Taxi Driver Online

M1 at 03.00 is still VERY busy especially that section between MK and M25

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Yes, I'm probably imagining something completely different to the reality. I wouldn't be surprised if that section is as busy at midnight (say) than our's here is during the rush hour.

But would be interesting to compare accident stats - suspect that with our relatively traffic-free roads drivers more likely to lose concentration/be distracted/fall asleep etc.

The p!ssed Polish driver had stopped and the minibus had stopped behind him albeit with his hazards on. I struggle to see why Mr Wagstaff is being blamed in all of this, it was proved he was handsfree and in cruise control at 56mph so IMO he's not broken any law. The p!ssed up lorry driver and the minibus caused the accident by stopping in a live lane. if it had been me in the minibus I would've gone onto the hard shoulder out of the way. Surely the minibus driver noticed the traffic going passed him in the two other live lanes, he would have caused an accident pulling out into a live lane if its as busy as you say it is therefore he should've gone onto the hard shoulder and increased his speed then joined the motorway but, then again was he licensed to drive a 12 seater minibus?

Very rare it is the case that a driver who hits another driver from the rear is blameless.

If he doesn't have enough time to stop, then that's his fault.

_________________
IDFIMH

Doubt if there's much blame to be attached to the minibus driver, and don't think going past on the hard shoulder is the way to do it either.

Regarding Wagstaff:

"When Wagstaff approached officers at the scene, he admitted being the driver of the Fed Ex lorry saying: ‘The collision is my fault. I hit the back of all of them.’ He also explained that he had not braked and that the vehicles in front of him appeared to have been stationary. Later in hospital he told a police officer: ‘I know I am going to prison. I have seen it happen enough.’"

Not sure if he will go to prison, but unlikely to get off scot free either.

If the Polak lorry was stationary, why did the minibus driver not envisage that and take avoiding action to driver round it? He must have had the same amount of warning as the other lorry. Indeed he had time to put his hazard lights on as well.

As for whether the minibus driver had a licence to drive more than 7 seats, that hasn't been answered yet. I would also wonder what the minibus driver's hours of work had been.

If found guilty the drivers will both go to jail. No doubt about that.

In respect of why the minibus didn’t over take, I think the driver was waiting for the middle lane to be clear.

_________________
IDFIMH

when we originally discussed this we identified him as the owner of a firm that had been operating minibuses for several years he must have been correctly licensed

the question I would ask is why he didn't take action to overtake the lorry as most experienced drivers are aware that coming to a stop on a motorway can have deadly consequences even on the hard shoulder

I would also want to know why the authorities had not noticed the stationary lorry bearing in mind how well covered this section of the M1 is with cameras and sensors

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Yes - even if you break down on hard shoulder you're supposed to get out of vehicle and stand on grass verge as far away from vehicle as possible.

As for the minibus driver not taking action to overtake the lorry, the Sun's report said:

"Masierak had allegedly stopped in the slow lane for 12 minutes despite there being miles of hard shoulder available.

"His lorry caused an obstruction on the motorway forcing others to slow or stop all together before moving around him, the court was told.

"As minibus driver Cyriac Joseph waited with his hazard lights on for a chance to go around the heavy goods vehicle, Wagstaff, 54, smashed into the back of the van, forcing it into and under Masierak's lorry, jurors heard."


Sounds pretty plausible if there was lots of traffic. Even if you're in the 'truck lane' and they're cruising at their speed limiter it can be difficult to change lane if you come up behind them. A truck completely stationary is going to cause all sorts of problems in that regard. Minibus presumably not travelling particularly fast, so was probably in lane 1 most/all of the time. A stationary truck will probably come as a bit of a surprise, and if traffic's piling by at 70/80 in lane 2 then not difficult to imagine the minibus having to come to a complete halt.



Yes, would be interesting to know if there was any neglect/lack of resources or whatever in that regard.

A fella I know well, in another thing I do, is a forensic accident professor, who as one of his first main cases investigated the Diana crash. When he talks about that he says that people are the worst witnesses, and why the fabled black car (at the time) was in fact white.

Anyway, he is responsible for the reason police cars now park at an angle on motorways following an incident, the reason for that is people on a motorway assume the red lights on a car are on a moving car, even if that car is stationary.

So to answer your question, maybe the chap in the minibus did just that, and I suspect the driver of the artic did that as well.

_________________
IDFIMH

Have to wonder if the artic driver saw the obstruction at all - I mean, he didn't brake or decelerate *at all* before the collision.

And since the minibus driver had the presence of mind to activate his hazard warning lights then that would have given the trucker more warning - it's standard practice to activate hazard warning lights on motorways to warn of an obstruction ahead, and the highway code even allows an exception from the basic rule for using hazards, which shouldn't normally be used on a *moving* vehicle. So probably more warning of the obstruction for the trucker than the minibus driver had.

Presumably the video should become available in due course though, and that should hopefully make the whole thing a bit clearer.

I was behind a weapon yesterday on the M6 travelling at 40MPH at 5am in the morning, now that's an accident waiting to happen.

Certainly not the straightest bit of motorway you're likely to see, but still plenty of time to take action - the photos probably make the curve seem closer than it actually is

Wagstaff had ten seconds to see Mr Joseph's 'baulked' minibus and avoid it, the jury was told.

'The view presenting itself to Mr Wagstaff comprised not only the minibus' flashing hazard lights but also the rear of Mr Maseriak's lorry - extending above the minibus,' said Mr Saxby.

'Notwithstandig which, Mr Wagstaff ploughed straight into the minibus - without braking or decelerating. In other words, he simply did not see the minibus, or at least appreciate that it was stationary. Presumably because he was not concentrating.'

Wagstaff told police: 'It was my fault. They appeared to be stationary and I ploughed into the back of them without touching the brakes at all'.

Had the opposite happen the other week, on dual carriageway in middle of night. No other cars in maybe a one mile stretch except another driver who was maybe half a mile behind and was travelling a bit faster. Ended up right up my arse before swerving onto slip road at last second.

Not sure if he was just being a dick and trying to intimidate me or if just not paying attention.

probably your first answer

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector