Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

“I apologise if I’ve offended you”

344 replies

MadMaryBoddington · 13/03/2018 09:19

AIBU to think this is a mealy-mouthed, patronising, inadequate excuse for an apology.

Just had ‘words’ with a van driver who had mounted the kerb and was driving with two wheels along the pavement on the village high street this morning.

Five year old ds was running ahead of me on the way to school, and suddenly there was this van driving along the pavement towards him. I yelled at ds to STOP, he did, about three metres in front of the van. Van carried on moving. I raced up to him, grabbed ds, and the driver then pulled off the kerb as I approached his window to yell at him.

He did not appear to think he’d done anything wrong. He ‘apologised if he had offended me’. Offended! I asked if he had children and how he would feel if he saw his child running along a pavement with a large vehicle approaching along it. He said he did have kids, and that he could assure me that he ‘was in full control of his vehicle the whole time’.

I’m raging. The high street is narrow. This happened at a pinch point where vehicles cannot pass side by side if they are large. Legally they should wait for a gap, but often they mount the kerb instead, especially at rush hour. It always makes me angry but they do at least usually stop dead if they see a pedestrian and pull off the pavement straight away. This guy carried on driving.

I normally keep the dc close to me or hold their hands along this stretch of road so that I can grab them if necessary. It’s typical that this morning I had my hands full with musical instruments and bags and so on and was momentarily distracted by saying something to dd behind me, and ds had run further ahead than I’d have liked.

Ironically it was a Highways Agency van.

OP posts:
SomethingNastyInTheBallPool · 13/03/2018 10:28

Yanbu at all. He was in the wrong and that was not an apology.

purplelass · 13/03/2018 10:28

Why the hell should any pedestrian, child or not, have to take extra care on a pavement in case a vehicle decides to drive on it?

Because we're responsible for our own safety, especially in a situation that we know to be dangerous, whoever's at fault.
It's not much good being morally in the right when you're lying on the floor with a broken leg...

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:30

I think you were angry because what could of happened scared you and you knew you were partly to blame.

No she wasn't "partly to blame". The only person doing anything illegal was the driver. He was totally to blame just as a rapist is wholly to blame even if the woman is walking in a dark alley in the night or a burglar is to totally in the wrong even if someone forgets to lock their door etc etc. The fact that someone can do things to protect themselves to some extent against crime doesn't make them partly responsible for the crime.

ProfessorSquarkAndCluck · 13/03/2018 10:31

We had a near miss when my child was about this age in front of a school where a parent pulled onto the pavement not looking. YANBU.

HollyBayTree · 13/03/2018 10:32

So individual drivers may override the Highway Code and the law, because they perceive a case of poor town planning? WTF!?

Try thinking outside the box and contacting the council, along with all the other parents etc and seeing if the narrow road can (a) be widened or (b) a one way system set up to allow free flow of traffic, no pavement mounting.

It really isnt difficult to think rather than react hysterically.

But Im failing to see the point of getting someone sacked, so they lose their job, lose their income, relationship, home, it's really nasty undercurrent of report report report, complain, get someone sacked.

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 13/03/2018 10:32

Exactly purple. Ridiculous to think that you or your child are untouchable when you're on a main road full of drivers. The world is full of people who drive carelessly and even wrecklessly so it's up to us to make sure we and any children are close by and supervised.

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:34

Love the fact that people are trying to blame OP for this. If OP had asked whether she should call police because she had been burgled would you agree that she should do that or would you start implying the burglar was only partly to blame because she hadn't locked the door, put the burglar alarm on etc?

purplelass · 13/03/2018 10:34

No she wasn't "partly to blame". The only person doing anything illegal was the driver.

I didn't say she was doing anything illegal. She knew this part of the walk was dangerous due to drivers' impatience / ignorance / stupidity and didn't take appropriate precautions.

tortelliniforever · 13/03/2018 10:37

Disagree that children have the right to run ahead on the pavement.

Of course children have a right to be on the pavement! The apology was rubbish but you already know that OP. There was a case recently of a child being run over on a pavement. It is NOT acceptable and it is happening more and more often.

Original poster
MadMaryBoddington · 13/03/2018 10:37

^^ here is your problem - poor town planning. Traffic cant just sit on a high street until 30 cars decide to reverse one way, it has to keep flowing.

It isn’t a town, it’s a small, rural village. It wasn’t ‘planned’, it evolved, over many hundreds of years - long before motorised vehicles were on the scene. It is used it as a rat run by traffic that chooses to avoid going a slightly longer route on more appropriate roads. It doesn’t ‘need to keep flowing’ - they could simply go the other way if they don’t want to wait a few minutes to take their turn. And that is all it takes; nobody gets stuck for long. Except when HGVs ignore the weight restriction and block up the whole road. 🙄

OP posts:
Ruffian · 13/03/2018 10:37

greatduckcookery

I wasn't suggesting no one should be careful of their child on a pavement, just that blame shouldn't be shifted to the OP because her child was running ahead.

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 13/03/2018 10:37

Dungeon if the child has been at the OP's side this wouldn't have happened. I have said that the driver was wrong but if you know that the road you're walking on is narrow and drivers have to wait for a gap then it's safer to make sure your dc are close by.

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:38

I didn't say she was doing anything illegal. She knew this part of the walk was dangerous due to drivers' impatience / ignorance / stupidity and didn't take appropriate precautions.

But how is it relevant to the question of whether she should be angry with the driver or report the driver? The driver isn't any less to blame because OP was previously unaware of the fact that dickheads like him exist.

purplelass · 13/03/2018 10:40

But how is it relevant to the question of whether she should be angry with the driver or report the driver?

Because I believe that part of her anger was due to the fact that she had not taken appropriate safety precautions. Would she have been so angry if her child had been by her side and hadn't had the 'near miss'?

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:41

Dungeon if the child has been at the OP's side this wouldn't have happened. I have said that the driver was wrong but if you know that the road you're walking on is narrow and drivers have to wait for a gap then it's safer to make sure your dc are close by.

But that is completely irrelevant to the question of whether OP should be angry with the driver or report him. The driver was the one behaving dangerously and illegally not the OP.

BevBrook · 13/03/2018 10:43

But Im failing to see the point of getting someone sacked, so they lose their job, lose their income, relationship, home, it's really nasty undercurrent of report report report, complain, get someone sacked.

He was doing something illegal. Illegal because very dangerous. Should we shut our eyes to everyone committing crimes - potentially dangerous crimes - because they might get in trouble?

BaronessEllaSaturday · 13/03/2018 10:44

I was angry yesterday when a car did the same thing to me and I didn't have my child with me. I'm angry because drivers treat us as irrelevant

NoqontroI · 13/03/2018 10:44

I'd make a complaint. Because he's not supposed to be driving on the pavement, it's dangerous, and your child had every right to be running / walking on the pavement.

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:44

Because I believe that part of her anger was due to the fact that she had not taken appropriate safety precautions. Would she have been so angry if her child had been by her side and hadn't had the 'near miss'?

Having been in a similar situation, I certainly would be. A driver pulled up on the pavement right in front of me outside a school while talking on his mobile phone. I would also be just as angry with someone who tried to burglar my house, whether or not they managed to steal anything valuable etc etc.

GreatDuckCookery6211 · 13/03/2018 10:45

I don't know if the OP would have been as angry if her dc had been by her side. I doubt it because he wouldn't have been in as much danger from the van. She's angry because she had to tell her child to stop because she obviously didn't know if the van driver had seen the child or if he was was going to be hit. She wouldn't have thought like that had he not been running ahead.

Original poster
MadMaryBoddington · 13/03/2018 10:46

*the council, along with all the other parents etc and seeing if the narrow road can (a) be widened or (b) a one way system set up to allow free flow of traffic, no pavement mounting.

It really isnt difficult to think rather than react hysterically.*

The road cannot be widened as it is a conservation area within a National Park, with listed buildings all along the high street. The council has been approached by various groups and individuals (myself included) over the years to install more bollards. Nothing is done.

I wasn’t hysterical, I was cross but calm.

My report requested that the driver be reminded of the rules of the road and how to drive safely, not that he be sacked.

OP posts:
NoqontroI · 13/03/2018 10:47

But Im failing to see the point of getting someone sacked, so they lose their job, lose their income, relationship, home, it's really nasty undercurrent of report report report, complain, get someone sacked.

Yes because that's so much more important than driving down the pavement and running the very real risk of hitting a pedestrian and killing them. In turn destroying their family, relationships, income, home etc. Oh wait.....

alligatortoss · 13/03/2018 10:48

Disagree that children have the right to run ahead on the pavement.

Of course children have a right to be on the pavement!

They are 2 different things. No one said a child shouldn’t be allowed on a pavement Confused

Dungeondragon15 · 13/03/2018 10:48

I don't know if the OP would have been as angry if her dc had been by her side. I doubt it because he wouldn't have been in as much danger from the van. She's angry because she had to tell her child to stop because she obviously didn't know if the van driver had seen the child or if he was was going to be hit. She wouldn't have thought like that had he not been running ahead.

If you think that I bet you are someone with a similar attitude to the driver...

splendide · 13/03/2018 10:48

Holding a 5 year old's hand isn't going to prevent a car driving on the pavement from hitting him.