Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

De Bhál

randomname2005 wrote: »

I have been driving around rural Ireland on holidays and jaesus it is awful. Behind two cyclists on a windy road, solid white line, impatient driver behind me over takes the three of us. Met them at a cafe later and explained why I wouldn't pass them. They understood but had the guilt.

Came around a corner to find a jag halfway over the white line trying to overtake. Look in the mirror after we pass and he is trying again.

On the first incident, one of the cyclists was beckoning me to pass which I found worrying as I would have had to cross the white line and break the law. But then later the wife asked would I break the white line if a pedestrian was walking towards us. Apologies if ot but what do you drivers do in this situation? The thought of coming to a complete stop to let them walk past is terrifying given how people drive on country roads but the other option is to cross the line.

just overtake them while crossing the white line, as long as it's safe to do so, as in you're sure there's nothing approching.
You can't be expected to sit behind a pair of cyclists going about 25km/h for long stretches on country roads because you're afraid to cross a solid white line.

Chuchote

randomname2005 wrote: »

I have been driving around rural Ireland on holidays and jaesus it is awful. Behind two cyclists on a windy road, solid white line, impatient driver behind me over takes the three of us. Met them at a cafe later and explained why I wouldn't pass them. They understood but had the guilt.

Came around a corner to find a jag halfway over the white line trying to overtake. Look in the mirror after we pass and he is trying again.

On the first incident, one of the cyclists was beckoning me to pass which I found worrying as I would have had to cross the white line and break the law. But then later the wife asked would I break the white line if a pedestrian was walking towards us. Apologies if ot but what do you drivers do in this situation? The thought of coming to a complete stop to let them walk past is terrifying given how people drive on country roads but the other option is to cross the line.

Surely you behave as you would with a car or a tractor in a similar situation - wait till there's a long straight stretch (which will probably have a broken line anyway) and then nip around them, giving them plenty of space.

papu

De Bh103947187 wrote:

just overtake them while crossing the white line, as long as it's safe to do so, as in you're sure there's nothing approching.
You can't be expected to sit behind a pair of cyclists going about 25km/h for long stretches on country roads because you're afraid to cross a solid white line.

You really can't suggest they break the solid white line, because to do so is against the law.
From the Garda press office.

. It is also accepted that vehicles are not permitted to cross a single or continuous white line, and indeed it is a penalty point offence to do so. The only exceptions are in an emergency or for access.

Chuchote

As a matter of interest, are there any records on how long the longest white line in the country is?

I remember a road in Kerry years and years ago that swivelled back and forth so you'd get seasick on it, and it seemed to have a white line that went for eternity, but maybe that's because I was going uphill.

Lumen

Chuchote wrote: »

As a matter of interest, are there any records on how long the longest white line in the country is?

RTE toilets?

Corca Baiscinn

I love Sean nos wrote: »

I was also half-listening to this on the drive home yesterday. I can't recall if it was Ciarán Cuffe or Ciarán Cannon. Regardless, he cycles regularly. A text was read out to him; some buffoon listener wanted to know all about road tax. There was a brief response about there being no such thing, then that there was no need for motor tax because cyclists don't generate pollution.

Later he was waxing lyrical about the cycling strategy document that his party wrote or something in response to a question about funding for cycling infrastructure. In 2012. Cooper didn't ask him the obvious question; so what? It's a 5 year old document. What have you done with it? You say you're fully supportive of cycling infrastructure. Prove it. You're the party in government.

I turned off at that point.

Ah now, you were only half listening! It was Ciaran Cannon and the main point of the interview was to push for the need for the MPDL which he is co-sponsoring as a private members bill. The comment re road tax just came in by text and while I don't disagree with any of the things you've said regarding the issue, I think it would have derailed the interview and given the texter too much prominence to have said them all just then. The reference to the 2012 Strategy Document was to FF's, not his, and the point of referring to it was that FF should therefore be likely to support a MPDL since they had called for it. I think it's unfair to ask what he has done as he hasn't been in a Transport or Justice Ministry but he has co-sponsored the MPDL and seems to be busting his gut to get cross-party support for it.
I think that it was brilliant that a Minister, albeit a Junior one said live on air that he commutes in Dublin by bike and that it's shameful that Matt Cooper feels that he can't let his 13 year old son out on his bike and that this needs to change.
I never thought I'd find myself defending an ex PD TD but we people on bikes must take our friends where we find them! I think the interview was heartening especially after the barrage of negativity in the past week from Verona Murray, Superintendent Reed et al. For anyone who'd like to listen back it's about 57 minutes-in, on Newstalk Drive yesterday. Just before, a spokesperson for the group who "saved" the St Andrew St Cycle Lane from encroaching traffic on Mon was on and just before that Matt Cooper said that he saw a Garda looking for the driver of a truck who had blocked the cycle lane in Rathmines so things are looking up!

De Bhál

papu wrote: »

De Bh103947187 wrote:

just overtake them while crossing the white line, as long as it's safe to do so, as in you're sure there's nothing approching.
You can't be expected to sit behind a pair of cyclists going about 25km/h for long stretches on country roads because you're afraid to cross a solid white line.

You really can't suggest they break the solid white line, because to do so is against the law.
From the Garda press office.

. It is also accepted that vehicles are not permitted to cross a single or continuous white line, and indeed it is a penalty point offence to do so. The only exceptions are in an emergency or for access.

OK what I suggest is just use common sense so.

ThisRegard

Pedestrian, cyclist, animal etc, cross the white line when you're sure it's safe.

Edit, Cannon was unashamedly truthful in describing how he has no trouble taking and holding his road space, and telling idiot listeners what motor tax actually is when they started texting in about road tax. Nice to hear a member of government not trying to sit on both sides of the fence for once on this topic.

Corca Baiscinn

[QUOTE Edit, Cannon was unashamedly truthful in describing how he has no trouble taking and holding his road space, and telling idiot listeners what motor tax actually is when they started texting in about road tax. Nice to hear a member of government not trying to sit on both sides of the fence for once on this topic.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but also acknowledging I think that not everyone has his degree of experience or confidence and that if we are to ever have kids cycling to school again that things have to change both from pov of infrastructure and driver attitude/behaviour

I love Sean nos

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

The comment re road tax just came in by text and while I don't disagree with any of the things you've said regarding the issue, I think it would have derailed the interview and given the texter too much prominence to have said them all just then.

That's fair enough and I'd be happy if he took an either harder line and responded saying "Matt, that's not relevant, so I'm not going to respond." If some listener wants to publicise that he or she is a moron, let them at it.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

The reference to the 2012 Strategy Document was to FF's, not his, and the point of referring to it was that FF should therefore be likely to support a MPDL since they had called for it. I think it's unfair to ask what he has done as he hasn't been in a Transport or Justice Ministry but he has co-sponsored the MPDL and seems to be busting his gut to get cross-party support for it.

His statement on it sounded rather wishy-washy to me. Even for a politician.

Corca Baiscinn wrote: »

it's shameful that Matt Cooper feels that he can't let his 13 year old son out on his bike and that this needs to change.

That was another opportunity to ridicule recent statements made by Gardai and the RSA. "Slap a helmet and some high-vis on him Matt and he'll be grand. Sure, isn't that what the RSA say. Make sure he knows all about his responsibilities as a cyclist to be visible and share the road."

AndrewJRenko

ThisRegard wrote: »

Pedestrian, cyclist, animal etc, cross the white line when you're sure it's safe.

Edit, Cannon was unashamedly truthful in describing how he has no trouble taking and holding his road space, and telling idiot listeners what motor tax actually is when they started texting in about road tax. Nice to hear a member of government not trying to sit on both sides of the fence for once on this topic.

It was also interesting to note that Matt didn't feel obliged to drag in Conor 'can I sell you a car-related insurance product' Faughnan or gob****e John McGurk or some other dinosaur for 'balance'?

Eamonnator

Chuchote wrote: »

Tax and insurance should be added to the price of fuel; it would stop this crap.

Not sure that would work.
I have full no claims bonus on my car insurance and would have to pay the same for my insurance as a learner driver. I don't think that would be fair.

Corca Baiscinn

He was trying to remind and embarrass FF I'd say, reminding them that they had the same idea in their manifesto in case they had any idea now of opposing it because it was proposed by a FG TD, though not by the government.

Re your idea of ridiculing the helmet and high-viz proponents, it's one approach but not the only one, it's frustrating when progress is at snail's pace if even that but perhaps alienating the people whose support you need isn't always clever and there's more than one way to skin a cat..............

I love Sean nos

Lumen wrote: »

RTE toilets?

That trailed off in 2010.

Weepsie

Eamonnator wrote: »

Not sure that would work.
I have full no claims bonus on my car insurance and would have to pay the same for my insurance as a learner driver. I don't think that would be fair.

Surely it can be worked in as a tax credit or something.

It would insure the tens of thousands uninsured instantly and should bring costs down

magicbastarder

Eamonnator wrote: »

I have full no claims bonus on my car insurance and would have to pay the same for my insurance as a learner driver. I don't think that would be fair.

AFAIK most 'insurance on petrol' models only provide third party insurance - most people would be paying for comprehensive separately.

Eamonnator

magicbastarder wrote: »

AFAIK most 'insurance on petrol' models only provide third party insurance - most people would be paying for comprehensive separately.

I still wouldn't want to pay the same for 3rd party insurance as a learner driver, or a driver with 9 penalty points.

Kaisr Sose

Eamonnator wrote: »

I still wouldn't want to pay the same for 3rd party insurance as a learner driver, or a driver with 9 penalty points.

I am not familiar with the workings of the pay as you go insurance but there has to be some way that drivers with loadings are charged / penalised. It sounds like a good idea to have all this centralised in one way but I don't see it being workable/ legal under EU Law. Is it not state intervention in the insurance market/ unfair / restrictive ? ANPR that has timely and accurate information will work when it is introduced in 2019. It's a joke they we in Ireland have to wait so long for technology that is now tried, tested and widely deployed in other countries.

Chuchote

Eamonnator wrote: »

Not sure that would work.
I have full no claims bonus on my car insurance and would have to pay the same for my insurance as a learner driver. I don't think that would be fair.

Insurance is high partly because so many people are skiving off and not paying. If it was on the fuel it would be cheaper; you'd pay more if you drove more, but everyone would pay.

I think it actually is charged on fuel in some country/countries, but maybe it's tax only.

You could likely to have a less likely to have an accident wife fill up the the car but I get the idea in linking insurance to fuel. Everyone would have to pay. Proper IT system in place and linking cars to a card and drivers or something.

Chiparus

You could do what they do in Australia where 3rd party insurance is included in your car tax ( rego), insurance companies tender to provide this 3rd party insurance.

beans

Tangentially on-topic, I've started commuting on my road-bike after a 10-month hiatus due to a bad crash killing my old frame.

At the point of the crash, every day this week, I've been super-sketchy on the brakes and hyper-vigilant before even consciously aware of where I am I'm still living that crash in some corner of my mind

Pinch Flat

Guy in an audi this morning, cut in front of me when I was going through a green light at this junction. He turned right, into a queue of traffic..

https://goo.gl/maps/vn87Lj3ecHw


He gave me a friendly wave as if you say "sorry, didn't see see your flashing 200 lumen strobe". I reciprocated "yeah it's only a matter of time before you kill someone with that driving".

magicbastarder

i had a funny crash on that road years ago - cycling home from school, on the footpath (because it was snowing) and crossed the end of a driveway - but the path was sloped up to the driveway, so my front wheel slid out from under me, straight into my friend aidan's front wheel, and we both took a right old pratfall.

Seaswimmer

Coming up Grace Park road yesterday morning towards Collins Avenue. Not really room to pass but cars do attempt it when there is a gap in oncoming traffic. I has passed a large BMW 640 something or other at the lights further back and saw him in my mirror behind me.

Expecting the worst I took the lane but he sat patiently behind me and when there was a gap overtook me with plenty of room.

Passed him again at lights at Collins avenue but again after a few cars had squeezed passed me he was behind me. Again he waited and passed safely.

When I caught him again at Swords Road I passed him on his drivers side. He had his window open so I remarked that he was a very polite and courteous driver.

"Thank you" he said and we both went on our way feeling happy:)

ThisRegard

magicbastarder wrote: »

i had a funny crash on that road years ago - cycling home from school, on the footpath (because it was snowing) and crossed the end of a driveway - but the path was sloped up to the driveway, so my front wheel slid out from under me, straight into my friend aidan's front wheel, and we both took a right old pratfall.

Ha, classic Aidan.

Annie get your Run

Seaswimmer wrote: »

I has passed a large BMW 640 he sat patiently behind me and when there was a gap overtook me with plenty of room.
Again he waited and passed safely.

"Thank you" he said and we both went on our way feeling happy:)

BMW driver in courteous/good driving headline shocker :D

Fighting Tao

Annie get your Run wrote: »

BMW driver in courteous/good driving headline shocker :D

I think Audi is the new BMW these days.

Danjamin1

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I think Audi is the new BMW these days.

I think the Audi generalisation is misplaced

(Hides Audi keys)

Kaisr Sose

Annie get your Run wrote: »

BMW driver in courteous/good driving headline shocker :D

Not as rare as you think! (I have one )

Some people in mid-priced or economy brands of vehicles have a lot to learn on the courtesy and respect aspects of driving...

schemingbohemia

So, having waited since last Wednesday week for a Garda to ring me regarding the near miss on June 20th, I rang Traffic Watch back who said to get in contact with Blackrock. No record there but apparently that may be because no-one assigned to it yet. So a potentially dangerous driver driving around for an additional 10 days without the Garda talking to him. What his memory of the incident is likely to be now is anyone's guess - not that it would make much odds anyway.

Danbo!

schemingbohemia wrote: »

So, having waited since last Wednesday week for a Garda to ring me regarding the near miss on June 20th, I rang Traffic Watch back who said to get in contact with Blackrock. No record there but apparently that may be because no-one assigned to it yet. So a potentially dangerous driver driving around for an additional 10 days without the Garda talking to him. What his memory of the incident is likely to be now is anyone's guess - not that it would make much odds anyway.

Yeah it's shame alright. My Neighbour called 999 during the week when he saw someone breaking into another neighbours house. Alarm going off, actually saw the guy enter. Gardai arrived 1 hr later. They're really stretched so unfortunately won't prioritise road incidents like yours

magicbastarder

my opinion of the handling of incidents by the gardai is not exactly sky high - we arrived on the scene of an accident on a motorway a few years back - we did not witness the actual accident itself - and when the attending garda (later found out he was a super) asked me, i explicitly told him i had no reason to believe the motorist was speeding.
when we were called to make a statement several months later (in front of a different garda), the super had written down that we had told him we had witnessed the motorist driving at excessive and dangerous speed. which we'd been at pains to point out was not the case.

the garda we gave the statement to said the super had probably been hoping to build a dangerous driving case based on our statements, but we'd blown that out of the water. and didn't seem to think there was anything unusual in it.

Danbo!

magicbastarder wrote: »

my opinion of the handling of incidents by the gardai is not exactly sky high - we arrived on the scene of an accident on a motorway a few years back - we did not witness the actual accident itself - and when the attending garda (later found out he was a super) asked me, i explicitly told him i had no reason to believe the motorist was speeding.
when we were called to make a statement several months later (in front of a different garda), the super had written down that we had told him we had witnessed the motorist driving at excessive and dangerous speed. which we'd been at pains to point out was not the case.

the garda we gave the statement to said the super had probably been hoping to build a dangerous driving case based on our statements, but we'd blown that out of the water. and didn't seem to think there was anything unusual in it.

Made a statement years back about an armed robbery where I worked and they were trying to ham it up quite a bit. To be honest, the lads that robbed the place were quite nice about it which sounds odd, but I think the gardai needed proper "fearing for my life" quotes for it.

Anyway, sorry for pulling the thread off topic about Gardai, here's a video I spotted on reddit of a cyclist being undertaken. Cyclist has a great attitude and doesn't go mental, something I can struggle with a little

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n7zuYCGV6k

De Bhál

can't believe he pulled off that move at the end and included it in the video. Overtake into oncoming traffic to save himself a few seconds.

Fairly standard filtering for the UK.

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

Fairly standard filtering for the UK.

It's not called the "coroner's corridor" for nothing.

Hah, I'd never heard that before!

Almost hit by a white van in the Phoenix Park outside Farmleigh on Saturday. He was overtaking too closely and "completed" the manoeuvre before he had fully cleared me. There was oncoming traffic as well.

Not a near miss, but we had a car driving up the new two-way segregated track on Military Road as well. He kept saying "I know, I know". If you know you're in the wrong, why do it?

Alanstrainor

Deleted User wrote: »

Not a near miss, but we had a car driving up the new two-way segregated track on Military Road as well. He kept saying "I know, I know". If you know you're in the wrong, why do it?

Did he at least have his hazards on? :pac:

Chuchote

Deleted User wrote: »

Not a near miss, but we had a car driving up the new two-way segregated track on Military Road as well. He kept saying "I know, I know". If you know you're in the wrong, why do it?

Because you're bone selfish.

Alanstrainor

Alanstrainor wrote: »

Did he at least have his hazards on? :pac:

No, I'll let him know how to be a chancer properly next time. :pac:

buffalo

Deleted User wrote: »

Not a near miss, but we had a car driving up the new two-way segregated track on Military Road as well. He kept saying "I know, I know". If you know you're in the wrong, why do it?

I've seen that as well, with the driver giving a shrug that seemed to say, "sure what can I do?"

TheBlaaMan

Out at 7:30 for a spin before work, leaving my estate my route took me right at the roundabout at the entrance to my area. As I entered the R/A I could see a car coming from my left. No sweat, I think, sure he see's me. I was fully compliant with road position and used hand signals but this bloke simply didn't see me ........as I reached the first exit (ie his entrance to the R/A) I sensed he was going too fast but I was tight to the R/A, he hits the brakes, locks up, skids 15-20ft onto the R/A and I being to **** myself (not literally). I tried (and failed ) to bunny hop onto a low kerb that forms part of the roundabout and gentle tumbled as I also fail to unclip. He pulls forward and asks if I'm OK. I tell him not so politely to be on his way....

I doubt I would have escaped without a pretty serious injury if I had been taking the second exit to the R/A. He would have t-boned me on the LHS

Just another day on the road. fcuk.

Kaisr Sose

The Judiciary don't seem to care or understand the challenges of cycling and the dangers caused by aggressive drivers.

I was up in small claims court for damage to a mirror of a car that was driven at me (in 2015), rather than it being a close pass. He could have passed but was angry because I took the lane to prevent a close pass.

The judge did not want to know why the car was so close to me and actually was hostile to me for even attempting or suggesting striking the car was to defend myself. She appeared anti-cyclist and rather flippantly asked me in a leading way "when you hit the car, what were you trying to achieve - to push the car away? Why were you in the centre of the lane blocking it to other traffic. She was not interest in the RSA advice to cyclists (actually saying that). Conversely, the driver was never asked to defend his driving. She did not see his driving as being dangerous, yet found no problem in suggesting my cycling was poor.

Needless to say, she found against me dispite me producing a photo showing no damage to the vehicle/mirror and the driver failing to produce evidence of financial loss. The Judge agreeed the photo showed it was not broken, but accepted the drivers claim that the indicator lamp on the back was cracked. To succeed you are supposed to show you incurred a loss.

As regard the court process itself, I am left with questions as to whether a fair hearing took place. I was not sworn into evidence and I don't recall him being sworn in either, though the court clerk later said he was. In all the cases before, the judge allowed no evidence from anyone without them being sworn in. Furthermore, she started off by saying I am not sure if I can hear this case (jurisdiction I think) yet took the drivers word for it that he reveived advice from a solicitor that it could be heard in the Small Claims Court. As far as I am concerned, the whole thing was a beach of legal /court process and I don't even know how the verdict can stand.

The Garda who investigated this incident and came as a witness for me, thought I got a bad deal and asked if I would be appealing. If I do, I have to go to the Circut Court but may incur more cost than its going to save. On a point of principle, I would like to have the verdict thrown out due to the poor process followed in court. Any ideas?

Chuchote

This is exactly the kind of thing that brings the courts and the judiciary into contempt.

AndrewJRenko

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

The Judiciary don't seem to care or understand the challenges of cycling and the dangers caused by aggressive drivers.

I was up in small claims court for damage to a mirror of a car that was driven at me (in 2015), rather than it being a close pass. He could have passed but was angry because I took the lane to prevent a close pass.

The judge did not want to know why the car was so close to me and actually was hostile to me for even attempting or suggesting striking the car was to defend myself. She appeared anti-cyclist and rather flippantly asked me in a leading way "when you hit the car, what were you trying to achieve - to push the car away? Why were you in the centre of the lane blocking it to other traffic. She was not interest in the RSA advice to cyclists (actually saying that). Conversely, the driver was never asked to defend his driving. She did not see his driving as being dangerous, yet found no problem in suggesting my cycling was poor.

Needless to say, she found against me dispite me producing a photo showing no damage to the vehicle/mirror and the driver failing to produce evidence of financial loss. The Judge agreeed the photo showed it was not broken, but accepted the drivers claim that the indicator lamp on the back was cracked. To succeed you are supposed to show you incurred a loss.

As regard the court process itself, I am left with questions as to whether a fair hearing took place. I was not sworn into evidence and I don't recall him being sworn in either, though the court clerk later said he was. In all the cases before, the judge allowed no evidence from anyone without them being sworn in. Furthermore, she started off by saying I am not sure if I can hear this case (jurisdiction I think) yet took the drivers word for it that he reveived advice from a solicitor that it could be heard in the Small Claims Court. As far as I am concerned, the whole thing was a beach of legal /court process and I don't even know how the verdict can stand.

The Garda who investigated this incident and came as a witness for me, thought I got a bad deal and asked if I would be appealing. If I do, I have to go to the Circut Court but may incur more cost than its going to save. On a point of principle, I would like to have the verdict thrown out due to the poor process followed in court. Any ideas?

That's awful, but not hugely surprising. Just to be clear - the driver took an action against you for damage to his mirror? If so, how exactly did he get your details?

I'd imagine that you might have been better off having a solicitor on your side, who would hopefully have gotten a better hearing that you got.

07Lapierre

TheBlaaMan wrote: »

Out at 7:30 for a spin before work, leaving my estate my route took me right at the roundabout at the entrance to my area. As I entered the R/A I could see a car coming from my left. No sweat, I think, sure he see's me. I was fully compliant with road position and used hand signals but this bloke simply didn't see me ........as I reached the first exit (ie his entrance to the R/A) I sensed he was going too fast but I was tight to the R/A, he hits the brakes, locks up, skids 15-20ft onto the R/A and I being to **** myself (not literally). I tried (and failed ) to bunny hop onto a low kerb that forms part of the roundabout and gentle tumbled as I also fail to unclip. He pulls forward and asks if I'm OK. I tell him not so politely to be on his way....

I doubt I would have escaped without a pretty serious injury if I had been taking the second exit to the R/A. He would have t-boned me on the LHS

Just another day on the road. fcuk.

I would suggest he wasn't looking, which is why he "Didn't see you". :mad:

(Glad your OK)

Arcade_Tryer

Chuchote wrote: »

This is exactly the kind of thing that brings the courts and the judiciary into contempt.

There are a lot of completely thick judges out there, all with a huge sense of entitlement. A US journalist once referred to them as students who mark their own exam papers. The problem of course is that they are allowed to get away with it due to lack of reform. And this suits both the good and the bad judges unfortunately.

Edit: Sorry for the rant. I've no advice. I'd say name and shame but they'd probably try and screw you with defamation.

Chiparus

07Lapierre wrote: »

I would suggest he wasn't looking, which is why he "Didn't see you". :mad:

(Glad your OK)

Actually he may have looked but often street furniture or even the A-piller blind spot may have obscured his vision.

Kaisr Sose

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

That's awful, but not hugely surprising. Just to be clear - the driver took an action against you for damage to his mirror? If so, how exactly did he get your details?

I'd imagine that you might have been better off having a solicitor on your side, who would hopefully have gotten a better hearing that you got.

Unfortunately, he got them from me! Lesson learned but I just did not want to be around this guy any longer than I had to. I had to subsequently report him for harassment and a decision is pending with the DPP on that. The Garda were very sympathetic and helpful.

Since last week, I have thought a solicitor would have been better but this court is supposed to be non-adversarial, easy accessible to represent yourself etc. Adding a solicitor on top would have outweighed the financial benefit of winning as you don't get costs.

I am more disappointed with the process. How can an award be made to someone that did not and probably could not prove a loss. Zero paper work. I doubt they got it repaired as it was not broken! How could a hand break a wing miror casing while at the same time keep balance? I have good bike handling but this level of force would have resulted in me falling off. It just crumpled. Like it was damaged already. The Judge did not want to know.