Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:39 pm  

I was driving down a very dark A road in rural Oxfordshire a few years ago at night, it was the way I usually drove home from work and unlike many on that road I don't drive like total ***t.
It was very dark, no moon and cloudy and no lights for a couple of miles. I stared into the gloom and then 5 feet infront of me there appeared in the headlights (when I say "appeared" he obviously was already there I just hadn't been able to see him) the most dangerous man in Britain. He was wearing (and I remember in great detail as I practically sh@t myself because I thought I was going to kill him) a long black coat (1930's style), black trousers and a black wooly hat. He was ridning a black bicycle straight from a Hovis advert, with no lights and no reflector. He must have been 70.
How the f*** he had made it to 70 I will never know.

Back when I was a kid they ran adverts with the slogan "be seen, be safe", and driving at night I see many people who are virtually invisible acting as though it's broad daylight and they are covered in fluorescent paint . I do it myslef when I am a pedestrian, I assume because I can see the car then anyone in the car can see me, it's often not true.
I bought my son a winter coat once in Sweden (he was 4 at the time) - it was dark blue and bit like a firemans jacket - he loved it. I remember the first time I shone a light on him outside at night - the coat lit up like the Olympic opening ceremony. It had reflector strips all over it that you couldn't see in daylight but at night under torchlight were almost blinding. I've never seen reflectors like them. He was visible for miles. Anything that helps kids, anything that helps motorists see kids has to be worth it.

As for the incident here, really, the insureance company should be ashamed. Pay the money, stop squirming. It's not like they won't recover it by jacking all their customers premiums up.

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:04 pm  

We have Hi Vis jacckets, 4 in one car, 7 in the other, we don't tend to walk anywhere unlit at night, we have them in case we break down and need to stand by the side of the road/motorway, in honesty we bought them because it is a legal requirement in France/Austria/Switzerland. We also have snow chains, first aid kit, breathalysers, warning triangle, a shovel, a spare set of bulbs and a tool kit for the self same reason.

Now, do I believe it should be a requirement for all vehicles in the UK to do the same, absolutely (to an extent, not chains and a shovel). Would a high vis jacket have helped this poor girl, I don't know, is it the responsibility of everyone to "see and be seen", absolutely.

Is there a case against the driver, I don't know, the "journalist" hasn't really given us much information other than "he pulled over and didn't see her", was he negligent, was it, maybe, just maybe, an accident for which the insured was liable but only in part, as Churchill say?

I would imagine it wasn't a case of the legal team for Churchill saying "she should have been wearing a hi vis jacket", I would imagine it was more like "had the injured party been more visible in an area of poor visibility, by virtue of a hi vis jacket or some other such reflective material, my clients insured party may have had a better chance of seeing her and thus avoid the unfortunate, tragic, events, on this basis we do not accept that the insured party was entirely to blame."

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:16 pm  

DHM wrote:

I was driving down a very dark A road in rural Oxfordshire a few years ago at night, it was the way I usually drove home from work and unlike many on that road I don't drive like total ***t.
It was very dark, no moon and cloudy and no lights for a couple of miles. I stared into the gloom and then 5 feet infront of me there appeared in the headlights (when I say "appeared" he obviously was already there I just hadn't been able to see him) the most dangerous man in Britain. He was wearing (and I remember in great detail as I practically sh@t myself because I thought I was going to kill him) a long black coat (1930's style), black trousers and a black wooly hat. He was ridning a black bicycle straight from a Hovis advert, with no lights and no reflector. He must have been 70.
How the f*** he had made it to 70 I will never know.

But, you were driving in a manner that you could avoid an obstruction within the distance you could see to be clear. Self-evidently, as you didn't mow him down. On the facts I'd say you were probably exceeding the standard required, of the average motorist. If you had hit him, the case against you would have been that you could not stop within the distance you could see to be clear. That would have been an interesting case. It would certainly be a case where a high degree of contributory negligence would be aimed at the cyclist.

The Highway Code states that (59) you should wear
"light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light"
"reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark."
Those are not legal requirements but can be cited in support of alegations of negligence.
It also states (60)
"At night your cycle MUST have white front and red rear lights lit. It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85)." Failure is an offence, as the quotes are from actual Regulations.

Anything that helps kids, anything that helps motorists see kids has to be worth it.

As for the incident here, really, the insurance company should be ashamed. Pay the money, stop squirming. It's not like they won't recover it by jacking all their customers premiums up.

Indeed.

[Kosh]

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:34 pm  

Standee wrote:

We have Hi Vis jacckets, 4 in one car, 7 in the other, we don't tend to walk anywhere unlit at night, we have them in case we break down and need to stand by the side of the road/motorway, in honesty we bought them because it is a legal requirement in France/Austria/Switzerland. We also have snow chains, first aid kit, breathalysers, warning triangle, a shovel, a spare set of bulbs and a tool kit for the self same reason.

Now, do I believe it should be a requirement for all vehicles in the UK to do the same, absolutely (to an extent, not chains and a shovel).

Although not a legal requirement in the UK yet, we have just had everything except the chains and shovel added to the conditions of our group car insurance policy at work. Luckily I'm already equipped (with the hi-vis kit inside the car so I can put it on before exiting the vehicle) for the same reason as you - driving in other EU countries.

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:40 pm  

Shortly after reading this this afternoon I was stood at our front window and up the street came an AA Driving School car - and the instructor was wearing a Hi-Vis vest INSIDE the car.

Its the same with all of the bus drivers around here, they all wear them whilst driving buses.

Of course I understand that sometimes they (the driving instructors) have to get out of the car and stand around on pavements drinking tea while their charges go off to take their tests, but why would they need a Hi-Viz vest for that ?

As for the bus drivers, I've never seen a bus driver that wasn't driving a bus so god knows under what circumstances he'd need a Hi-Viz vest ?

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:51 pm  

Got several in the boot of the car. Latest ferry scam to extract casjh from you - apparently its a requirement in lots of EU countries when you drive there - just like fire extnguishers, traingles (2 in some places), etc. Mrs D spent a fortune last time we took the car over The Channel. They're all still in their wrappers.

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:57 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Of course I understand that sometimes they (the driving instructors) have to get out of the car and stand around on pavements drinking tea while their charges go off to take their tests, but why would they need a Hi-Viz vest for that ?

Driving instructors need to get in & out regularly to move from the passenger seat to the driver's seat and vice versa. I'd imagine some regulation involving working on a public highway comes into effect?

Just guessing, like.

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:42 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

Shortly after reading this this afternoon I was stood at our front window and up the street came an AA Driving School car - and the instructor was wearing a Hi-Vis vest INSIDE the car.

When I did my driving test the examiner wore a hi-viz. Maybe the person was on their test?

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 6:45 pm  

wigan_rlfc wrote:

When I did my driving test the examiner wore a hi-viz. Maybe the person was on their test?

When I took my driving test he wore a trilby and a tweed suit.

Re: Have you all got a hi-vis vest? : Thu Feb 07, 2013 7:14 pm  

JerryChicken wrote:

As for the bus drivers, I've never seen a bus driver that wasn't driving a bus so god knows under what circumstances he'd need a Hi-Viz vest ?

Walking about in dimly lit parking areas, in fact any sort of environment where pedestrians and vehicles come into contact or have to cross paths, say like a bus depot for instance