To have been terrified by H's driving?

[pinkypanther]

(D)H and I were driving back from a weekend away late last night. DS (4 months old) was sleeping in his car seat in the back.

We were on the motorway and (D)H was driving a bit too fast for my liking ? he was going above 80 at all times, and sometimes nearer to 90, in the outside lane. I had twice asked him to slow down, as (leaving aside any legal/speeding issues) I don?t like to go so fast with DS in the car. He didn?t.

Anyway, the motorway was pretty empty, but there were a lot of people sitting in the middle lane when there was nothing in the inside lane for miles. (D)H took a dislike to this (TBH it bugs me too) and started driving up behind the people in the middle lane, flashing them, and when they didn?t move over, overtaking them in the outside lane.

He had done this a couple of times (even after I had asked him not to) when he did it to a guy in a silver BMW. (D)H then moved to overtake him and before moving back in again. Unfortunately, the guy accelerated as (D)H was moving back into the middle lane (meaning it was a very close shave when (D)H moved left) and then tailgated us for a mile or two, accelerating to 90 or so, weaving in and out of the lanes, and cutting us up. (D)H continued to drive at 85 or so and (despite me asking) refused to back off or pull over.

I was absolutely terrified by then and when this guy started tailgating us again, I put the hazard lights on (they are in the middle of the car, so easy for the front passenger to reach). The guy then backed off, undertook us, and drove away.

(D)H then went completely ballistic at me, saying I had put us in danger by putting the hazard lights on, that I had ?distracted him from the road? and ?made the situation more dangerous?. The mother of all rows then followed and I asked him why he had refused to back off and he said that ?he was driving perfectly sensibly? and ?was in the right?. I said I didn?t know any father who drove like that with their child in the car and I didn?t care who was technically in the right if we all ended up dead following a high speed smash with some nutter.

So, was I being unreasonable to use the hazard lights (given that I wasn?t driving) or was (D)H being unreasonable to be driving like that? I have said that I won?t let him drive me and DS on the motorway until he has shown me he can drive safely, is this a massive over-reaction?

By the way, top tips for curing men of wanky driving:

1. Get them a car that has a fuel consumption gauge, preferable one that resets automatically for each trip (most VW, Audi, Skoda, etc cars have this) and target them on getting the fuel consumption better. Point out that fuel conservation is the top issue in F1 these days, and by driving in a way that minimises the use of fuel they are doing what Jense does.

1. On a similar theme, get them to buy a Golf, Octavia or Leon with a DSG gearbox. Point out it's the same technology that David and Mika drove at McLaren in the late 90s. As a huge amount of wanky driving revolves around gear levers (which are not a little phallic, and of course heel and toeing is a metaphor for sexual prowess) it's a way of getting them to drive an auto, much more sedate, without letting on that it's an auto. And they'll have a fuel consumption gauge, qv. When told by their mates that autos are heavy on the gas, mate, they can talk about their new skills in making that not so.

CCPCCP she hit the hazards which are on the centre console of her car so she interfered with his driving as much as she would of done if she had put the air con on.
He was the one failing to work as a team she was the one who warned the BMW driver in a non-aggressive way to keep his distance

Dont think your right on that Debs75.

Switching AC on/playing with radio etc is not the same as indicating to another driver using the hazard lights.

I dont think the police would have seen it your way either, as in the event of an accident due to harzard lights going on, OP would have been liable and open to prosecution.

ccpccp - in your opinion, why did the BMW cease his tailgating when the hazards went on?

No, hazards are to warn of a danger to other road users.

OP's Dh was clearly driving his car in such a way as to be a danger to other road users. Therefore, she wasn't being at all unreasonable.

If Dh or I have to brake suddenly on the m-way, the other one will often hit the hazards if the situation is dangerous. Not a problem. Working as a team.

YANBU. This could easily be my DH. He says he hates driving so drives fast to get it over with. I have begun to realise that he thinks he can communicate with other road users with his car - tailgating, revving his engine, driving off extra fast to make a point. What he doesn't seem to realise is that other road users aren't "listening" to him, they are probably as dopey as I am when I drive. He won't be driven by me as I don't come up to his standards, but I would guess that I drive much more safely than him. It is the only think we really argue about. My DH does seem to get the point and is generally apologetic when I get upset, but it doesn't last long enough. Being in the right doesn't stop you dying in a road rage incident or crash and is little consolation to those left behind. What I really don't get is how I can "hear him" in my mind when I am about to do something a little bit stupid (e.g. leaving a glass too close to the edge of a table) and don't do it, yet when he drives like a twat he doesn't feel the same.

Thanks for all the opinions. I am actually getting into a cold sweat just thinking about it again...

I'm still not sure about the hazard lights. I probably wouldn't do it again (because of H's reaction and also because the driver is in control) but I really don't understand why it would have made the situation worse - why would it have been more likely to cause an accident? If the person in front of me put hazard lights on then I would definitely slow down therefore making an accident less likely I would have thought.

I am driving everywhere for a while I think. Bit of a shame really as I don't like driving and H doesn't like being a passenger, but as I pointed out to him, we have DS now and can't behave like a pair of teenagers...

I'm not saying putting hazard lights on didnt work in this case IsItMeOr. Just trying to see it from DH perspective, and explain why he was so angry.

The fact is - OPs DH did the correct thing which was to ignore the BMW and continue driving. It was the OP who paniced and used the hazard lights. We should all be thankful she didnt try the handbreak first, as its also within reaching distance of the passenger.

Interesting way of looking at the hazard light thing, Suburbia No doubt exactly what went through OPs mind as she flailed for the centre console.

I'm not sure I "flailed for the centre console" - and I wouldn't have touched the handbrake

H could have slowed down at any time and let the guy go, instead he chose to drive at the same speed/faster, which seemed to encourage the guy to continue what he was doing.

I guess I may be particularly sensitive at the moment with having DS (and being about to lose my no claims discount for an accident which H had in my old car in 2008...)

You could spraypaint the car with Boy Racer instead, to warn the rest of us.
Punch a hole in the exhaust, so we can hear you coming and take appropriate action.
ccpccp, he drove aggressively, terrified his passenger, has done this on previous occasions and you are still more bothered that OP put on the hazard lights?
He's the sort of nutter I despise, no reason for his actions and if he crashes and burns he might take others with him. Like me and mine.

I think by the time you pressed the hazards you were getting desperate tbh as your H had been driving erratically, aggressively and fast for quite a while from the sounds of it and not listening to you and now you had a very stressful situation with another driver because of it and were full of adrenaline (as was your H I suspect by then). You were being tailgated by the BMW and he wouldn't back off or pull over you said in your OP. I suspect you pressed it out of desperation. I can see why it upset him, he's driving, he's in control etc. But if he hadn't antagonised the other driver by being so aggressive, it wouldn't have happened in the first place.

What was the rush anyway? Why was he trying to prove a point with the middle lane hoggers? Why didn't he just drive home and just over take them in the outside lane and pull in and then pull out again etc etc until home?

I like a relaxing drive home, that sort of stress is unnecessary and it is dangerous to rush up behind people constantly like that. That's dangerous and aggressive and seems more about him trying to prove a point or make himself feel better, just bullying behaviour. There will always be middle lane hoggers, so he may as well give up now on trying to prove a point every drive and just go in the outside lane around them. Rather than get wound up everytime he drives and end up in situations like last night. What a fool.

On Saturday a man raced up behind me on a dual carriageway so it was 2 lanes, I was in the outside lane at 80 overtaking the slower drivers and planned to move back in once I'd passed them, he rushed up behind me from nowhere, we'd incidentally just come off a roundabout so everyone was accelrating anway, he tailgated me and when I was able to pull in a short while later I did. He rushed off up ahead and undertook someone, then pulled out again and then lo and behold one of his tyres caught the soil by the crash barrier on the right and he lost control for a moment and ended up crashing his car into the crash barrier for a moment, he then pulled over into the slow lane and then onto a slip road, he looked very shaky and he'd trashed the side of his car. It's ok to drive at 85 or 90 (I suppose) in the outside lane if it is clear but aggressive driving, like rushing up behind people isn't the same. As others have said.

Perhaps when the police catch him in due course or a speed camera and he ends up having to do a driving course like my H had to, he'll realise. My soon to be ex H said that there is a big difference on stopping distance and control if you're going faster, than at the speed limit and it's made him think twice after the driving course about how he drives.

This must be a long running problem I take it, if he crashed your car in 2008? He needs to change how he drives when you and the baby are in the the car, he really does. Yes I suppose you shouldn't have pressed the hazards but it was a heat of the moment thing when you were scared and he hadn't listened to you at any point previously on the drive either

So yes he is being unreasonable to drive like that and you were being a little unreasonable to press the hazards but he shouldn't have been such a maniac on the road tbh.

Sorry for the mammoth post.

Well in that case PinkyPanther, he was being a bit of a c0ck, though you did say he continued to drive as he had before in your OP. The fight response got the better of him, when he should have kept a cool head with his family in the car.

Goblin - not everyone who drives at 85mph on an empty motorway is a boy racer. You are reading a lot of emotion into the OP.

To re-iterate, the stopping distances and the energy in the accident increase by the square of the speed. So 10% more speed is 21% more energy and braking distance, 20% is 44% more, 30% is 70% more, and so on. So if you're driving at 90 when you should be driving at 70, you'll take 60% further to stop, or a sudden impact will be 60% more injurious.

This is especially true in the sort of cars that families end up driving, because both MPVs and (especially) 4x4s are horrible under braking, especially at speed, and a lot of older small cars still don't have effective anti-lock or stability control. Someone driving a modern medium-sized car with all the bells and whistles can probably stop from 90 better than an elderly Zafira can from 70, but they'd be even safer if they used that electronic wizardry to stop from 70 instead (brake force distribution and stability control help long before the ABS kicks in).

You may have hated the science teacher trying to get you to remember that energy is half the mass times the velocity squared, but it's the key, key equation. Speed is nasty stuff, and small increases in speed equate to larger increases in the danger. The reintroduction of the 1970s 50mph limit on motorways would be good for the environment, for safety and for the general public good. Even 60mph would probably take 20% out of the risks and the energy consumption. No one needs to drive at 90 on the public roads, and it should be grounds for instant disqualification.

Maybe next time do what I do - scream, cover my eyes and end up sobbing. Seems to make a point without having to touch anything.

Perhaps your DH should get a job as a traffic cop if he wants to police other people's driving?

If someone is annoying me by eg hogging the middle lane when there is space in the left hand lane, I find it helps to imagine that it is my mother or my great aunt (they do that) and how truly mortified they would be to be flashed, tailgated or generally bullied on the road. The driver is no doubt a decent human being doing his/her best.

But most importantly, no driver, including your DH, should go faster than his/ her passenger is comfortable with. To do otherwise is a form of imprisonment and bullying. My father used to do it when I was a child and my mother had annoyed him. The more she asked him to slow down, the faster he went. We kids were terrified in the back. There is no excuse. Only idiots do it.

Mind you, no sure about using the hazard lights as a passenger. I agree that could be distracting and dangerous but I can see why you did.

I agree with goldenlife. It's bullying behaviour towards passengers.

Maybe it would be sensible to drive as per the conditions of the road. For instance motorway with lots of middle lane hoggers, either stick behind them and slow down or overtake them and get onwith your drive. Or is that too simple and passive for the majority of male drivers?

People flashing at you to move out of the way is annoying and distracting and very rude on their part.

I seriously don't understand why people care that someone is 'hogging' the middle lane, when there is an outside lane there for overtaking. What is the problem? I mean sure, if the outside lane is full of people doing 90 and the middle lane is full of people doing 60 [so it's difficult to pull out] and the inside lane is empty then yeah, the people in the middle lane need to move, but a few people on here seem to be bothered about anyone at all but them being in the middle lane, whatever the circumstances.

Maybe, just maybe, the people in the middle lane are making their first few trips on the motorway, and they are a bit scared [of people doing stupid things, like the OP's husband] and they've been warned that lorries travel in the inside lane and they also don't want to get in the way of people getting on/off the motorway. Maybe they think it's safer to stay in the middle lane for the majority of the journey instead of changing between middle and left at every junction. In theory it would be, if so many people weren't so fucking disrespectful and downright dangerous behind the wheel of a car.

I think that no matter what lane you're in, you're right if you're going at the speed limit. I don't stay in the outside lane if I don't need to be there [for turning, overtaking etc] but that's not because I think I would be wrong for doing so [if driving at the limit], just because I would be scared of what idiots like the OP's husband would do if I dared to give them the uncomfortable realisation that the world doesn't revolve around them.

You're not being in the slightest unreasonable, OP. If your husband refused to listen to your worries [which were very much founded] then he was both thoughtless towards you as well as stupid, and the hazard lights gave him and the other driver the shock they needed to back the fuck down.

'Goblin - not everyone who drives at 85mph on an empty motorway is a boy racer. You are reading a lot of emotion into the OP.'

I use the term boy racer to denote an attitude rather than a chronological point. My BIL drives a BMW and is a boy racer at 58...you weren't in Gloucestershire were you OP?

It's not an empty motorway if there are people to be undertaken, terrified and tailgated.

thing is that fortunatley your dh didn't murder other motorist this time - possible next time he could murder a whole family and they could die together - having had a lovely day out at alton towers and travelling home minding their own business get killed by the twat in the car because he is more interested in his pride than who he kills with the machine he is driving.

then he could spend two years in jail

so only possibly two or three families wrecked by his stpid hormones that he couldn't possibly keep in check

the sad thing is the prat is allowed a licence to drive not to kill with the car
and yes I did know the family at alton towers and the twat that murdered them did get two years for the 5 deaths

I also had a school friend killed by a mother and son racing on a road with two schools - they took her head of - she was making her way home on a push bike

She was 23 - she would be 44 now

Are you sure he wasn't tailgating in the middle lane as cars were trying to pass traffic in the inside lane OP?

Seems like odd behaviour if the road in empty IMO, and what road is empty on a Sunday evening unless it is very very late?

Were you London bound on the M4 by any chance?? Perhaps you DH was the knob Jockey who tailgated me as I was passing slower traffic. Nice, if he'd gone into the back of me he would have most certainly killed my DD who has her 3rd birthday in a few weeks and my DS who is a few months old.

He was unreasonable..if you are going to drive like a twunt you have can't expect you passenger to sit and take it for too long!

What is amazing me in all of this is the number of you condoning speeding! It doesn't matter how quiet the road is, there is a speed limit!