Irony? or Coincidence? Carefulness causes accidents...M1 accident.

‘‘Carefulness causes accidents…’’ obviously im not being serious when i say that, just to clarify.

But, today i was involved in a crash on the M1 today.
Not me driving, or on the bike luckily. In mums car (59’ BMW 1 Series.)

The traffic was very stop/start.
We accelerated out of the annoying 50 limits, up to about 60-65.
The car infront Braked, very hard.
As did we, getting closer and closer, we werent slowing.
Fortionatly we did stop, about 5 inches from the car, then BANG!
The car bend smacked into us, which then forced us into the car infront.
So 3 cars involved, the car ahead came up to us and said “Is everyone OK? Said his car is fine” and before we knew it, he drove off. Leaving the scene of an accident.
We were in the fast (3rd) lane, so stuck in the central res with cars going past on both sides, not fun.

We also had the dog in the boot of the car.
The police took about 15 mins to get there.

My mums car, was barely damaged, Just the bumper was scuffed, num plate broken.
Just num plate cracked on the front from the shunt.

The other car, some 03’ Hyundai thing.
Didnt get a picture, Dunno why.
I looked on google this was the best way i can show you what the other car looked like damage wise.
But something was leaking, most likely just the radiator, there was a laod of what looked like polystyrene or something similar had been thrown all over the road and was hanging out of his engine.
The Fire service couldnt open the bonnet to disconnect the battery, but they did eventually with some force!

Now the reason for me writing
‘Carefulness causes accidents’
Is because, my mum is a fast driver, generally sits about 95-110 on motorways.
And did any of you watch ‘Police, Camera, Action’ last night on Channel 4 i think, or 5 at 9PM.
After this she said on the motorway, something to the effect of
“After that program last night, that really made me think about the speed i drive”
As a result she wasnt speeding at all really, just the normal 75ish no more on the M1.

So i just think its ironic, or coincidental that the time my mum slows down to be safe, we are involved in an accident, if she hadnt they it would most likely be that we would be further ahead and not involved in the collision. Even less likely that we would have crashed, as should couldnt have done her usual M’way speed due to traffic.

No one was injured, not even the dog.
Who happily slept in the recovery van…

No injurys, surprisingly…


So if she had been going 95-110 and the car in front braked very hard, you would have been safer?

Very naive. What your talking about is fate! If we’d been going faster we may not have been involved in the accident. We’ll maybe it was your time and thankfully you were going slower for a change…

Lesson to be learned there?

That’s not what im saying, my point is that the one say she drives safely, we are involved in a crash.

I feel there should be a lesson learnt but I don’t know what. But I hear what your saying,
I’m surprised the guy in the other car was unhurt.

At first inthink I was looking at it with the attitude
‘If you hit me at 30 I have an 80% chance of living’
'if I step out in to the road at 40, I’ll be way head. ’

But that is the completely wrong attitude to have.

"The traffic was very stop/start.
We accelerated out of the annoying 50 limits, up to about 60-65.
The car infront Braked, very hard.
As did we, getting closer and closer, we werent slowing.

Sounds to me like there no care here, just not the opportunity to reach usual speeds…

Maybe the reason for the accident was you [your mum] was impatient and was too close to the car in front.

Care, consideration, awareness, focus, assertion, planning, decisiveness and caution do not cause accidents. Doing things you dont normally do, can…


Yeah I get what your saying but doing things different.
But I don’t think it’s at all to do with my
Mums impatience, she never drives close to people, fast but lives by the braking distances and whole 2 or 3 second rule.
No one caused the accident that I consider.
Just the man infront, who legged it off. We stopped, just the person that hit the back of us pushed us forward.

I’m worried for you :unsure:

I’m not saying your mom was the cause of the accident. But why was she so close especially with this principle of living by braking distances? You should leave enough gap so even if the dude in front breaks sharp, you dont have to - which may have meant the guy behind didnt need to be so vigilant - which he wasnt so bang-bang-bang.

Were you guys aware what was going on in front of the guy you hit? Could you/were you looking beyond the back of his car? Was he using the 2 second rule himself? What were his options or intentions? Why did he brake hard while accellerating out of the works? Do you know the braking distances while accellerating? Cos they aint the same as from a constant speed…

Loooooooooaaaaaads goin on here. Its like a constant game of speed chess out there. The more moves ahead you can see the more time you have to deal with whatever comes your way.

To be honest, i think it was just one of those very unexpected things.
I wasnt paying any attention, just reading so im unaware of what as going on up ahead.

I dont think anyones to blame, i think the question is, my mum managed to stop, so the person that was at fault was the guy behind. But anyone could have done it.
When im on the motorway i NEVER sit close to anyone at all. and in times like that i know the feeling of flowing with traffic and then just having to brake so hard you cant stop, luckily i have everytime (touch wood).
M’way are just so unpredictable.

The recovery man said that that was the stretch of road he does to most, between jnc 23 and 25 i think he said and its always that type of crash.
Braking, Bang, bang bang.
Apparently 4 were killed last week in that same type of accident, multi-car pile ups.

EDIT: Also i over heard the officer saying to the guy that went into the back of us, that its likely he’ll be done for driving with out due care and attention… which i think is a bit unjust…

Hmmm why are you saying on a forum that your mum does 110 alot you do know the limit is 70 right? What was your need to say the reg of her car are you trying to play tops trumps with us?

If your mum finished inches from the other car then she wasnt paying attention to whats happening, didnt look around to move around which suggests she was speeding.

Not a very good thread to put up really no one has learnt anything other than your mum isnt a safe driver

Yes i know the limit is 70, but honestly hell me you stick to it 100% of the time?

No im not playing top trumphs, its just to give you an idea of what cars were involved, to gain an idea of the car and mainly just to show how a new car come out much safer then an old car. Im not trying to prove anything, just that its worth buying a decent car when its you life at risk in a crash.

she wasnt speeding, she couldnt have, we were barely even doing 70, 65 at most.

Also dont get me wrong, im not going to defend her, i tell her to slow down at nutty speeds. She doesnt always do that, just the odd occasion for a few seconds. Normally sits about 85-95 which still, i very much agree with you is unsafe. And putting hers and especially others lives at risk.
Shiver, I love speed, i dont encourage her btw… so dont shoot the messenger, i think its stupid what she does. The other day, i told her she drives too fast (this way one of the occasions she was sitting just under a ton on the M1) she replied with driving at 40 in a 60 on the way home…(Now dont go "Oh thats just dangerous, roads are not to be pissed about on, it was about 11:30 with about 1 car every 15 mins. + she was only joking and did 40 for all of about 3 minutes)

Honestly please dont flame me or be angry at me, i havent done anything. Ok i shouldnt mention the speed, but its the truth. I dont like it either, thats just her. Impatient mother…

general rule is that it is the person at rear at fault for driving without care & att… for not anticipating and drving to conditions so in essence your mum is lucky that the other vehicle was not hit …

i echo the above posts …

Drive at speed if you so wish but drive to the road ahead that you can see and be prepared to stop in the road you can see …

ps i know its your mum so not saying its you its just easier to write in that perspective…

i think there was a study regarding end of speed restrictions on mways and i think there was something like a 68% chance of further accidents where people instantly speed up and want to get away so lane changes etc all then cause another tidal way of slow traffic and as people speed up the cars in front are braking … as in this case … easiest way is to steadily increase your speed to allow the traffic to return to its flow …

glad all ok though …

Other vehicle? which one do you mean? the one that went in to the back of us?

Yeah Tim, i understand what you say about driving at speed, but be prepared for it.

End of M’way speeds? i can see how people would just abuse that.

Its easy for you people to speculate and go “you did this wrong or you did that wrong” at the end of the day, it all happens in 3 or 4 seconds, from the time you brake to when you crash.
If you werent in the crash you wont have known the details.
How come my mum stopped? and the person behind us didnt? Who does that show is at fault, not my mother…

the vehicle your mother missed by inches i mean by other vehicle …

i’m not having a go directly ok …

yes we can all say this as in hindsight im sure your mumthinks if i had done x y z…

just think of this scene …

car in front stops

car behind late reaction/lack of forward planning …brakes hard but advoids collision by a small margin

car behind that late reaction to the vehicle in fronts late reaction …impact …

.Whose late reaction causes the incident ?

different scene …

car in front stops

Car behind has noticed vehicles in front ( approx 2 -3 cars ) are slowing/stopping prior to car in front stopping and reduces speed at a gradual rate over a greater distance

car behind does not react harshily to sudden brake lights but also slows down gradually with the flow of traffic …

When i said about people speculating about it, i wasnt aiming that at you Tim. Well i wasnt really aiming it at any one, just a comment in general about how Armchair experts like to give their inputs that all.

Everything to my mum is a daze, she cant recall if she was looking ahead or just infornt and has no real recollection of the crash per say, Which tell me that she must have been just looking in fornt, not 2-3 cars ahead.

We live and learn, at the end of the day we shouldnt play the blame game, what matters is that everyone is alright and was safely out of the cars. Kudos to the services who were very helpful and shut the m’way quickly to let us cross then opened it again in a matter of minutes.

Why put the dog in the boot? Would you travel in the boot?

Where else?
She cant go on the back seats, thats even more dangerous for her. At least she can comfortably lie down in the boot, its easily big enough.

Actually you can get a harness for dogs and these can be secured through the seatbelts front and/or rear, you wouldnt put a 5 year old child in the boot, why put a dog there ?

I’ve looked at those harnesses, we sell them at work. (I work in a Pet shop)

The cars a hatch back, so there’s alot more space for her to lie down and sleep in the back.
When she was younger we used to have to put her in a cage to keep her from jumping about, but she’s calmed down now.
Alsoooo, there wasn’t any space in the main part, the car was full.

You can’t compaire putting a child in ten boot to a dog, seriously man… :slight_smile:

Hmm, it does seem a bit cruel though…

you what?