rufford ford

[Andy Burns]

It's that time of year again ...

The ducks are safe, but even a few landrovers come unstuck this time.

[Andy Burns]

These are the biggest numpties

[Tim+]

I wonder how many of these are ?insurance jobs? as in, deliberately writing off the vehicle in a way that they still get a payout for?

Tim

[Colin Bignell]

The numpties are the people who gather to watch and film, instead of putting road cones across the road, to stop people using the ford when it is too deep.

[alan_m]

How would a EV cope with that depth of water?

[Chris J Dixon]

Do you really think that the majority of those shown on the film would take any notice of any cones?

I get the impression that most of them know exactly what they are doing, even if it doesn't go the way they wanted. :-(

Chris

[Vir Campestris]

A few years ago I was driving along a flooded road in an ordinary car. I knew it was pretty level, but I was a bit nervous about the foot of water. By keeping a steady speed I could have a bow wave, with the trough behind it where the engine was.

All fine until somebody came the other way in a 4x4 throwing up a large wave. I had solid water, not just spray, over the bonnet.

Much to my surprise my car didn't even hiccup!

Andy

[Jacob Jones]

Tim+ [e-mail] wrote

Surely the insurance wouldnt pay out in that situation with the road closed sign and the water depth indicator.

[Tim+]

But does it say ?road closed?? It?s a ford where you can cross assuming you know what depth of water your vehicle can cope with. I dare say owners will bleat about misjudging the depth.

Tim

[Jacob Jones]

Yes it does.

Hard to get away with that with the depth guage clearly visible.

[Colin Bignell]

They would, at least, make them stop and wonder why the ford was blocked off. Then one of the gawpers could tell them, instead of mindlessly taking videos.

You think they are intentionally doing thousands of pounds worth of damage to their vehicles?

[Tim+]

Well, it certainly looks like it to me. Are you saying that they?re all accidentally ignoring a road closed sign and a depth marker?

Tim

[Colin Bignell]

I suspect they haven't seen either. Many drivers see nothing except what is directly in front of them and sometimes, not even that. The authorities should have put up gates to go with the signs.

In any case, that does not excuse the behaviour of the people who think it is better to film cars being driven into a flood than to prevent it happening. If we had Good Samaritan laws, as they do in France and Germany, they would probably all face prosecution.

[Robin]

That would of course inconvenience greatly all those with vehicles equipped to pass through the deep water - several of which were shown in the video.

Do you take a similar view to private citizens taking it upon themselves to close roads in bad weather? (Asking on behalf of Extinction Rebellion.)

I'd need to be pointed to where either State's laws require - or even permit - private citizens to close a road on grounds of the risk to

*some* vehicles. The more so when there is no evidence of risk to life and limb.

[Colin Bignell]

The drivers of which were all committing an offence by driving past the road closed sign. Unlike floods around here some years ago, the sign does not say road closed except to HGVs.

....

Their laws make it an offence not to come to the aid of a person in distress, if it is safe to do so. I would expect English Courts to interpret that as including not stopping people before they get into distress.

Getting out into three feet of running water is a risk to life.

[Andy Burns]

[ARW]

It's 30 for a reason sign:-)