They're some injuries for a fall from a taxi it must have been travelling at speed. My daughter did the same thing when she was tiny and fortunately had no injuries.
There is a lot to be said for wearing seatbelts
| Taxi Driver Online http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/ |
|
| Two Boys Critical After Falling From Taxi http://taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11913 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Brummie Cabbie [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 2:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Two Boys Critical After Falling From Taxi |
Two Boys Critical After Taxi Fall 28th July 2009 Two 17-year-old boys are in a critical condition after falling from a moving taxi in Manchester city centre. The teenagers were travelling with three other boys, aged 17, 13 and 11, in a private hire taxi along Deansgate on Monday evening, police said. One of boys suffered a fractured skull, broken shoulder, collapsed lung and internal bleeding. The other suffered a fractured skull. A 59-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of dangerous driving. Source; news.bbc.co.uk |
|
| Author: | toots [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
They're some injuries for a fall from a taxi it must have been travelling at speed. My daughter did the same thing when she was tiny and fortunately had no injuries. There is a lot to be said for wearing seatbelts
|
|
| Author: | bloodnock [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Was it an over crowded 4 seater or a Six seater with dodgy doors?? |
|
| Author: | toots [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
bloodnock wrote: Was it an over crowded 4 seater or a Six seater with dodgy doors??
I think it will have been something to do with dodgy doors or an idiot playing with the doors. It doesn't say anything about it not being insured for the amount of passengers it had on board so it may be safe to assume it had enough seats. Having re read this it would appear that the driver would have been responsible for at least two of the passengers wearing their seatbelts and had he insisted they did the others may have followed suit. |
|
| Author: | bloodnock [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
toots wrote: bloodnock wrote: Was it an over crowded 4 seater or a Six seater with dodgy doors?? I think it will have been something to do with dodgy doors or an idiot playing with the doors. It doesn't say anything about it not being insured for the amount of passengers it had on board so it may be safe to assume it had enough seats. Having re read this it would appear that the driver would have been responsible for at least two of the passengers wearing their seatbelts and had he insisted they did the others may have followed suit. You can start off making them wear belts..but some oiks just take them back off when your on the move, and unless you have a no seat belt in use warning or eyes in the back of your knapper whats to let you know that they are being well behaved little oiks or not...still, kiddys locks would have helped |
|
| Author: | skippy41 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 12:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So its a PH either a saloon or MPV, reading between the lines they could have been trying to do a runner and the driver noticed this and kept going but they decided to jump anyway |
|
| Author: | Doom 101 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Unless they were doing a "runner" How have PHV avoided motion locking for so long?? |
|
| Author: | grandad [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
littlejack3 wrote: Unless they were doing a "runner" How have PHV avoided motion locking for so long??
Motion locking doesn't stop anyone from unlocking the doors and opening them whilst on the move. It just means that the doors lock when you drive off. Well thats what happens in my cars. |
|
| Author: | cabby john [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 3:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Once again the driver is getting the blame. If they had their seat belts on (over 14 years of age) and they are responsible, then it would not matter one iota if the doors opened or not. Let us be fair about this! how does one fall out if they are strapped in? The law is quite clear, over 14 years and the passenger is responsible, |
|
| Author: | Doom 101 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The law is quite clear, over 14 years and the passenger is responsible. BUT - In blame Britain - The driver will be held responsible, any accidentlawyer.com will tell you. Grandad, in the purpose built cabs (LTI & Metrocab) The motion locking prevents the doors from being opened when the vehicle is in motion, or operated by a dead mans handle (controlled by the driver) The technology has been around for over 20 years and could easily be fitted into saloon cars. I am surprised the councils haven't cottoned on to this. |
|
| Author: | skippy41 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My Octavia has this but you can still open the door if you pull the handle twice, I think it could be adapted so it wont and connected to the break pedal |
|
| Author: | bloodnock [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
grandad wrote: littlejack3 wrote: Unless they were doing a "runner" How have PHV avoided motion locking for so long?? Motion locking doesn't stop anyone from unlocking the doors and opening them whilst on the move. It just means that the doors lock when you drive off. Well thats what happens in my cars. And in mine...ive had upchuckers try and depart before ive stopped the cars... 
|
|
| Author: | Darren63 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 8:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Removed by me. |
|
| Author: | bloodnock [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Darren63 wrote: Removed by me.
Why???? |
|
| Author: | Darren63 [ Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
bloodnock wrote: Darren63 wrote: Removed by me. Why???? I made a comment about motion locks, didnt notice they'd already been mentioned. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|