Woman pinned against wall by car (From Southend Standard)

Hope she's ok.


Blo0dy cyclists.

this happened in canewdon road, not crowstone

aduksquack wrote:
Hope she's ok. Blo0dy cyclists.

Care to elaborate on your comment? I'm sure if you have more information than is given in the report above, many of us (& maybe the Traffic Police) would be interested to learn of it.
Regardless of anything else, I do hope the casualty is ok, the number of "Blue Lights" hurtling down Hamlet Court Road point towards it being a major incident.

aduksquack wrote:
Hope she's ok.


Blo0dy cyclists.

Where in this article does it say anything about cyclists? Maybe if you got on a bike and cycled, perhaps you would shred some of that weight which I assume you have.

Basildon.lad.21 wrote:

aduksquack wrote:
Hope she's ok.


Blo0dy cyclists.

Where in this article does it say anything about cyclists? Maybe if you got on a bike and cycled, perhaps you would shred some of that weight which I assume you have.

ironically he's probably got more pairs of lycra shorts than you've had hot dinners

This woman is a family member of mine, no cyclist involved at all, a car mounted the pavement as she walked along the street. That's all I know at the moment. I obviously wish her a very speedy recovery and the family are all thinking of her.

aduksquack wrote:
Hope she's ok.


Blo0dy cyclists.

Nasty accident. Hope the lady is ok. Must have been very frightening for her. Opalina, I share your sentiments.

Aduksquack - I understood your tongue in cheek humour - made me smile ;)

opalina wrote:
This woman is a family member of mine, no cyclist involved at all, a car mounted the pavement as she walked along the street. That's all I know at the moment. I obviously wish her a very speedy recovery and the family are all thinking of her.

Opalina, thank you for the clarification, I add my best wishes for your relative's full & speedy recovery.
I hope that the originator of the first comment here has the decency to apologise for their untrue statement & request that it is deleted.

Bosniavet wrote:

opalina wrote:
This woman is a family member of mine, no cyclist involved at all, a car mounted the pavement as she walked along the street. That's all I know at the moment. I obviously wish her a very speedy recovery and the family are all thinking of her.

Opalina, thank you for the clarification, I add my best wishes for your relative's full & speedy recovery.
I hope that the originator of the first comment here has the decency to apologise for their untrue statement & request that it is deleted.

Wow, you really are an irony free zone aren't you? You of all people who whines and moans incessantly about the 'dangers' of cyclists on pavements. Yet an ironic comment on a story about a car on the pavement goes right over your head.

Incredible.

Just a note, my last comment was disrected solely at bosniavet, not at opalina.

Another seriously injured by a car in Westcliff. I am sure the clowcil will be along soon to tell us that the road users in Westcliff are perfectly safe.
Hope the lady is making a good recovery.

Thank you aduksquack. I have to admit that I didn't get your irony until you pointed it out but it makes sense now.

I don't want to go into details about the nature of her injuries but just to report that she is doing well much to the relief of all of us.

Thank you to all who have sent their regards.

Poor, poor woman. I sincerely hope she is ok and her injuries aren't serious. A carbon copy accident happened to me in 2009 and weirdly I am sitting in hospital as I type having had another operation on my very damaged leg. I hope she is ok and makes a very speedy recovery. If anybody knows her, please tell her she has my sympathies as I know what she's going through xx take care ****

I wish the injured lady a speedy recovery.

When are the Council and police going to clamp down on speeding and careless driving in our town? I'm sick of witnessing reckless driving on daily basis; I do not know what speed the car involved in the above incident was driving, but unless the driver had a seizure at the wheel, they were clearly going too fast given that they drove onto the pavement.
With cars these days so powerful many drivers cannot be trusted to drive responsibly and at a speed appropriate to their surroundings. Serious accidents like this then happen - with vulnerable pedestrians and cyclists the innocent victims while those shielded in their 1-tonne-plus metal box emerge relatively unscathed.

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

We already have reams of speed bumps and cameras, not to mention a fair few 20mph limited roads.

Accidents happen. Get over it.

RootsHallRoar wrote:
I wish the injured lady a speedy recovery.

When are the Council and police going to clamp down on speeding and careless driving in our town? I'm sick of witnessing reckless driving on daily basis; I do not know what speed the car involved in the above incident was driving, but unless the driver had a seizure at the wheel, they were clearly going too fast given that they drove onto the pavement.
With cars these days so powerful many drivers cannot be trusted to drive responsibly and at a speed appropriate to their surroundings. Serious accidents like this then happen - with vulnerable pedestrians and cyclists the innocent victims while those shielded in their 1-tonne-plus metal box emerge relatively unscathed.

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

I disagree completely. Why should everyone else be penalised by having stupid speed humps, and cash cow cameras? Police should be targeting the real dangerous drivers not the ones who marginally exceed speed limits.

Horace Wimpole wrote:

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

We already have reams of speed bumps and cameras, not to mention a fair few 20mph limited roads.

Accidents happen. Get over it.

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

aduksquack wrote:

Horace Wimpole wrote:

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

We already have reams of speed bumps and cameras, not to mention a fair few 20mph limited roads.

Accidents happen. Get over it.

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

OK I don't have an agenda here and don't want to spark off a huge disagreement but I note you regularly make that point and I don't agree.

So, can I turn it on it's head and ask you if she feel there is such a thing as a 'cycling accident' i.e. where no car is involved?

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

Horace Wimpole wrote:

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

So what if its about revenue, which I dont believe it is, speed hump?.
If people are dumb enough not to keep within the speed limits they deserve all they get. Simples.

I would love to enter into this debate but unfortunately feel far to emotionally involved in this to really comment. All I will say is we don't really know what caused the accident in this case yet. In fact the women involved didn't really know what happened it all happened so fast. But according to the highly inaccurate Echo yesterday there were 2 vehicles involved. The collision caused one of the cars to veer off the road.

I did just type out a whole reply but decided it innapropriate for me to comment on this particular case.

But for those interested, there were three women pedestrians injured in this, two still in hospital but both doing well :)

opalina wrote:
I would love to enter into this debate but unfortunately feel far to emotionally involved in this to really comment. All I will say is we don't really know what caused the accident in this case yet. In fact the women involved didn't really know what happened it all happened so fast. But according to the highly inaccurate Echo yesterday there were 2 vehicles involved. The collision caused one of the cars to veer off the road.

I did just type out a whole reply but decided it innapropriate for me to comment on this particular case.

But for those interested, there were three women pedestrians injured in this, two still in hospital but both doing well :)

I hope your friend and the others make a good recovery.

John the resonator wrote:

aduksquack wrote:

Horace Wimpole wrote:

We need the introduction and proper enforcement - with speed humps and speed cameras - of a 20mph speed limit in built-up areas to slow cars down before more people are injured or killed.

We already have reams of speed bumps and cameras, not to mention a fair few 20mph limited roads.

Accidents happen. Get over it.

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

OK I don't have an agenda here and don't want to spark off a huge disagreement but I note you regularly make that point and I don't agree.

So, can I turn it on it's head and ask you if she feel there is such a thing as a 'cycling accident' i.e. where no car is involved?

SHE feel (doh) meant YOU feel.

Horace Wimpole wrote:

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

Mechanical faults happen through failure to properly maintain a vehicle - that is someone's fault.

Not driving carefully in poor weather conditions - that is someone's fault.

Not looking where you're going - that is someone's fault.

Like I said, there's no such thing as an 'accident' when driving, because there is always someone at blame.

aduksquack wrote:

Horace Wimpole wrote:

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

Mechanical faults happen through failure to properly maintain a vehicle - that is someone's fault.

Not driving carefully in poor weather conditions - that is someone's fault.

Not looking where you're going - that is someone's fault.

Like I said, there's no such thing as an 'accident' when driving, because there is always someone at blame.

What tosh! You should look up the true meaning of the word accident.

I hope you are not suggesting the act was deliberate!!

Seem as though Diannah, Horace Wimpole & Opalina & John the Resonator have a 4 some /2-some/ thing going.
What could this link be?
Could they all be the same person, or even two people?

Diannah wrote:

aduksquack wrote:

Horace Wimpole wrote:

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

Mechanical faults happen through failure to properly maintain a vehicle - that is someone's fault.

Not driving carefully in poor weather conditions - that is someone's fault.

Not looking where you're going - that is someone's fault.

Like I said, there's no such thing as an 'accident' when driving, because there is always someone at blame.

What tosh! You should look up the true meaning of the word accident.

I hope you are not suggesting the act was deliberate!!

It wasn't accidental because the cause - like the vast majority of collisions, injuries, and deaths on British roads - was bad driving.

That's why the police now call them RTCs - Road Traffic Collisions - instead of RTAs, because the word accident implies no-one is at fault.

Alec Cikes wrote:
Seem as though Diannah, Horace Wimpole & Opalina & John the Resonator have a 4 some /2-some/ thing going.
What could this link be?
Could they all be the same person, or even two people?

What an idiotic suggestion to make. Is it conceivable to you that four people could have differing views without being only two people, or two people could have a similar view without being the same person?

Had you looked at the threads when Dale Farm was in the news daily you would have perhaps concluded there were only two posters - for and against the Travellers.

Anyway I await your contribution on the story itself although perhaps not a good plan to hold my breath whilst doing so. If you come out on one side or the other maybe you will reveal which one of me you are.

Alec Cikes wrote:
Seem as though Diannah, Horace Wimpole & Opalina & John the Resonator have a 4 some /2-some/ thing going.
What could this link be?
Could they all be the same person, or even two people?

I will take that as a compliment. I think John and Opalina talk a lot of sense (and I'm sure Horace too but can't recall his posts). I don't remember you though, Alec as being a long term poster. Are you new on here or just a reincarnation?

Alec Cikes wrote:
Seem as though Diannah, Horace Wimpole & Opalina & John the Resonator have a 4 some /2-some/ thing going.
What could this link be?
Could they all be the same person, or even two people?

How did you come to that conclusion? My posts on this thread have been purely correcting information and wishing my niece a speedy recovery. I purposely didn't enter this debate because of that fact.

In fact JTR, Dinnah and I have had some great debates in the past but that was over 6 months ago and like Dinnah, I dont recall your monica either. So you must either be a stalker or a reincarnation yourself. With some memory to remember me because as I have just said I haven't posted at all on these threads for over 6 months. :/

But just as an update I would like to say that the lady who was seriously hurt in this accident had only just been released from hospital but is recovering well. In fact she herself posted on the other story about this accident. Although it will be some weeks/months before she is fully recovered.

aduksquack wrote:

Horace Wimpole wrote:

There's no such thing as an 'accident' where driving is concerned.

Don't be so stupid.

Drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, mechanical faults, unforeseen circumstances, weather... these will always exist, therefore so will accidents.

As for speed bumps and cameras, these are often about revenue generation—not always, but often.

Mechanical faults happen through failure to properly maintain a vehicle - that is someone's fault.

Not driving carefully in poor weather conditions - that is someone's fault.

Not looking where you're going - that is someone's fault.

Like I said, there's no such thing as an 'accident' when driving, because there is always someone at blame.

I stand corrected. If only we were all perfect as you eh?

Twunt.