Moron Motorists #3

User avatar
Derny Driver
Posts: 3039
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 12:18 pm
Location: Wollongong

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Derny Driver » Tue Oct 30, 2018 12:18 pm

RobertL wrote:
Ross wrote:But you know, cyclists are the problem...

https://www.smh.com.au/education/hundre ... 50bfw.html

105,800 fines issued for offences in school zones last financial year (NSW)
Fewer than 50 per cent of drivers comply with the 40 kilometres per hour speed limit in school zones, hundreds have been caught using mobile phones near schools and the number of fines in school zones has steadily increased, reaching a total value of $28 million in 2017-18.

More than half of the 105,800 fines issued for offences in school zones last financial year were for exceeding the speed limit by 10 kilometres an hour or less, with a total of 69,000 fines issued in this category, data from Revenue NSW shows.

Another 33,360 were for exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 kilometres an hour, nearly 20,000 were for disobeying a no stopping or no parking sign near a school and about 8700 were for stopping in a bus zone.

Nearly 650 drivers, including 50 learner or provisional drivers, were caught using a mobile phone in a school zone in 2017-18 and another 153 mobile phone offences have been recorded since July this year.

Five children aged under 17 have been seriously injured in an operating school zone in NSW since June last year and there have been a total of 26 children injured in school zones since 2013.

The school zones where the most fines have been issued include the Princes Highway in Kogarah, near Kogarah Public and Kogarah High schools, James Cook Boys High School, Moorefield Girls High School, St George Girls High School, St George Hospital School and St George School, where 6870 offences were recorded in 2017-18.

There were also 4427 infringements recorded on Woodville Road in Chester Hill, near Old Guildford Public School, and 4294 on Victoria Road in Ryde, near Holy Cross College and St Charles Catholic Primary School.

However, a new auditor-general's report finds that the number of drivers caught breaking road rules, especially those caught speeding on cameras in school zones, is likely to be significantly less than the number of people who regularly drive over the speed limit.

"Speed surveys indicate that fewer than 50 per cent of drivers comply with the 40 km per hour speed limit in school zones," the report states.

"General speed surveys indicate 28 per cent of drivers travel at up to 10km/hr over the limit and over five per cent, or one in 20 drivers, at more than 10km over.

"However less than 0.1 per cent, or one in 1000 drivers, that pass a [mobile speed camera] in NSW is fined."

The report also finds that rules around signage have made it difficult for NSW authorities to deploy mobile speed cameras in school zones.

A spokesman for Transport for NSW said: "The operation of mobile speed cameras in school zones can be problematic due to congestion where children are being dropped off or picked up and pedestrian traffic.

"Ensuring that mobile speed cameras are used to improve safety and not provide a hazard is imperative, so enforcement of school zones using mobile speed cameras is not currently conducted."

The spokesman said that all schools in the state have at least one set of flashing lights, 39 school zones have fixed speed cameras and another 11 have red-light speed cameras.

"These locations were selected based on their crash history," he said.
Put in speed bumps.

The authorities have asked people nicely to slow down, they've put up signs telling them to slow down, they've periodically enforced the slower speeds - and nothing has worked. So put in speed bumps and permanently force people to slow down 24/7.
You're from Brisbane Rob, these speed cameras that have been mentioned as the big money spinners at Kogarah, James cook High, Ryde etc are on 4 or 6 lane major highways. Victoria Road and the Princes Highway are two of the biggest roads in Sydney. The schools are set back behind 8 foot high fences and the students do not enter or exit the schools on those roads. So they are just money grabbers. I'm all for 40k zones outside schools, but the blanket approach is pretty stupid.
Id actually like to see speed humps on those major roads, be pretty funny.

User avatar
Bunged Knee
Posts: 1704
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 12:29 pm
Location: Not drowning in Parramatta river yet

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Bunged Knee » Wed Oct 31, 2018 6:40 am

Low life hit run driver of wheelchair.

MELBOURNE driver is on the run after a horrific hit-and-run with a man in a wheelchair crossing the road.

Melbourne Highway Patrol members are appealing for witnesses following the collision in Docklands.

A man in a wheelchair was struck by a car on Bourke Street, near the intersection of Cumberland Street and Seafarers Lane, about 1.20pm.

What the??
I have no words to say and it's the lowest scum of this driver to have no regards of him.
ID please? What ID? My seat tube ID is 27.2mm or 31.6mm depending on what bikes I ride today.thanks...

Cyclophiliac
Posts: 1014
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 7:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Cyclophiliac » Wed Oct 31, 2018 7:55 am

Bunged Knee wrote:Low life hit run driver of wheelchair.

MELBOURNE driver is on the run after a horrific hit-and-run with a man in a wheelchair crossing the road.

Melbourne Highway Patrol members are appealing for witnesses following the collision in Docklands.

A man in a wheelchair was struck by a car on Bourke Street, near the intersection of Cumberland Street and Seafarers Lane, about 1.20pm.

What the??
I have no words to say and it's the lowest scum of this driver to have no regards of him.
Hit and run is contemptible regardless of the mode of transport of whoever gets hit.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Wed Oct 31, 2018 2:30 pm

Bunged Knee wrote:Low life hit run driver of wheelchair.

MELBOURNE driver is on the run after a horrific hit-and-run with a man in a wheelchair crossing the road.

Melbourne Highway Patrol members are appealing for witnesses following the collision in Docklands.

A man in a wheelchair was struck by a car on Bourke Street, near the intersection of Cumberland Street and Seafarers Lane, about 1.20pm.

What the??
I have no words to say and it's the lowest scum of this driver to have no regards of him.
Either the car was stolen or the owner of the car was driving it and has abandoned the car to report stolen later
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

User avatar
duncan16v
Posts: 407
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:09 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby duncan16v » Wed Oct 31, 2018 3:18 pm

It was an RACV car share so there will be records of the person who hired it.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:28 pm

duncan16v wrote:It was an RACV car share so there will be records of the person who hired it.
Same concept just the car is hired not owned;
1. The car was stolen
2. The hirer of the car drove off and abandoned it and then later will claim it was stolen
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Scott_C
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 10:49 am
Location: Perth, WA

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby Scott_C » Thu Nov 01, 2018 1:33 am

mikesbytes wrote:
duncan16v wrote:It was an RACV car share so there will be records of the person who hired it.
Same concept just the car is hired not owned;
1. The car was stolen
2. The hirer of the car drove off and abandoned it and then later will claim it was stolen
They have CCTV of the driver dumping the car so they aren't going to get away this time unless they have the resources to flee the country.

User avatar
uart
Posts: 3208
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2016 9:15 pm
Location: Newcastle

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby uart » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:44 am

Look, glare from the sun was probably just in the driver's eyes, and the wheelchair guy wasn't even wearing a helmet. So come on guys, let's not put too much blame on the driver here?

Yes I was being sarcastic. But it's interesting isn't it. When it's a vulnerable person on the road, who isn't a cyclist, then it's almost like the hunt for the "unibomber". When it's a cyclist that gets hit however, then the first responders are already making excuses for the driver and looking for contributory blame from the cyclist (eg not wearing a helmet etc).

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:42 pm

uart wrote:
Look, glare from the sun was probably just in the driver's eyes, and the wheelchair guy wasn't even wearing a helmet. So come on guys, let's not put too much blame on the driver here?

Yes I was being sarcastic. But it's interesting isn't it. When it's a vulnerable person on the road, who isn't a cyclist, then it's almost like the hunt for the "unibomber". When it's a cyclist that gets hit however, then the first responders are already making excuses for the driver and looking for contributory blame from the cyclist (eg not wearing a helmet etc).
I didn't see the bicycle because he didn't have a bell
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

cogs19
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 4:35 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby cogs19 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:25 pm

cogs19 wrote:
cogs19 wrote:
cogs19 wrote:This evening I was rear ended by a motorist going through a roundabout.

Typical issue of wanting to get in front of me and failing, so honked at me persistently. I slowed in the roundabout and gestured "what do you want" and there was a flurry of activity in the driver seat indicating for me to move over to the left - which I refused to do. The car then lurched a couple of times towards me in a threatening manner, the second time connecting with my back wheel resulting in buckling and a broken spoken. There was then a verbal altercation - she then drove off.

So it is with the police now. Constable was pretty friendly and showed concern. She is seeking to contact the driver and urge her to exchange details. And then she says the police will no longer be involved. There will only be an investigation if the driver disputes my story. BTW it's all on camera (front and rear) and witness stopped and kindly gave me her number and said she is willing to make statement.

So does anyone find this strange - a driver (according to me) causes an accident and then drives off and the police are not interested in following that up with a view to penalising her?

Anyway - I'll keep you posted.

Been commuting for over ten years, with cameras for the last three, and this is first time needing to go to the police.
Just a follow up:

Police contacted me today and have decided to charge the driver. The officer left a message so didn’t get any of the finer details. I’ll follow up tomorrow. All I know is she has a date in court. I still don’t have the driver’s details - I’ve got a bill for a new wheel with her name on it!
Finally received a confirmation of the finer details on this one. Driver has been charged with Careless Driving and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. The prosecution (ie police) has recommend a Diversion Order. I'll be providing a copy of receipts for repairs and replacement of the back wheel. So I expect I will be fully compensated in due course. Seems like a satisfactory outcome.
So this one went to court on Monday and I received a letter today.

Driver accepted diversion order and conditions - 1. Pay a donation to Amy Gillett Foundation / 2. Pay for my out of pocket expenses for repairs and FOI request / 3. Written apology to me / 4. Good behaviour bond for 3 months.

Interestingly, when I was asked for my input I only requested remuneration for expenses. So the donation and written apology were conditions generating from the court (or police).

Anyway - as far as I'm concerned it was a fair outcome and I'm broadly pleased with the process.

User avatar
pj
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby pj » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:42 pm

cogs19 wrote:
cogs19 wrote:
cogs19 wrote:
Just a follow up:

Police contacted me today and have decided to charge the driver. The officer left a message so didn’t get any of the finer details. I’ll follow up tomorrow. All I know is she has a date in court. I still don’t have the driver’s details - I’ve got a bill for a new wheel with her name on it!
Finally received a confirmation of the finer details on this one. Driver has been charged with Careless Driving and Leaving the Scene of an Accident. The prosecution (ie police) has recommend a Diversion Order. I'll be providing a copy of receipts for repairs and replacement of the back wheel. So I expect I will be fully compensated in due course. Seems like a satisfactory outcome.
So this one went to court on Monday and I received a letter today.

Driver accepted diversion order and conditions - 1. Pay a donation to Amy Gillett Foundation / 2. Pay for my out of pocket expenses for repairs and FOI request / 3. Written apology to me / 4. Good behaviour bond for 3 months.

Interestingly, when I was asked for my input I only requested remuneration for expenses. So the donation and written apology were conditions generating from the court (or police).

Anyway - as far as I'm concerned it was a fair outcome and I'm broadly pleased with the process.
Nice outcome, wonder if this will get reported in the daily mail :roll:

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:57 pm

cogs19 wrote:So this one went to court on Monday and I received a letter today.

Driver accepted diversion order and conditions - 1. Pay a donation to Amy Gillett Foundation / 2. Pay for my out of pocket expenses for repairs and FOI request / 3. Written apology to me / 4. Good behaviour bond for 3 months.

Interestingly, when I was asked for my input I only requested remuneration for expenses. So the donation and written apology were conditions generating from the court (or police).

Anyway - as far as I'm concerned it was a fair outcome and I'm broadly pleased with the process.
Wow. That does seem almost like a correct and just process. I'm amazed. Over what period of time was this?

I'm also surprised at the feedback you got compared to my personal experience. Granted I never chased anything up, but in my case, it took well over a year and I never got much information regarding the judgment or any of the process. I eventually got a letter in the mail saying the person had plead guilty and I was eligible to apply for victims of crime.

(In this case it was assault and there were witnesses, though I was unharmed. I was a cyclist and he was a motorist who had just previously hit and run a pedestrian. The assault occured after I took pictures as evidence.)

Overall the lack of transparency and communication did leave me a little in the dark about whether justice had been served. But the fact that he was convicted is something.

cogs19
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 4:35 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby cogs19 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:09 pm

human909 wrote:Wow. That does seem almost like a correct and just process. I'm amazed. Over what period of time was this?
It was 6 months in total.

It started off a bit shaky with my police contact not seeming too interested in pursuing the criminal side of things and encouraging me to work it out with the driver. But after she consulted her superior (and showed him the vid) it was escalated quickly with charges being pursued.

I've pondered why my (positive) experience seems at odds with many others' (less positive) experiences detailed in this thread. My contention is I went to the "right" police station. I went to Fitzroy. Anyone who knows Melbourne will know that Fitzroy is inner-city hipster fixie central and more than half the constituents are bike riders.

Or, maybe they just saw sense... :roll:

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:21 pm

cogs19 wrote:I've pondered why my (positive) experience seems at odds with many others' (less positive) experiences detailed in this thread. My contention is I went to the "right" police station. I went to Fitzroy. Anyone who knows Melbourne will know that Fitzroy is inner-city hipster fixie central and more than half the constituents are bike riders.
Absolutely.

I went to North Melbourne. Still bicycle heaven and plenty of hipsters but its a big station that covers plenty of ground. In my case at no stage did I not think it was taken seriously. Also the offender wasn't in his vehicle, it was clear assault with witnesses. I was on my bike but I was ripped off it. (I should of skedaddled but pride my me hesitate.)

The part I was disappointed in was the lack of communication. I'm not sure what I expected but I expected SOMETHING beyond a letter over a year later.

User avatar
pj
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby pj » Thu Nov 01, 2018 11:04 pm

Not that close but general crap driving while playing with phone (not visible in video unfortunately).


User avatar
pj
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby pj » Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:20 am

hannos wrote:Altus Traffic Australia
Bourke Road Mascot
BE54HA
2010 White Hilux 2x4 table top with fittings as far as https://my.service.nsw.gov.au/MyService ... ck/display is concerned.

Same stretch of road from the opposite direction, only a matter of time before someone gets taken out :shock:


human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:15 am

pj wrote:Same stretch of road from the opposite direction, only a matter of time before someone gets taken out :shock:
Horrible infrastructure.... When oh when will Sydney realise that bi-direction paths are a death trap when you put them parallel to roads. Particularly the case if they are unprotected like this one in many places.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Nov 02, 2018 1:47 pm

human909 wrote:
pj wrote:Same stretch of road from the opposite direction, only a matter of time before someone gets taken out :shock:
Horrible infrastructure.... When oh when will Sydney realise that bi-direction paths are a death trap when you put them parallel to roads. Particularly the case if they are unprotected like this one in many places.
That particular path is there due to politics, the road is under City of Sydney (COS) control and that's why the bike path is there. The better route would be along Alexandria canal but that's under NSW State Govt control and we know how little we get out of them for bike infrastructure.

In hindsight possibly a better solution would of been to connect the dividing structures with a rounded bump that could be driven over for entering/exiting business's while discouraging the cutting over we see in those video's

BTW I've noticed that the portion of the bike path that was removed by WestConnex is now being used as a parking spot, as seen in the video
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:19 pm

mikesbytes wrote:That particular path is there due to politics, the road is under City of Sydney (COS) control and that's why the bike path is there....
It's less about the location it is the whole bidirectional thing that I believe are largely steps in the wrong direction. As somebody not from Sydney it boggle my mind that these are persisted with. I know COS has the best intentions but I'm not sure the dangers of bidirectional bike paths is worth it.

(Here in Vic our councils face similar difficulties. Roads which are state controlled just don't get cycling infrastructure while council ones are getting the full works in many of the progressive councils. The big difference is Sydney's preference for bidirectional infrastructure which is shown to be more dangerous.)

anthbear
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 10:44 pm

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby anthbear » Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:46 pm

warthog1 wrote:
briztoon wrote:I'm so over idiot motorists, that I don't even bother commenting on them any more.

Two weeks ago I was approaching a two lane round about. I rode the shoulder "lane" until 50 metres before the round about, checked back behind me, and there was no traffic in sight (a good 100 metres to a set of lights), so I crossed over to the right lane as I was going around the round about taking the second exit from where I was entering.

20 metres before the round about this guy speeds up behind me, beeping his horn and yelling "get off the road", and then pulls in to the left lane next to me, continues beeping his horn and yelling at me to get off the road and threatening me with a beating. I didn't say a thing, just looked at him briefly, then concentrated on the round about to make sure there was no traffic coming around from the other directions.

He ended up going straight through the round about, while I went around to the right.

No other traffic, except for a white 4WD that came up behind him as he took off.

Some people are just w@nkers and not worth worrying about.

Well handled, didn't give him any oxygen, just the attention he deserved.....none.
It's a little scary out there at times, too many people don't give a rat's about bike riders and too many texting whilst driving.

User avatar
find_bruce
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 10579
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby find_bruce » Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:05 pm

human909 wrote:Horrible infrastructure.... When oh when will Sydney realise that bi-direction paths are a death trap when you put them parallel to roads. Particularly the case if they are unprotected like this one in many places.
Bidirectional paths can work well & were responsible for a significant uptake in cycling, particularly from females, WHEN they are properly protected. This is especially true when there is a row of parked cars - it is less likely for a cyclist to get doored because they are riding towards the person opening the door and if they do, it is less likely to injure. The best ones are in the inner city where there are few if any driveways crossing the path

BUT - that particular path, along Bourke Rd, is an abomination that should not have been built. Part of the problem is the gaps in protection, but more fundamentally is the large number of driveways crossing the path, including heavy vehicles & every crossing is an uncontrolled intersection in which looking for cyclists before crossing, let alone giving way, is the exception rather than the rule.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Nov 02, 2018 9:08 pm

human909 wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:That particular path is there due to politics, the road is under City of Sydney (COS) control and that's why the bike path is there....
It's less about the location it is the whole bidirectional thing that I believe are largely steps in the wrong direction. As somebody not from Sydney it boggle my mind that these are persisted with. I know COS has the best intentions but I'm not sure the dangers of bidirectional bike paths is worth it.

(Here in Vic our councils face similar difficulties. Roads which are state controlled just don't get cycling infrastructure while council ones are getting the full works in many of the progressive councils. The big difference is Sydney's preference for bidirectional infrastructure which is shown to be more dangerous.)
what I'm saying is that due to politics that was the only option. to add that is the only design that could be put in. unfortunately thats the best we can currently get and is an example of why there are less cyclists here

as ive prevously said its because the state govt wont provide, cos is restricted to cos controlled roads
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

human909
Posts: 9810
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:48 am

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby human909 » Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:02 am

find_bruce wrote:Bidirectional paths can work well & were responsible for a significant uptake in cycling, particularly from females, WHEN they are properly protected.
Agreed and recognised. But the effect you describe could be readily gained from non bidirectional paths without the safety concerns.
find_bruce wrote:This is especially true when there is a row of parked cars - it is less likely for a cyclist to get doored because they are riding towards the person opening the door and if they do, it is less likely to injure. The best ones are in the inner city where there are few if any driveways crossing the path.
Again agreed. But still inferior and against best practice to single directional paths on the correct side of the road.

If you are going to go to the very significant expense of putting in sepparated infrastructure why continue with what is recognised to be a dangerous exercise.

User avatar
pj
Posts: 291
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 10:36 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby pj » Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:34 am

find_bruce wrote: BUT - that particular path, along Bourke Rd, is an abomination that should not have been built. Part of the problem is the gaps in protection, but more fundamentally is the large number of driveways crossing the path, including heavy vehicles & every crossing is an uncontrolled intersection in which looking for cyclists before crossing, let alone giving way, is the exception rather than the rule.
Totally agree, it's often safer to take your chances on the road.

Cops were out patrolling it on Thursday, assume they were checking for bells........ :D

Image

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Moron Motorists #3

Postby mikesbytes » Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:56 am

pj wrote:
find_bruce wrote: BUT - that particular path, along Bourke Rd, is an abomination that should not have been built. Part of the problem is the gaps in protection, but more fundamentally is the large number of driveways crossing the path, including heavy vehicles & every crossing is an uncontrolled intersection in which looking for cyclists before crossing, let alone giving way, is the exception rather than the rule.
Totally agree, it's often safer to take your chances on the road.

Cops were out patrolling it on Thursday, assume they were checking for bells........ :D

Image
Is that the spot where the truck unloads on the bike path?
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users