[Closed] Car repeatedly rammed by lorry on M1

Ack he was probably in his blind spot.

Lorry driver acts dangerously, gets fired.

What is there to froth about?

I guess it's a good advert for the dashcam company he owns.

Mr Stockdale, who runs a dashcam company

Aren't we doing this one already on the 'middle lane hoggers/surfmax awesomeness' thread?

more details here including [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-34933345 ]Mr Stockdale who runs a dashcam company[/url]

Hmmmm....

EDIT - well done Dicky, beat me to it

is the unedited video anywhere ?

suspicious cat is suspicious.

Hope the truck driver had the suitable qualifications to help mitigate responsibility. 😉

he was only "making progress" surely. 🙄

A bit more has gone on there than shown in that clip. The car is travelling slower than the truck in the first lane when you see the rear camera as it closes the gap. The fact the truck in the second lane has gone into the third lane to overtake the car must have been very frustrated by then. it would have been interesting to see the speed on the camera which for some reason isn't shown.
Doesn't excuse the truck driver for threatening the car driver with his trailer.

Taken to hospital by ambulance for shoulder and neck pain

Owns a dashcam company

stays in middle lane for some time (at sub 56 mph, evidently)

honestly feared for my life

lorry rammed him again 14minutes later

lorry driver looses his sh1t with middle lane muppet and endup getting sacked. would have been much simpler to just pass him on the left.

(then violently swerve out and kill him with the trailer)

I suppose it is quite possible that the car driver has contrived to set up a situation like that to get some good footage for his dashcam company.

BUT... regardless of how irritating his driving might have been, ramming him with a trailer is bang out of order. Someone could have been killed.

I can't understand why he needed to be taken to hospital by ambulance due to his 'neck and back pain' when he was capable of driving for god knows how many miles to follow the truck.
No doubt there's gonna be a nice little whiplash claim going in sometime soon.

I think we need to see the complete footage...and no doubt, having slagged off Northants Police, they may be interested to see if there is any other evidence of offences on the unseen bit...

There is absolutely NO excuse for that threatening driving behaviour, I don't care how 'frustrated' the driver of lorry was. No One deserves to be ****ted by an immovable object, even 56mph middle lane hoggers.
The lorry driver needs the full extent of the law thrown at him. Personally, I would ban him for life. It's a fine line between aggressive driving and attempted murder when sitting behind wheel of 10 tons.

I had a lorry driver try to pull a similar move on me whilst I was driving on inside lane once, my 18 month old son with me in his child seat. I had to pull into hard shoulder several times as he repeatedly tried to side swipe me. The highways agency were unable to locate footage, so in this case another unbalanced professional driver got away scot free.

Does seem a little dodgy and I'd agree that the fact he is rolling along in the middle lane going no faster than the lorry in the inside lane makes me think he's been winding the driver of the lorry up.

Wonder which dashcam company he owns.

GrahamS - Member

BUT... regardless of how irritating his driving might have been, ramming him with a trailer is bang out of order. Someone could have been killed.

Absolutely, no argument there. However it seems that dashcam business owners seem to have the same ability to get themselves into 'situations' that make for good footage in the same way that helmet-cam warriors do...

ryton57 - Member

Lorry driver acts dangerously, gets fired.

What is there to froth about?

Just assault with a deadly weapon. No big deal.

I had to pull into hard shoulder [b]several times[/b] as he [b]repeatedly[/b] tried to side swipe me.

jimjam - Member
ryton57 - Member
Lorry driver acts dangerously, gets fired.

What is there to froth about?

Just assault with a deadly weapon. No big deal.

You don't get it.

This is a bunch of people discussing and emotionally afflicting themselves something that has already happened that they can't influence.

Hence, the discussion and inter-arguments are fruitless, and their energies would be better spent elsewhere.

This is a bunch of people discussing and emotionally afflicting themselves something that has already happened that they can't influence.
Hence, the discussion and inter-arguments are fruitless, and their energies would be better spent elsewhere.

Good point - I don't know why anyone bothers to read any news at all. It's all in the past. Nothing we can influence.

🙄

Big discussion about this on local radio this morning- apparently the car driver called police 6 times after the incident saying he was going to follow the truck until police sent a car (which they were unable to do as motorway trained officers were already involved in a pursuit). He was asked to stop following the truck/leave the motorway at the next services but refused to do so. Call centre should have contacted the next force down the road investigate, but failed to do so- seems to have been their own error.

Obviously truck driver a dick, but seems likely that there was provocation by Mr Stockdale.
Parallels between some of the more aggressive head cam carrying cyclists and van/car drivers?

So the police take notice of dashcam cameras but when it comes to cyclist cameras it's like pulling teeth to get them to do anything 🙄

Lorry driver acts dangerously,gets no pudding.
And if anyone knows about emotionally afflicting themselves to pointless arguments it's Kryton,so only he can get it.

Good point - I don't know why anyone bothers to read any news at all. It's all in the past. Nothing we can influence.

That's a glib statement and is not always true as you know Graham. I'll live with the implied insult Rorschach, but if people started using their brains you'd see that I'm right.

What's he doing in lane 2? ... you can see from the front view that lane 1 is completely clear. Lorry driver is still wrong to do what he did.

Serious question; why didn't you just stop (or slow right down) and put distance between you and the lorry after the first time? Can't imagine a circumstance where a lorry would get two chances to do that to me. But I appreciate that I wasn't there, and I'm interested. It's like this footage; how ON EARTH is it that the lorry overtakes the bloke TWICE? Unless he's a) goading him in his own little 'Mad Max/Duel' type fantasy, or b) working with the bloke to get some totally ace dashcam footage to promote his company.

Even simpler, why didn't the car driver just speed the **** up?

A slight increase in speed 57mph should have put him infront of the lorry (limited to 56mph) and out of harms way. Plus he wouldn't be holding other traffic up in the process?

Absolutely no excuse why a modern car (classic campers, land rovers etc forgiven) should be getting overtaken by a truck on the motorway.

That's a glib statement

It was.

But so was suggesting that we shouldn't waste any energy discussing something because it has already happened and we can't influence it.

Dashcam manufacurer, former special constable, conflict-seeking knob winds up dangerous arsehole in lorry

You know, if somebody [i][u]had[/u][/i] to die on the roads that day, I'd have voted for those two. I'd prefer lifetime bans for both though.

Even simpler, why didn't the car driver just speed the **** up?

57mph should have put him infront of the lorry (limited to 56mph) and out of harms way. Plus he wouldn't be holding traffic up in the process?

Which as all keen amateur detectives know takes us back to what his motives were...

But so was suggesting that we shouldn't waste any energy discussing something because it has already happened and we can't influence it.

I'm stating its not productive. Which it isn't. But carry on...

scaredypants

Dashcam manufacurer, former special constable, conflict-seeking knob winds up dangerous arsehole in lorry

You know, if somebody had to die on the roads that day, I'd have voted for those two. I'd prefer lifetime bans for both though.

Nothing irritates me more than middle/outside lane hoggers (that's not true lot's of things do) but just because the car driver was being a dick doesn't give the lorry driver the excuse to attack him.

I mean, just for the sake of hyperbole if Warrick Davis had a few too many pints and was winding you up in the pub would that give you licence to kick his **** in?

No insults Kryt's you are one of the better mob on here.But you don't half get yourself wound up sometimes.And run the danger of appearing to be a somewhat sanctimonious arse.Which you're patently not.Overly sensitive and needy...maybe 😉

😆

That's hilarious - in a WTF is going on, type way.

If you can't out manoeuvre an HGV, then you probably shouldn't be on the road.
He could have slowed down, speeded up, swerved etc....
The bit at the start of the video where the HGV is repeatedly weaving into the side of the car - he doesn't even seem to react by swerving out of the way - no sound though so not sure if anything relevant is said.

If he was supposedly 'following the HGV' until the feds arrived, couldn't he have just slowed to a safe distance and maintained a gap - 100m should be enough to ensure not getting whacked again.

I'm stating its not productive.

Logging on to here is the very definition of "not productive" 🙂

FWIW, I agree with slimjim78. Whatever the provocation, he should be prosecuted.

Overly sensitive and needy

I'd agree with that. 😐

I won't apologise for my stance, its all down the mindfulness studies and reading that "Essentialism..." book, so I'm reading some of this (and therefore contradicting myself) noting what a waste of time it is.

But you don't half get yourself wound up

I'm not wound up at all. 😛

I won't apologise for my stance, its all down the mindfulness studies and reading that "Essentialism..." book, so I'm reading some of this (and therefore contradicting myself) noting what a waste of time it is.

This entire forum is a waste of time. I don't need a book to tell me that.

Passes the hours though. 😀

What's the book Kryton?

just because the car driver was being a dick doesn't give the lorry driver the excuse to attack him.

What is unseen in the video is the actions of the driver which has clearly riled the lorry driver. Did he slam on the brakes previously in-front of the lorry, had he been deliberately winding the lorry driver up by holding him up on purpose? The guy appears to be a complete sanctimonious bell*nd of the highest order so I can't blame the trucker for getting frustrated.

No the trucker shouldn't have done what he did, but the guy in the car looks equally at fault from what I can see. Everyone has a point when they will 'snap' - deliberately winding up an angry trucker, at the end of the day what did this plonker expect? It's like goading a brown bear with a pointy stick, can't complain if you get bitten eh?

jimjam - Member
What's the book Kryton?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Essentialism-The-Disciplined-Pursuit-Less/dp/0753555166

If you look at the clip at the start you can see what looks like the car drivers hazards lights reflected in the front of the lorry cab, again once past you can see them on the rear of the trailer.
As others have said there is deffo more going on than the edited dashscam footage is showing.
Im not justifying the lorry drivers actions, but these sort of situations dont just arise out of the blue. Cause and effect etc...

jimjam - Member
Nothing irritates me more than middle/outside lane hoggers (that's not true lot's of things do) but just because the car driver was being a dick doesn't give the lorry driver the excuse to attack him.

I mean, just for the sake of hyperbole if Warrick Davis had a few too many pints and was winding you up in the pub would that give you licence to kick his **** in?

I can't blame the trucker for getting frustrated

Frustration simply has to be handled. (I just un-capitilised HAS, as I needed to control my frustration).

Your anology, and several other sympathisers here seems to be wanting to excuse the truck driver - because he was having a bad day, or something..

He is a professional driver, at the wheel of a massive, heavy, easily lethal vehicle. his actions were literally fractions away from squashing the other (bell-end) driver like a bug, possibly leaving a further trail of destruction behind him as other innocent parties pile into the carnage infront of them.

But at least the truck driver would have got his point across I suppose?

Stop and look at the desctruction these type of drivers cause to families every single day, empathise with their position, and come back and say that it's ok to swipe a car with an HGV if they've been really naughty and wound you up.

Similar analogy for frustrated tree surgeon with chain saw in hand:

'whats the fuss? he only lost a bit of his arm. Besides, he was really really rude to the tree surgeon'

etc

scaredypants

Would you treat him differently because he's different? I don't know him but I imagine that might make him cross

Yeah, I'd treat him differently because he's much smaller, and hence more vulnerable.

[img] [/img]

I wouldn't be worried about making him cross or hurting his feelings, I'd be worried that a judge would rightly see that my use of force was unreasonable if I struck and injured someone who wasn't a physical threat to me just because they were annoying.

Now, if he came at me with a knife, and he was naked....well then that's a different story. I'd bottle him. Then maybe teabag him while periscoping it.