wprime

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    1,678
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,316 Excellent

About wprime

  • Rank
    Super Member
  1. In other words what I said is entirely correct and you can't fault it so you choose to argue things that you think I mean but didn't actually say. I'm just stating the legalities here and why the MB driver likely won't face any penalty. I'm not trying to imply anything like what you're arguing against. I for one think he was road raging, I just don't see much luck in a legal claim against him unless he admits to having malicious intent.
  2. Yeah that's this thread. In that video the lorry had 9 seconds from when the camera vehicle came in front to bring his truck to a stop so he had more than sufficient time (a fully loaded semi could've stopped in time). He has an obligation to adjust his speed to a safe following distance from a brief reactionary/brake delay after the point that the camera vehicle came in front, he obviously wasn't driving with due care (or his brakes failed). The thing that can make the MB driver in that video have liability is malicious intent. Without malicious intent it's just another vehicle stopped in the left lane of an expressway so the vehicle in the back is at fault. Stopping for any damage caused to another vehicle is not only a reasonable reason, it's legally required (Sect 78 LTA iirc) so vehicles are required to drive with the reasonable expectation of encountering stopped vehicles. Not expecting a stopped vehicle on an highway is not a reasonable defense for rear-ending it. I understand this might not be the law in US/Canada - I know there was a case in Canada where a young lady was sentenced to jail after a motorbike drove into the back of her stopped car but this is Thailand - the laws are different here and you need to drive in accordance with the local laws.
  3. In Thailand if you drive into the back of a stopped vehicle it's your fault unless the stopped vehicle had just entered the lane before stopping and it was not reasonable for you to have braked in time. It doesn't matter if they're in the right lane of an expressway - it's still 100% the fault of the vehicle who hit it. If you drive enough on the highways here you'll know they usually just stop wherever the crash was, on motorways this is very commonly in the right lane so people are usually prepared for this and slow down accordingly. In any case, they don't usually go more than 30km/h around this particular bend and as it's elevated the truck (which was directly behind me) could be seen from a mile away.
  4. That's bordering on defamation. Thai police are very honest. The rightful owners will get their money back, all 1M baht of it.
  5. Technically true but misleading. about 75% of eligible voters did not vote for Clinton either.
  6. Which one is the culprit in the photo? Why aren't the police pointing at him? So unprofessional!
  7. The costs are because so many panels were damaged - bonnet, roof, front bumper, A pillar, front passenger door, roof, windshield, left light cover, left front bumper and a few more - all have rock chips now, there were about 10 things listed on the claim form. It's a 5.5M baht car, paint jobs aren't exactly cheap. Have a look at the video closely, you can see a whole bunch of rocks came flying out of his truck as he cut in, he's carrying rocks and he hasn't covered his load at all. It would not have been pleasant for those two fixing their motorbike in the right lane at 1:02 in the video if he stayed in the right lane. Yeah that's the road.
  8. In reliability yes. Lexuses have released some fine cars and their discrete styling is a plus for me but they cost as much as equivalent Mercs in Thailand so why bother?
  9. I didn't do it out of anger, I did it to exchange details. He clearly wasn't going to stop. Insurer estimated over 100,000 baht of damages. I was stopping the truck to exchange details. When he cut in a massive rock came off the back of his load and dented my A pillar along with heaps of other rocks that chipped my paint and windshield.
  10. Here, I did the same thing today after a truck cut me off. We both went to the police station, showed the video, no penalty for me at all. Fine for him.
  11. If the video car caused an accident then trying to stop him to exchange details might be somewhat justified. I just did this in my Mercedes to a vehicle that cut me off. I'll upload a video tonight. I'm at Chonburi police station at the moment, no penalty for me, vehicle I stopped got fined. Over 100k of damages, if I didn't stop him my insurer would have to pay and I can expect a big premium increase next year. Since I stopped him he was identified and his insurer will pay.
  12. I think Khun Pakdee is on his own in thinking body dismemberment was sexually provocative.
  13. You were probably driving base models, You really need a highly optioned E or equivalent or an S before you experience what makes a Mercedes better than a Honda but with a Merc it's more about comfort. If you like the 3 series then it's probably not for you. The low end Mercedes are designed to be pretty, cool and uncomfortable (I think they industry term for this is "sporty") so they appeal to younger buyers to get people into the brand. In the rest of the world they're not exactly expensive so you can hardly complain about them.
  14. More likely the pickup driver wasn't at fault so they only expected help because they were poorer, not because of any legal obligation.