Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think this driver was a twat

241 replies

PunkrockerGirl · 04/12/2015 22:01

Driving home about 6pm, very busy main road, 30mph speed limit.
A cat ran out in front of me, I braked, the car behind went right into me.
I got out of the car to a tirade of abuse and that if anything happened to the baby in the car I would be responsible Confused
I gently suggested that she had been driving very close to me right up my arse but just got screamed at.
I asked if they'd called the police and they said that they had. In the meantime, I called dh and ds to come and be with me. The police didn't turn up because they hadn't been called. Loads of incensed and abusive relatives turned up instead.

My dh and ds came, police were called and (rightly so) an ambulance to check the baby over (who was beaming and being bounced up and down by the outraged mother when dh went to see if they were ok).
Anyway, I feel very shaken up but glad that nobody was hurt.

Anyway, aibu to think if you drive so close to the person in front that you can't stop in time when they brake, then baby or no baby on board, you are driving like a twat.
And to say you've called the police when in fact what you've done is called loads of relatives to swerve up and intimidate the person you've bashed into is about as low as it gets.

OP posts:
ProvisionallyAnxious · 04/12/2015 22:57

It's not illegal to kill a cat by driving. That doesn't mean you are legally required to kill the fucking cat if it runs in front of you.

MooseAndSquirrel · 04/12/2015 22:58

I'm pretty certain the general rules are not to endanger yourself or other drivers, ie swerving into another lane to a void a rabbit. But bigger animals would cause you injury if you hit them. There's quite a lot of grey area when it comes to this issue and insurrance.
however its a moot point as by not leaving enough stopping distance she's driving without due care. Insurance wise, as long as you havnt already admitted liability, shell be found at fault. As PP have said, you could of broke for a cat/child/cow/santa 🎅 and she should be driving with enough room to break herself!

WitchWay · 04/12/2015 23:00

You can choose to brake for a slug if you want - the person behind ought to leave enough space & be watching what you are doing.

FWIW I once deliberately didn't brake for two dogs because I had someone tailgating me, a car on my inside & the crash barrier to my right. Killed them both Sad By the time I reached work 2 minutes away & rang the Police, I'd already been reported for "failing to stop" which was nonsense - hitting farm animals & dogs needs reporting but not stopping for. Stopping is for people & their vehicles.

honeyroar · 04/12/2015 23:03

I'd stop whatever I hit to make sure it was dead.

Justaboy · 04/12/2015 23:05

A long time ago since i read the highway code but the onus is on the driver following to leave enough of a gap so if the car in front should have to stop then the car or vehicle following must be able to do so too.

Problem is that tailgating is far to prevalent these days.

Best bet is to let your insurance company sort it out. Old bill does not have to be summoned unless someone has been hurt or injured.

WitchWay · 04/12/2015 23:05

The dogs were dead for sure - I ran right over them - badump-badump

Horrible. There was nowhere safe to stop close by.

ProvisionallyAnxious · 04/12/2015 23:06

There are also lots of reasons why you might need to slow down / brake before the driver behind you sees the reason why - e.g. standing water that you might aqua plane on, stuff falling off other vehicles.

Surely the rule about you being at fault for dangerous driving is if, e.g., you swerve to avoid a cat and in so doing drive into a car coming the opposite direction. Whereas the fault is clearly with the person tailgating in this situation.

Permanentlyexhausted · 04/12/2015 23:07

Hunters No, unless it has changed very recently, you do still have to report hitting a dog. Generally you have to report a collision with an animal that has an owner (i.e. dogs and livestock). You don't have to report an accident with a wild animal (which includes domesticated cats).

WitchWay · 04/12/2015 23:08

BTW OP the driver was definitely a twat.

My brother drives one of the "delivery ambulances" & hit a woman who drove out in front of him, with a load of grannies in the back. He's a very careful driver, has his advanced certificate etc. She went berserk, called a load of rellies who pitched up & started ranting at him.

Until her husband turned up & say "NOT AGAIN!!"

Grin
Justaboy · 04/12/2015 23:09

WitchWay Yes you do have to report a collision with the following animals summed up in the mnemonic DG CHAMPS were,

D Dog
G Goat
C Cattle
H Horse
A Ass
M Mule
P Pig
S Sheep

It was embodied in the Highways Act of 1856.

Doesn't cover poor moggies :-(

gingerdad · 04/12/2015 23:11

You should have hit the cat.

But it's still their fault as they where clearly too close.

Permanentlyexhausted · 04/12/2015 23:12

And in the 1988 Road Traffic Act, Just. www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170

BurningBridges · 04/12/2015 23:13

I've braked for a squirrel before now. And a pigeon. But luckily there's been no collisions.

I've had one accident when reversing (no livestock involved) so I got out and prepared to exchange numbers and the other driver went apeshit. Some people just like to do that OP; maybe people should spend more time googling the definition the word accident.

IHeartKingThistle · 04/12/2015 23:19

I once stopped on a high speed slip road alongside a roundabout as I mistakenly thought it was feeding onto the roundabout. Driver behind was driving too close and hit me hard. He went mental and contested it all through the courts, but I was never even called for a statement. He should have left enough distance to stop and that's how the insurance companies and the court saw it too.

I hate tailgaters. Hope you're OK OP.

specialsubject · 04/12/2015 23:21

fault of person behind for driving too close. She put her ickle preshus in danger by her crap driving. Pity the clan didn't tell her that.

the car in front of you may stop suddenly at any time. Drive assuming that they will.

warning - no MN sugar coat on what follows:
ideally don't brake for small animals, they are less important than people. BUT most of us will brake when something dashes in front of us. Which is why item 1 above applies.
end of no sugar coat warning.

IguanaTail · 04/12/2015 23:23

I think the confusion with cats and dogs is more with the liability of the owner. If a dog runs into the street and causes an accident, the owner has some responsibility. The onus is on the owner to keep the dog secured. Cats do their own thing and owners are not liable for what their cats do, because there's an understanding that cats can't be trained etc.

WMittens · 04/12/2015 23:23

LunchpackOfNotreDame
You should do all you can to minimise the risk of an accident

It's about risk assessing what's going to cause more harm to human life. Would slamming the brakes on do more damage or would hitting the cat?

Pop quiz: does travelling too close to the car in front increase or decrease the risk of causing harm to human life?

Alisvolatpropiis · 05/12/2015 00:09

honey cats are vermin within the law, hence not needing to report running them over.

wasonthelist · 05/12/2015 00:11

Op yanbu - you are correct, other driver was driving like a twat and acted like one afterwards. Hope you feel better soon.

TheExMotherInLaw · 05/12/2015 00:32

I've had cars I've been driving rear ended three times - and only the first time was it a sudden stop! That driver refused to fill in a statement for his insurers, so it all dragged on until he needed to re-insure his car. The other twice the driver behind was woolgathering. I'd only had the car 3 weeks (sob), then a few years later it got rear ended again, and was written off. All I could do was press the button to phone dh, and say, car crash, Tesco roundabout get help. He phoned police and ambulance, who were all wonderful. I can't for the life of me remember why I couldn't call them myself - I think I couldn't remember how to.
I agree - you react to the movement, and stop; that's why people need to leave a safe distance. If you hit a creature, you work out afterwards what is the right thing to do - stop/drive on/report.

ouryve · 05/12/2015 00:40

They were driving like a twat (whether you were correct in braking when you did, or not)

Just like the idiot who raced down a hill and round a bend with no seatbelt on, this afternoon - thankfully I had the spidey sense to step back towards the pavement with DS1 before i could even see him.

Just like the other twat racing through the estate at 40mph and having to brake hard to turn a corner, this afternoon.

Just like the eejit driving around with a toddler on his lap - thankfully he didn't come face to face with either of the other pillocks because that could have ended in something horrific.

This was all on the 12 minute walk down to the school, this afternoon. I took the opportunity to chat with DS1 about staying safe by assuming everyone else on the road is an idiot because the hit rate was pretty high, this afternoon.

SmallLegsOrSmallEggs · 05/12/2015 00:54

The difference between cats and dogs is dogs have owners. Therefore dogs are property and also owners are liable for damage caused by them. Cats legally, do not have owners and are not property. Which is why if someone 'steals' your cat, legally it is tricky. (I don't think they are vermin as deliberately killing cats domestic cats is afaik not allowed although I have heard of feral cats being treated as vermin)

redredblue · 05/12/2015 01:26

YANBU
She definitely shouldn't have been driving so close to you. If she drives like that (and sees nothing wrong with it) I fear for her baby!! Sad
There could have been many other reasons someone in front stopped! Her baby was lucky, could have been sooo much worse.
And calling her abusive relatives just shows what kind of person she is.

Pedestriana · 05/12/2015 01:36

I understood you were supposed to drive in a way that enabled you to stop without smashing into the back of the car in front of you. I hate tailgate drivers. I had a van nearly shunt me some months ago. I'd gone to pick up DD from nursery. There was no parking on their driveway, but a little further down the road was a small cul-de-sac. I indicated to turn into it, but the nobbers in the van behind me were so close they didn't see my indicator and let loose with a load of hooting and verbal abuse.

BTW, I brake for anything in the road in front of me; bags, cats, birds. It is just instinct.

19lottie82 · 05/12/2015 03:31

I really don't see the dilemma / argument here. The driver behind the OP should have maintained a safe distance behind them, they didn't, so they crashed into the back of the OP. They are legally at fault. they were driving too close. Argument over.