BMW driver cut free from Southampton crash

Woman cut free from Southampton crash

Woman cut free from Southampton crash

First published in News
Last updated

A woman had to be cut free from her car after an accident on a Hampshire road this afternoon.

The 46-year-old, from West Wellow, was freed from her black BMW Coupe following the two-vehicle collision in Bursledon.

The female driver was taken to hospital with suspected spinal injuries, after the smash involving a white Mercedes Benz van at the junction between Bridge Road and Oakhill.

The driver of the Mercedes van, a 46-year-old man from Hedge End, is believed to be unhurt.

Emergency services were called to the scene following the collision at 1.08pm.

Two fire crews, two police cars and a crash investigation team remain at the scene, with traffic queuing back for over a mile down Bridge Road.

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:30pm Fri 8 Feb 13

hulla baloo says...

From this picture, I can only see minimal damage and it seems a bit excessive to cut the roof off. Unless this is now becoming the norm because of compo claims.
From this picture, I can only see minimal damage and it seems a bit excessive to cut the roof off. Unless this is now becoming the norm because of compo claims. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

2:59pm Fri 8 Feb 13

bigfella777 says...

Yes, it will be interesting to know the extent of her injuries seeing as the airbag has not even gone off.
No wonder insurance is so dear when 30 grand cars just get destroyed for no reason.
Yes, it will be interesting to know the extent of her injuries seeing as the airbag has not even gone off. No wonder insurance is so dear when 30 grand cars just get destroyed for no reason. bigfella777
  • Score: 0

3:16pm Fri 8 Feb 13

bernard7 says...

I feel a hefty personal injury claim coming on...

and our car insurance goes up and up and up....
I feel a hefty personal injury claim coming on... and our car insurance goes up and up and up.... bernard7
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Fri 8 Feb 13

espanuel says...

Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away.
Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away. espanuel
  • Score: 0

3:37pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Lord Ikea says...

That is nuts. That BMW is a very strong car and would have been repairable. Stupid thing is it looks like the model that has a metal folding roof. All they had to do was hit the open button and the roof would have removed itself.

Also, why have they not removed the van roof is it too difficult for them?.
That is nuts. That BMW is a very strong car and would have been repairable. Stupid thing is it looks like the model that has a metal folding roof. All they had to do was hit the open button and the roof would have removed itself. Also, why have they not removed the van roof is it too difficult for them?. Lord Ikea
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Fri 8 Feb 13

espanuel says...

Lord Ikea.
The roof might have been damaged? An it also say's the man in the white van was not hurt. So he probably got out the other door?
Lord Ikea. The roof might have been damaged? An it also say's the man in the white van was not hurt. So he probably got out the other door? espanuel
  • Score: 0

4:09pm Fri 8 Feb 13

RonnieSoak says...

Hmm, zoomed in on the photo and the steering wheel boss appears to be intact, so no airbag deployment there it would seem. Can't tell if the side ones have gone off, but there doesn't seem to be any side impact damage that would cause this. So yes, removing the roof does appear at first sight to be a bit excessive.

However, NONE OF US HAVE ALL THE FACTS, as we're reading a short local newspaper article, not a full report from the emergency services. Unless anyone on this site has mystical powers allowing them to telepathically receive full details directly from the brains of all involved, I would respectfully suggest that we bear that in mind.

Two possible conversations:
1. "Good news and bad news Ms X: The roof was not removed from your car, so it will be like new after a couple of days in the body shop. However, on the down side, you're paralysed for life."
2. Er, do I really have to spell it out? I think you can see where this is going. I know which conversation I'd rather have.

All the best to the injured lady. Hope you're OK and get well soon.
Hmm, zoomed in on the photo and the steering wheel boss appears to be intact, so no airbag deployment there it would seem. Can't tell if the side ones have gone off, but there doesn't seem to be any side impact damage that would cause this. So yes, removing the roof does appear at first sight to be a bit excessive. However, NONE OF US HAVE ALL THE FACTS, as we're reading a short local newspaper article, not a full report from the emergency services. Unless anyone on this site has mystical powers allowing them to telepathically receive full details directly from the brains of all involved, I would respectfully suggest that we bear that in mind. Two possible conversations: 1. "Good news and bad news Ms X: The roof was not removed from your car, so it will be like new after a couple of days in the body shop. However, on the down side, you're paralysed for life." 2. Er, do I really have to spell it out? I think you can see where this is going. I know which conversation I'd rather have. All the best to the injured lady. Hope you're OK and get well soon. RonnieSoak
  • Score: 0

4:17pm Fri 8 Feb 13

SotonLad says...

The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around! SotonLad
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Fri 8 Feb 13

sotonboy84 says...

espanuel wrote:
Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away.
Err, don't you think calling somebody a tw*t is a little excessive? They were merely airing a non-offensive observation, no different to yours by assuming the van driver would have climbed out the other door and the woman drivers airbag was cut away. If anybody's a tw*t, it's you mate.
[quote][p][bold]espanuel[/bold] wrote: Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away.[/p][/quote]Err, don't you think calling somebody a tw*t is a little excessive? They were merely airing a non-offensive observation, no different to yours by assuming the van driver would have climbed out the other door and the woman drivers airbag was cut away. If anybody's a tw*t, it's you mate. sotonboy84
  • Score: 0

4:49pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Tenderhearts wife says...

RonnieSoak wrote:
Hmm, zoomed in on the photo and the steering wheel boss appears to be intact, so no airbag deployment there it would seem. Can't tell if the side ones have gone off, but there doesn't seem to be any side impact damage that would cause this. So yes, removing the roof does appear at first sight to be a bit excessive.

However, NONE OF US HAVE ALL THE FACTS, as we're reading a short local newspaper article, not a full report from the emergency services. Unless anyone on this site has mystical powers allowing them to telepathically receive full details directly from the brains of all involved, I would respectfully suggest that we bear that in mind.

Two possible conversations:
1. "Good news and bad news Ms X: The roof was not removed from your car, so it will be like new after a couple of days in the body shop. However, on the down side, you're paralysed for life."
2. Er, do I really have to spell it out? I think you can see where this is going. I know which conversation I'd rather have.

All the best to the injured lady. Hope you're OK and get well soon.
loving this. :-)
[quote][p][bold]RonnieSoak[/bold] wrote: Hmm, zoomed in on the photo and the steering wheel boss appears to be intact, so no airbag deployment there it would seem. Can't tell if the side ones have gone off, but there doesn't seem to be any side impact damage that would cause this. So yes, removing the roof does appear at first sight to be a bit excessive. However, NONE OF US HAVE ALL THE FACTS, as we're reading a short local newspaper article, not a full report from the emergency services. Unless anyone on this site has mystical powers allowing them to telepathically receive full details directly from the brains of all involved, I would respectfully suggest that we bear that in mind. Two possible conversations: 1. "Good news and bad news Ms X: The roof was not removed from your car, so it will be like new after a couple of days in the body shop. However, on the down side, you're paralysed for life." 2. Er, do I really have to spell it out? I think you can see where this is going. I know which conversation I'd rather have. All the best to the injured lady. Hope you're OK and get well soon.[/p][/quote]loving this. :-) Tenderhearts wife
  • Score: 0

5:44pm Fri 8 Feb 13

MGRA says...

its a running joke at fire stations, they have pools of money on who can cut the roof off the most expensive car that month. Its been going on for the last few years....
its a running joke at fire stations, they have pools of money on who can cut the roof off the most expensive car that month. Its been going on for the last few years.... MGRA
  • Score: 0

5:51pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

It seems quite clear who's at fault by looking at the picture, the van driver either pulled out of the side road without looking or they decided to just chance it, then again, It's also possible the BMW was speeding but the van driver should have still been paying attention, no excuse not to see a car coming in either direction there as that is the highest point of that hill with a clear view down both sides, it's the junction where the Crows Nest used to be, when I used to walk that way to go fishing on the estuarine part of the Hamble river, I quite often saw cars and stuff pull out from that road without looking or stopping.
It seems quite clear who's at fault by looking at the picture, the van driver either pulled out of the side road without looking or they decided to just chance it, then again, It's also possible the BMW was speeding but the van driver should have still been paying attention, no excuse not to see a car coming in either direction there as that is the highest point of that hill with a clear view down both sides, it's the junction where the Crows Nest used to be, when I used to walk that way to go fishing on the estuarine part of the Hamble river, I quite often saw cars and stuff pull out from that road without looking or stopping. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

5:53pm Fri 8 Feb 13

100%HANTSBOY says...

SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
[quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident. 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Fri 8 Feb 13

mickey01 says...

whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ??

the hedge hog has the **** on the outside
whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ?? the hedge hog has the **** on the outside mickey01
  • Score: 0

6:24pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

6:25pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.[/p][/quote]That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

6:33pm Fri 8 Feb 13

MGRA says...

mickey01 wrote:
whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ??

the hedge hog has the **** on the outside
whats the difference between mickey01 and a dog sh1t ? The dog sh1t doesn't look or smell as bad !
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ?? the hedge hog has the **** on the outside[/p][/quote]whats the difference between mickey01 and a dog sh1t ? The dog sh1t doesn't look or smell as bad ! MGRA
  • Score: 0

7:43pm Fri 8 Feb 13

100%HANTSBOY says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.
Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.[/p][/quote]That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.[/p][/quote]Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink! 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

7:45pm Fri 8 Feb 13

100%HANTSBOY says...

mickey01 wrote:
whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ??

the hedge hog has the **** on the outside
I don't get it...why did the DE censor the word NEEDLES?
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: whats the difference between a b m w driver and a hedgehog ?? the hedge hog has the **** on the outside[/p][/quote]I don't get it...why did the DE censor the word NEEDLES? 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

7:57pm Fri 8 Feb 13

huckit P says...

espanuel wrote:
Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away.
Looks like the centre of the steering wheel is intact which means the air bag is still nicely curled up asleep. Apart from that they deflate almost immediately which means there's little need to remove it.
Hope the driver is ok and judging by the minimal damage (before HFRS got to it) I expect she will be home in bed tonight.
[quote][p][bold]espanuel[/bold] wrote: Hulla baloo. The lady driver had suspected spinal injuries. They will cut the top off as it is easier to get the person out of the car without further injury. TW*t. As for the airbag that would have been cut away.[/p][/quote]Looks like the centre of the steering wheel is intact which means the air bag is still nicely curled up asleep. Apart from that they deflate almost immediately which means there's little need to remove it. Hope the driver is ok and judging by the minimal damage (before HFRS got to it) I expect she will be home in bed tonight. huckit P
  • Score: 0

9:16pm Fri 8 Feb 13

YellowTaxi says...

Roofs get taken off for a couple of reasons;
- The casualty complains of neck pain on palpation of their cervical spine (even if you think they're lying you can't take that risk).
- The mechanism of the incident (i.e. rollovers are *technically* high risk and thus must be treated as such).

Also, health & safety restrictions now mean that the Fire Service don't have as many unwanted cars to train on so of course they're going to want to cut the roof off and use a non-critical incident as a training session.

So, if you want to slag someone off for these sorts of things then blame the "casualty" not the emergency services.
Roofs get taken off for a couple of reasons; - The casualty complains of neck pain on palpation of their cervical spine (even if you think they're lying you can't take that risk). - The mechanism of the incident (i.e. rollovers are *technically* high risk and thus must be treated as such). Also, health & safety restrictions now mean that the Fire Service don't have as many unwanted cars to train on so of course they're going to want to cut the roof off and use a non-critical incident as a training session. So, if you want to slag someone off for these sorts of things then blame the "casualty" not the emergency services. YellowTaxi
  • Score: 0

9:36pm Fri 8 Feb 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.
Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink!
Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim.
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.[/p][/quote]That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.[/p][/quote]Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink![/p][/quote]Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

9:36pm Fri 8 Feb 13

MGRA says...

YellowTaxi wrote:
Roofs get taken off for a couple of reasons;
- The casualty complains of neck pain on palpation of their cervical spine (even if you think they're lying you can't take that risk).
- The mechanism of the incident (i.e. rollovers are *technically* high risk and thus must be treated as such).

Also, health & safety restrictions now mean that the Fire Service don't have as many unwanted cars to train on so of course they're going to want to cut the roof off and use a non-critical incident as a training session.

So, if you want to slag someone off for these sorts of things then blame the "casualty" not the emergency services.
rubbish. Its just a simple scam. Just like the police getting back handers for getting stolen vehicles embounded before the owner gets the chance to recover it themselves... The Fire service charge for cutting, its as simple as that...and love taking the pi55 and wrecking perfectly good cars. Anyone too stupid to see this must have manure for their brains ( no offence ) spinal injury statistics in road collisions ae the proof of the pudding...
[quote][p][bold]YellowTaxi[/bold] wrote: Roofs get taken off for a couple of reasons; - The casualty complains of neck pain on palpation of their cervical spine (even if you think they're lying you can't take that risk). - The mechanism of the incident (i.e. rollovers are *technically* high risk and thus must be treated as such). Also, health & safety restrictions now mean that the Fire Service don't have as many unwanted cars to train on so of course they're going to want to cut the roof off and use a non-critical incident as a training session. So, if you want to slag someone off for these sorts of things then blame the "casualty" not the emergency services.[/p][/quote]rubbish. Its just a simple scam. Just like the police getting back handers for getting stolen vehicles embounded before the owner gets the chance to recover it themselves... The Fire service charge for cutting, its as simple as that...and love taking the pi55 and wrecking perfectly good cars. Anyone too stupid to see this must have manure for their brains ( no offence ) spinal injury statistics in road collisions ae the proof of the pudding... MGRA
  • Score: 0

10:01pm Fri 8 Feb 13

YellowTaxi says...

Ha ha.

Who exactly do they charge for it in your little conspiracy world then?

Considering it's the ambulance clinician on scene that decides whether the roof comes off or not, I think your "argument" is severely flawed......

Dope.
Ha ha. Who exactly do they charge for it in your little conspiracy world then? Considering it's the ambulance clinician on scene that decides whether the roof comes off or not, I think your "argument" is severely flawed...... Dope. YellowTaxi
  • Score: 0

12:51am Sat 9 Feb 13

andysaints007 says...

Nice to see all the usual 'experts' on here!! It appears the same people always have a better way of doing things than the professionals who are actually there and in the situation.
Some of you should just stay in that dip on the sofa you have created and wind your necks in - d*ckheads
Nice to see all the usual 'experts' on here!! It appears the same people always have a better way of doing things than the professionals who are actually there and in the situation. Some of you should just stay in that dip on the sofa you have created and wind your necks in - d*ckheads andysaints007
  • Score: 0

11:12am Sat 9 Feb 13

MGRA says...

YellowTaxi wrote:
Ha ha.

Who exactly do they charge for it in your little conspiracy world then?

Considering it's the ambulance clinician on scene that decides whether the roof comes off or not, I think your "argument" is severely flawed......

Dope.
if you had a brain you would realise that the fire service gets paid for every car cut, the insurance company has to pay up,,, just get off your lazy ar5e and do some proper research, then you can find out for yourself.
[quote][p][bold]YellowTaxi[/bold] wrote: Ha ha. Who exactly do they charge for it in your little conspiracy world then? Considering it's the ambulance clinician on scene that decides whether the roof comes off or not, I think your "argument" is severely flawed...... Dope.[/p][/quote]if you had a brain you would realise that the fire service gets paid for every car cut, the insurance company has to pay up,,, just get off your lazy ar5e and do some proper research, then you can find out for yourself. MGRA
  • Score: 0

2:21pm Sat 9 Feb 13

100%HANTSBOY says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.
Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink!
Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim.
Yeah,bit judgemental as usual Ginge!

Get a job and perhaps you'll understand what I mean.

It's called earning (that's earning) a living,paying my bills and supporting my family....and you!
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.[/p][/quote]That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.[/p][/quote]Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink![/p][/quote]Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim.[/p][/quote]Yeah,bit judgemental as usual Ginge! Get a job and perhaps you'll understand what I mean. It's called earning (that's earning) a living,paying my bills and supporting my family....and you! 100%HANTSBOY
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

100%HANTSBOY wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
100%HANTSBOY wrote:
SotonLad wrote:
The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around!
The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999.
A total waste of emergency services time and resources.
We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.
I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.
That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.
Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink!
Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim.
Yeah,bit judgemental as usual Ginge!

Get a job and perhaps you'll understand what I mean.

It's called earning (that's earning) a living,paying my bills and supporting my family....and you!
If you hadn't said it the way you did then I wouldn't have said that, also, I have had a job, just I wasn't lucky enough to find another before my 6 month contract with Groundwork Solent ended, if you know anyone looking for a gardener/groundskeep
er/conservationist then let me know, as that's what I did for 6 straight months, even in some of the harsh weather we had during that 6 months, obviously it has to be within REASONABLE distance of Thornhill.
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SotonLad[/bold] wrote: The other day I witnessed a collision - female got out and was walking around. Police called, she got back in. HAS and HFRS turned up and were about to take roof off until it was pointed out she had been walking around![/p][/quote]The same happened to a colleague of mine a few months ago,very low speed shunt into car in front at a roundabout,the occupants got out,helped direct traffic around the scene,got back in car waited for police,and ten minutes later,after complaining of neck injuries,the roof was removed and they were taken out on back boards! An absolute disgrace...compo seekers like this....it's on a par with people who make bogus/unnecessary calls to 999. A total waste of emergency services time and resources. We now have a policy at work where we are told to take video/photographic evidence at the scene of an accident.[/p][/quote]I'd suggest your boss goes a step further and also fitting the vehicles with on-board cameras, I mean you can get cheap HD ones these days and the small cost of them is nothing compared to a huge hike in insurance cost.[/p][/quote]That's if you use company vehicles where you work but I'd still suggest a dash cam for your personal car too.[/p][/quote]Fair point,but not always keen on boss knowing our movements! nudge nudge wink wink![/p][/quote]Hmm, yeah but depends on which you'd prefer, evidence in the event of a bogus claim that might otherwise get you the sack or keep your questionable movements and get the sack due to a bogus claim.[/p][/quote]Yeah,bit judgemental as usual Ginge! Get a job and perhaps you'll understand what I mean. It's called earning (that's earning) a living,paying my bills and supporting my family....and you![/p][/quote]If you hadn't said it the way you did then I wouldn't have said that, also, I have had a job, just I wasn't lucky enough to find another before my 6 month contract with Groundwork Solent ended, if you know anyone looking for a gardener/groundskeep er/conservationist then let me know, as that's what I did for 6 straight months, even in some of the harsh weather we had during that 6 months, obviously it has to be within REASONABLE distance of Thornhill. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree