Category - Bad Drivers

This article from The Foreigner – an English language Norwegian news site – says that statistics suggest drivers from outside Norway are involved in more accidents than “domestic-born” ones.

This is the first Statement of the Blindingly Obvious I’ve seen this year. The second isn’t far behind…

A local Norwegian driving instructor of Pakistani origin says he isn’t surprised, and explains that people who come to Norway bring a completely different driving culture with them.

Apparently, the statistics show that male and female drivers from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia are more likely to have accidents in Norway.

The first thing I’d point out is that the problem isn’t confined to Norway. It happens in every country where non-native drivers mix it with the locals. The second thing is that it isn’t just Asians and Africans – British drivers unfamiliar with driving on the right are a big risk wherever they go.

In Nottingham, several years ago there was a large Irish contingent, and their standard of driving was noticeably, um… different. At the moment Nottingham has a lot of Polish and other eastern European drivers, and they can be very aggressive (especially the younger ones). Older Asian drivers – particularly around Hyson Green – are also very suspect.

I’ve been to Pakistan and I know what they drive like. My Indian pupils tell me it is the same in India. The older drivers bring that style over here, and will happily park on double yellow lines outside the Asian food stores to go inside and shop.

Hyson Green has the additional problem that many Asian taxi drivers use it as a meeting (and eating) point. As a result, they will think nothing of carrying out standard taxi manoeuvres in gridlocked traffic (i.e. U-turns, turns in the road, etc.) 5 metres away from traffic lights).

In this respect, they’re only slightly worse than native British women in 4x4s picking up their kids from school.

Going back to the article, what is amusing is that they have a photo of a clearly-British car with L-plates gaffer-taped on to it.

It just goes to show that no one is perfect – or above the law (well, maybe just a little to the side of it). This story details how a police officer in Scotland was driving to an incident involving a diesel spill – which doesn’t appear to have been an emergency from the way the wording goes (an earlier story says it was) – at speeds of up to 149mph!

The officer, Jacob Marshall, didn’t slow down as he passed a motorway slip road, and another driver pulled out to allow other traffic to merge. Marshall clipped the other driver (the earlier story says he “collided with” the other driver).

The BBC article doesn’t say what happened to the other driver (nor does the earlier story).

The judge expressed surprise that Marshall didn’t slow down “even a bit” as he approached the junction.

It’s worth pointing out that if Marshall was doing 149mph at the point where he hit the other car (the report suggests it was at least 120mph), and assuming the other car was driving at the speed limit of 70mph (he was probably going slower), then the police car would have closed in on the other car at 79mph! It’s not exactly something you’d expect, or be able to plan for if you were a normal member of the driving public.

Marshall was found guilty of the lesser charge of careless driving (down from dangerous driving, with which he was initially charged). Sentencing has been put off to allow the defence to put forward “mitigating arguments”.

It puts me in mind of the argument the advanced motoring group members like to put forward – about how they’re better drivers than anyone else (Police drivers are advanced drivers, of course).

They’re not. They’re human, like everyone else.

And even if they weren’t, all those thousands of other drivers are.

National Express West Midlands took on 420 drivers last year, out of 4,500 applicants. It has a further 170 vacancies – and yet it can’t fill them, even though there are so many people looking for work. Why?

It has the admirable recruitment criterion that applicants must not have ANY points on their licences.

According to the story, the industry “standard” (I think they used that word to try and suggest it is National Express who is in the wrong) is 3 points for those seeking to become drivers.

National Express throws out the application without further ado if the applicant has ANY points. It also requires candidates to take literacy and numeracy tests.

National Express West Midlands spokesman Jack Kelly said: “We are committed to developing opportunities for people in the West Midlands through Jobcentre Plus.

“As well as having a rigorous test people have to have a clean driving licence.”

Good for them. Let’s hope they aren’t forced to back down – the article also cites the case of London bus company, Abellio, who went to Poland to find drivers because they couldn’t get suitable applicants “among Britain’s 2.5 million unemployed” (again, implying that Abellio is at fault).

This is what happens when you dumb down education and don’t punish people who break the law. Eventually, being stupid becomes commonplace. I guess we’re seeing that now.

But I must confess I am seeing National Express in a much more positive light knowing that they have such high recruitment standards.

Kylie Innes, 23, passed her driving test on Christmas Eve (link long since dead). On Boxing Day (just), she was stopped by police who had seen her swerving across the A90, near Newtonhill in Scotland. She was 1½ times the drink drive limit.

The usual kind of mitigating circumstances were given – argument with mother, went for drive to clear head (at 1.35am on Boxing Day, of course), got breathalysed… the old story.

She was fined £400 and banned for a year.

It must be close to a world record. At 1.35am on Boxing Day, it must have been less than 18 hours after passing that she was stopped.

You sometimes have difficulty believing what you read – believing that people can be so completely stupid, and unable to learn from previous incidents.

This story came in on the newsfeeds (dead link). A 17-year old male from Brackley was driving a typical pratmobile – an MG Rover ZR – near Banbury, when it left the road. He had four passengers on board (this is a commercial script being played out here, remember, so you’ll have to forgive the similarity to other recent articles), all between 14 and 17.

The driver was treated for minor injuries, arrested, then bailed on suspicion of dangerous driving.

One 14-year old female passenger is in critical condition in hospital. Two boys, aged 16 and 17, are in serious but stable condition. A 15-year old girl has been released from hospital.

The previous story relates to an incident which occurred in 2010, but which has only now been heard in court. This latest one could easily end up being yet another teenage-death story when it is eventually heard.

Police are appealing for witnesses.

Lauren Birkett, 16, was one of three teenagers killed in Mexborough (link now dead), South Yorkshire, as a result of “aggressive driving”. The others were Robert Tepper and Jonathan Scott, both 17.

The survivors in other cars involved provided evidence that was “self serving and supporting of the individuals closest to them”, and “lacking in credibility”, according to the coroner.

In English, that means they were shown to be liars.

Jonathan Scott was the driver of the souped-up Corsa which crashed. The coroner ruled that it was being driven “in a manner that exposed them to risk of serious injury or death and a collision occurred from which they died”

Due to the stupidity inherent in English Law, there was apparently not enough evidence to show that the deaths were due to “dangerous driving”.

Let me just say that again: the car was being driven in a manner exposing the occupants to serious injury or death, but it wasn’t being driven dangerously. English Law, eh? So Scott is deemed to have died “accidentally”.

The story paints a vivid picture of juvenile motoring stupidity. There was an Astra overtaking a Punto, and Scott in his Corsa followed it and lost control. All three cars were being driven in a “competitive and aggressive” way. The Astra and Punto were being driven by two of the surviving individuals (along with their passengers) who the coroner concluded were liars.

Pedestrian witnesses said:

…the cars were driving so close together it looked as if they were ‘tied by a piece of string’.

The coroner rejected evidence (i.e. the lies) that they were all driving within the 30mph speed limit.

A police spokesman said:

Jonathan Scott’s Corsa had a two-litre engine instead of the standard 1.2 litre engine.

It also had bigger brakes fitted which made it more prone to skidding under sudden braking.

It’s difficult to feel any real sympathy, seeing as it is quite possible that if one of the other cars had crashed instead the occupants of the Corsa would perhaps have taken the same line that the occupants of the Astra and Punto have in trying to cover for each other. It was simply another example of young people behaving in precisely the manner that many of them do. No doubt, all of them felt very “cool” while they were acting like idiots.

It is why their insurance is sky-high. And “warnings” about the test getting harder are a joke when you consider that this was deliberate behaviour, and not an accidental event. Insurers should start dealing with these things instead of those which they clearly don’t understand.