his car. Long story short he got 25k for "whiplash"

frazzledhome

yourpics wrote: »

I had an accident where a farmer pulled out of a side road in front of me. He got the guard to side with him. Then he got an engineers report, it didnt help his case so he got a different engineer. Plus he had 3 "witnesses" onboard his car. Long story short he got 25k for "whiplash"

And what exactly has his/her occupation have to do with that post?

Farmer Pudsey

yourpics wrote: »

I had an accident where a farmer pulled out of a side road in front of me. He got the guard to side with him. Then he got an engineers report, it didnt help his case so he got a different engineer. Plus he had 3 "witnesses" onboard his car. Long story short he got 25k for "whiplash"

And how come you knew he got two engineers reports.

yourpics

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

And how come you knew he got two engineers reports.

My solicitor showed me both reports but we could not use the first one as it was entered 'without prejudice'.
His occupation is relevant as he claimed he could not carry out his work, physical work etc

Farmer Pudsey

yourpics wrote: »

My solicitor showed me both reports but we could not use the first one as it was entered 'without prejudice'.
His occupation is relevant as he claimed he could not carry out his work, physical work etc

No it is not in any libality case most will sue for loss of earning especially if self employed.

moy83

yourpics wrote: »

My solicitor showed me both reports but we could not use the first one as it was entered 'without prejudice'.
His occupation is relevant as he claimed he could not carry out his work, physical work etc

In fairness 25 k doesn't sound alot if someone can't do their job . I've heard of people getting more money for less excuses than that

yourpics

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

No it is not in any libality case most will sue for loss of earning especially if self employed.

Well if he had a desk based job i dont think it would have the same impact. He claimed on a basis of X amount earnings per week. Not sure how he calculated that.

yourpics

moy83 wrote: »

In fairness 25 k doesn't sound alot if someone can't do their job . I've heard of people getting more money for less excuses than that

Thats a BIG If!! Well its 25k more than he should hav got as he pulled out of a minor road through a stop junction in front of oncoming traffic in 2 directions

J.O. Farmer

yourpics wrote: »

Well if he had a desk based job i dont think it would have the same impact. He claimed on a basis of X amount earnings per week. Not sure how he calculated that.

How do you think he might calculate that. You generally average your years earnings by 52 to get a weekly amount the same as anybody else.
Who cares what he did for a living if he can't do it because of an accident he can't do it. Next time run into somebody on social welfare and there will be no loss of earnings as they won't have a job to not be able to do.

yourpics

J.O. Farmer wrote: »

How do you think he might calculate that. You generally average your years earnings by 52 to get a weekly amount the same as anybody else.
Who cares what he did for a living if he can't do it because of an accident he can't do it. Next time run into somebody on social welfare and there will be no loss of earnings as they won't have a job to not be able to do.

Anyway the point of the story is he was in the wrong but had the garda on his side which put me on the backfoot straight away like the op here

Farmer Pudsey

yourpics wrote: »

Anyway the point of the story is he was in the wrong but had the garda on his side which put me on the backfoot straight away like the op here

Where did you hit his car in the side or the rear.

J.O. Farmer

yourpics wrote: »

Anyway the point of the story is he was in the wrong but had the garda on his side which put me on the backfoot straight away like the op here

That's a fair enough point. The fact that he was a farmer was irrelevant to your point.

yourpics

I hit the side. He pulled out across me intending to go down the road i was coming up ie opposite direction to what i was travelling

Farmer Pudsey

yourpics wrote: »

I hit the side. He pulled out across me intending to go down the road i was coming up ie opposite direction to what i was travelling

What you posted is not making sence I think you are making it up as you go along. Have never heard of a case where if you hit the side of a car pulling out you lost the case, and very seldom of a case where you hit the rear that you won. How come none of the 3 occupants other than the farmers did not sue or did you forget about there 25K each as well.

yourpics

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

What you posted is not making sence I think you are making it up as you go along. Have never heard of a case where if you hit the side of a car pulling out you lost the case, and very seldom of a case where you hit the rear that you won. How come none of the 3 occupants other than the farmers did not sue or did you forget about there 25K each as well.

well thats the thing. I was in the right he was wrong but i lost. The other occipants made no claim. It was a minor accident. Very difficult to see how he was 'injured'

Farmer Pudsey

yourpics wrote: »

well thats the thing. I was in the right he was wrong but i lost. The other occipants made no claim. It was a minor accident. Very difficult to see how he was 'injured'

As I said you are making it up as you go along and you are not any good at it.

lefthooker

hargo wrote: »

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

As a rational person i think you are an idiot
Nothing careless there at all. Reread the very first post, the OP had his mother and father at both ends to stop traffic. Careless was the Jeep drivers actions. Even reckless and negligent to ignore the man waving him to slow down. Would you say the OP was careless if his father had been hit by the driver as well as the heifer. The case you outline is a totally different circumstance.

whupdedo wrote: »

This thread reads like the turkeys voting against Christmas, we have 1 side of the story and I'm sorry, but an old man waving a stick doesn't constitute safe droving
How many cows were you moving op and isn't the recommended quota for moving cattle 1 person to 9 cows
also how far away from the gate was your father? Was the heifer not on the road until after the jeep passed your father, surely he should wait for the road to be clear before opening any gates, that's how I read the situation
And just because 99 percent of posters here would like to agree with you and make you feel really good about yourself, the reality is you probably will be found at fault, remember the insurance company will err on the side of caution, its easier to pay for a bumper than to go to court with the risk of losing a case which will cost multiples of thousands

We had to move 60 bullocks today, 250yds from one gate to the other. The road between the gates is straight but there is a slight bend either side of both gates. We park vehicles in the line of traffic past the gates, traffic has to slow down cos they won't overtake on a bend. When the road is clear we step onto the middle of the road this signals that it is OK to let on the stock. The road is blocked, if a motorist is unable to stop well then they are at fault. Been doing it like that for years. No dramas. Just two of us handling 60 bullocks. No hi-vis jackets, no semiphore flags and no flashing beacons on our heads.

The main problem is that some motorists don't have a clue how to react to livestock. They panic and all they can think about is they're shiny merc, beemer or landy. They ignore instructions from the people who are handling the stock. Cos Fran from Foxrock knows better than the farmer

yourpics

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

As I said you are making it up as you go along and you are not any good at it.

No i am not making it up. I spent 7 years getting it sorted but sure whstever you think yourself

whupdedo

lefthooker wrote: »

As a rational person i think you are an idiot


We had to move 60 bullocks today, 250yds from one gate to the other. The road between the gates is straight but there is a slight bend either side of both gates. We park vehicles in the line of traffic past the gates, traffic has to slow down cos they won't overtake on a bend. When the road is clear we step onto the middle of the road this signals that it is OK to let on the stock. The road is blocked, if a motorist is unable to stop well then they are at fault. Been doing it like that for years. No dramas. Just two of us handling 60 bullocks. No hi-vis jackets, no semiphore flags and no flashing beacons on our heads.

The main problem is that some motorists don't have a clue how to react to livestock. They panic and all they can think about is they're shiny merc, beemer or landy. They ignore instructions from the people who are handling the stock. Cos Fran from Foxrock knows better than the farmer

You have to be applauded on your herdsmanship, and also its no boast to say you have no high visibility vests or any safety wear or equipment, you should, because some day it might just save yours or someones life

lefthooker

whupdedo wrote: »

You have to be applauded on your herdsmanship, and also its no boast to say you have no high visibility vests or any safety wear or equipment, you should, because some day it might just save yours or someones life

Thanks but it was not a boast. What it is is a system that works. The day it fails is the day someone ignores the signal to stop or slow down. With a parked vehicle with its hazards flashing and a person standing in the middle of the road if a vehicle won't stop that's just driver ignorance. Hi-vis or not.

Jude13

hargo wrote: »

Interesting. As a motorist I think the op was careless. He states that when the jeep approached there were no cattle on the road but the first one came out as as the jeep passed and a collision occurred.
A man waving a stick is not a signal to slow down or stop. One could say its a good reason not to stop.
Op you have a responsibility to properly warn motorists by wearing hi viz vest, using a flag and stop traffic before allowing the cattle onto the road or be sure that there is no approaching traffic.
Traffic should also be stopped in the opposite direction before the point where the cattle exit the road. No motorist wants a herd of cattle bouncing off their car if they can avoid it.
I unfortunately know this from poor farmer experience as a man near to me drives 100 cattle up the road daily without anyone in front and several times i have come around the bend to find the cattle approaching but by that time I am in the middle of the run and have the cattle banging up against the car. I for one would prefer some professionalism and be properly warned to stop in time.

I have to agree with this, no cattle on the road yet, guy waving a stick, signs? high viss vest?

And then some posters saying put signs up after the fact in case of legal proceedings as I can only imagine as an attempt to claim they were there all along. If the incident had been the motorists fault why the cover up?

Rovi

lefthooker wrote: »

As a rational person i think you are an idiot

[MOD]

Yellow card warning for personal abuse.

[/MOD]

Rovi

Viewtodiefor wrote: »

1) have you signs up for caution cattle crossing? ( insurance co will ask you? My advise say yes!)

[MOD]

Yellow Card warning for breach of forum charter: 2. Illegal actions, cruelty, advocating such actions, etc. ("advocating the falsifying of records or other illegal or morally dubious practices")

[/MOD]

lefthooker

Jude13 wrote: »

no cattle on the road yet, guy waving a stick,

Its not magic, the cattle don't just appear on the road. The guy waving the stick was there to let the cattle on the road and to stop the traffic.

signs?

The OP had two of the best signs available, his parents, live active signs. I see plenty of cattle crossing signs but do you think vehicles slow down.

high viss vest?

Perhaps but at 7:15pm there shouldn't have been any visibility issue

And then some posters saying put signs up after the fact in case of legal proceedings as I can only imagine as an attempt to claim they were there all along.

I can agree with ya there, some bad advice.

If the incident had been the motorists faultwhy the cover up?

The glaringly obvious fact is the motorist is at fault. With the circumstances he failed to stop.
I'll bet next weeks wages the driver knew exactly what was happening and didn't want to be caught behind then cattle so took a chance and drove on.

lefthooker

Rovi wrote: »

[MOD]

Yellow card warning for personal abuse.

[/MOD]

No worries Rovi I gladly accept the warning. They expressed an opinion, I did also. I'd like to apologise to any of the idiotic posts I challenged.
Some of the attitudes and opinions expressed by motorists here are just dumbfounding. Some people you just can't learn.
Going to step back from this thread now.

Jude13

lefthooker wrote: »

No worries Rovi I gladly accept the warning. They expressed an opinion, I did also. I'd like to apologise to any of the idiotic posts I challenged.
Some of the attitudes and opinions expressed by motorists here are just dumbfounding. Some people you just can't learn.
Going to step back from this thread now.

Probably best

dzer2

Jude13 wrote: »

I have to agree with this, no cattle on the road yet, guy waving a stick, signs? high viss vest?

And then some posters saying put signs up after the fact in case of legal proceedings as I can only imagine as an attempt to claim they were there all along. If the incident had been the motorists fault why the cover up?

Believe me if you hit any thing with your car it is your fault. Be it an animal or a person. Driving with due respect for other road users what ever kind is the leaast I would expect. If some one was waving at me while standing on the road I would stop how would you know that he didnt want some help or be in difficulty.

As for the OP he done all that was possible to inform other road users that he was turning cattle on to the road. As for the guard what does anyone expect he is likely to be covering a huge area and this is just another incident for him.

Viewtodiefor

I got a warning over my reply to this thread ! Not quiet sure what I did wrong?

Kovu

Viewtodiefor wrote: »

I got a warning over my reply to this thread ! Not quiet sure what I did wrong?

This sentence here-

1) have you signs up for caution cattle crossing? ( insurance co will ask you? My advise say yes!)

Advising the OP to tell the insurance company that he had signs up when he may not have them up.

Viewtodiefor

.Kovu. wrote: »

This sentence here-


Advising the OP to tell the insurance company that he had signs up when he may not have them up.

Fair enough, that's up to himself I suppose

Viewtodiefor

Viewtodiefor wrote: »

Fair enough, that's up to himself I suppose

I should have said!
(I have said yes in the past)

Point taken

whupdedo

Reading all the replies based on a 1 sided argument from the original poster its easy to understand the assumptions made by people other than farmers that country folk, especially farmers are lacking in the brains department somewhat and are a little backwards