UberEATS Motorcycle/Scooter Drivers Not Knowing Road Rules

p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 16:36
Last edited 16/07/2019 - 22:34 by 1 other user

Just wondering if everyone else has been noticing the particularly poor driving by UberEATS motorcycle/scooter riders? Usually seem to be overseas license with little understanding of Australian road rules, cutting and swerving everywhere and honestly just an accident waiting to happen.

For the record, I have both a car and motorcycle license and understand the rules for both cars and motorcycles.

The other day when I was in a carpark, I saw the following altercation between an UberEATS rider and a driver. I was stationary and waiting for the guy in front of me to reverse into a parking spot (on the left) when an UberEATS rider tried to cut in from my left and behind the reversing car. Obviously they were on a collision course, I beeped my horn so the driver would stop. The driver and UberEATS rider got into a physical altercation afterwards.

I think the issue is that these riders are riding like in Asia, where they can just cut in anywhere and just ride anywhere where there is space, there's little understanding of just waiting for the guy in front of you. I find that Australia tends to be very car centric, so as a rider, I find that if I try to act as much like a car as possible, it's generally less dangerous.

Anyway, complimentary MS paint diagram: http://i67.tinypic.com/ezoak8.png

Automotive

Related Stores

Uber Eats
Uber Eats
Marketplace

Comments

  • BunnyDownDog on 16/07/2019 - 16:55
    +4

    Are they allowed on the footpaths too? Haymarket area, Sydney.

    I'm not sure what the rules are, but they are quite annoying.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 22:03
      +6

      No, definitely not allowed on footpaths. I work in the CBD and I see all sorts of illegal behaviour - going down tram routes, pedestrian walkways, clearways, clearly places where cars and motorcyles are not allowed.

      • Bryanalves on 20/07/2019 - 01:37
        +2

        How does OP know the licences is from overseas?

        • Limitless Light on 20/07/2019 - 08:36
          +3

          I don't know but I once hit a dominos motorcycle delivery guy, straight up turned left onto the narrow road I was travelling down, he wasn't looking, he didn't stop, I had to slam on the brakes, ABS kicked in, still hit him, he stayed on the bike but my bumper got smashed up. I found it mildly interesting that when we exchanged details he had an Indian driver's license.

      • Zonty on 20/07/2019 - 09:15
        +3

        It's shows how desperate to make some money at cost of their life. They want to make maximum delivery in short time so they can afford their international student life style. Unfortunately. They have no patience because they thinking time is. Money and immigration not allow work more then 20 hours a week.
        I know because I deal every days with those dumbs because I works in hospitality and when I hand food them if take 2 min longer get engry and upset like end of world.

        • whooah1979 on 20/07/2019 - 10:59
          +2

          take 2 min longer

          2 min for every delivery adds up.

    • OneIdiot on 18/07/2019 - 06:53
      +12

      Problem is overseas students driving for delivery services like ubereats on overseas motorcycle licence. So clearly no idea of Australian road rules.

      • whooah1979 on 18/07/2019 - 21:42
        +6

        Try finding a natural born Australian that knows the road rules is just as difficult.

        • Miss B on 19/07/2019 - 17:32
          +4

          Yep, people are forever talking about having right of way, completely confused about how you would indicate to leave a roundabout, there are people who think you're allowed to go over the speed limit to pass another car, unaware cyclists are allowed to ride to abreast, indicating right when going straight at a roundabout.

          Then there's all of the entitled people who think they're above the law - speeding, running red lights, driving in emergency stopping lanes, talking on/playing with their phones, driving in the right hand lane on roads with speed limit over 80k/h, tailgating people, over .05, don't indicate when turning at a roundabout or when changing lanes.

        • Sammyboy on 19/07/2019 - 19:45
          +3

          Yes it's the Aussie way to not give way when doing a u-turn, try to run people of the road when lanes merge, tail gate and go through red lights in quiet areas and then get road rage when someone horns them for doing one of the above.

    • Nebargains on 18/07/2019 - 08:29
      +1

      This is one of my big issues with food delivery riders, is they often hang around the popular places to eat, waiting for orders to come through.

      The number of times I am walking down the footpath only to have one ride straight towards me is insane, they do it as if there is nothing wrong. Sure, maybe if he came to a stop, waits for pedestrians to walk past then proceeds slowly I wouldn't have an issue with it, but you have no idea where they are going or what there intention is because they shouldnt be riding on the footpath.

      • ankor on 18/07/2019 - 18:47
        +3

        That's insane. I'd take licence plates and complain to the police and council alike.

  • MaKa on 16/07/2019 - 16:59

    I feel like a similar case can be made for those food delivery riders on electric bikes. The ones that spring to mind are those yellow bikes or Pizza Hut. Putting these riders on the road or footpath with no great knowledge of road etiquette or rules is just a disaster waiting to happen.

  • elgrande on 16/07/2019 - 17:02
    +10

    Why do you drive a green car?

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 22:04

      Was just using random colours - most definitely don't drive a green car.

      • tomsco on 17/07/2019 - 09:25
        -5

        Please re-upload with a new paint job :p

        • Hirolol on 19/07/2019 - 21:45
          +1

          This is obviously a joke

      • Torzz on 18/07/2019 - 13:01
        +3

        Judging by your post… Bet your car isn't yellow brown or black

        • payton on 18/07/2019 - 13:18
          +1

          Obviously white colour!

  • nansnake on 16/07/2019 - 17:03
    +8

    Last weekend, I almost collected this delivery person riding a scooter. I had green light and this guy cut me from the opposite lane to turn to his right. I almost had a heart attack and honked the horn. Guess what, he didn't even flinch, like he had the right of way. Probably was using earphones too.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 22:04
      +2

      That's the sort of behaviour I'm talking about. Just complete ignorance of their surroundings and the assumption that others will not hit them.

  • djkelly69 on 16/07/2019 - 17:05
    -5

    Usually seem to be overseas license with little understanding of Australian road rules

    Just wondering how you can tell if someone has an Australian or overseas licence just by looking at them and seeing them drive/ride? If you want to say they usually appear to be of XX descent, then say it.

    • HighAndDry on 16/07/2019 - 17:10
      +24

      Mostly Asian or Indian? I think p1 was just trying to be civil/politically correct. We all know what they meant, and it's their ignorance of road rules that's really relevant, not their actual skin colour.

      • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:50
        +8

        Yeah, this is what I meant - I'm making a judgement on what sort of license they have based on many factors, the average demographic of an UberEATS rider, the way they ride and behave on the road, their general etiquette and knowledge of road rules, and yes, their appearance (not just race, but the way they act, speak, dress, look…etc.).

        Also, as someone with a motorcycle license, it's quite easy to tell who got their license properly and not. Unlike with car licenses, the process to get a motorcycle license is much tougher. You have to enroll in an accredited course, make sure you do all of the modules properly, and the ride test is actually much tougher (not just driving around slowly, like the car test is). That's why you might see reckless riders, but very few absolutely incompetent ones the way you do with drivers.

        Either way, this isn't a post about race or politics, it's about UberEATS drivers and their behaviour on the road that's an accident waiting to happen. Their race is irrelevant.

        • gimme on 18/07/2019 - 08:29

          You need a bike license for a moped?

          • ATangk on 18/07/2019 - 10:15
            +2

            @gimme: Yes. Anyone going through the AU licence scheme would not ride like the uber-eats. Unless you mean pedelecs (<250W allowed) or pure electric (<200W allowed), all other vehicles must be registered, and hence require a licence.

            • gimme on 18/07/2019 - 11:38
              -1

              @ATangk: Thought you can ride a small bile (under 100cc?) on a standard car license which most of these Uber bikes look like.

              • ATangk on 18/07/2019 - 12:18

                @gimme: Not allowed, at least not in NSW.

                • gimme on 18/07/2019 - 12:46
                  +2

                  @ATangk: yea my mistake, looks like things have changed since I got my bike license.

                  edit: ok this clears it up now - NSW seems to be different.

                  To ride a scooter over 50cc you need a motorcycle licence in all states, but in QLD, NT, SA and WA you can ride a scooter 50cc or less with a car licence.
                  To ride a 50cc scooter in NSW you have to get a 'conditional rider licence'.

      • dogboy on 17/07/2019 - 02:15
        -4

        Are we the only country that splits asians into Asians and Indians? Everywhere else I travel, people just refer to both as Asians.

          • lltravel on 18/07/2019 - 08:25
            +18

            @OneIdiot: India is part of Asia.

            The have Indians in nepal that look Asian but speak fluent hindi \ tamil.

            Clearly you haven't left the country.

          • rambao9 on 18/07/2019 - 08:58
            +14

            @OneIdiot: Username checks out

          • giventofly on 20/07/2019 - 11:48

            @OneIdiot: Facepalm.

        • SydStrand on 18/07/2019 - 21:47
          +3

          Americans split 'Asians' and 'Indians' too. Brits tend to use Asian to refer to the subcontinent, and Oriental to East Asians.

          • whooah1979 on 18/07/2019 - 22:04

            @SydStrand: Just call them Caucasian. That may cover the whole lot (exc SEA).

            • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2019 - 14:44
              +1

              @whooah1979: Just call them humans, covers everyone :)

      • Sammyboy on 19/07/2019 - 20:00

        Haha so true.

        I think there should be compulsory retesting for licences for people from countries where it is known you can buy a licence off the net or bribe an official at the counter. For example, Chinese licence isn't recognised here, so the people from mainland China go to Hong Kong and buy the licence even off sites like Taobao supposedly. So they end up with a HK licence which is then recognised here.

  • HighAndDry on 16/07/2019 - 17:09
    +11

    I'm pretty surprised there haven't been a spate of Uber rider deaths from just how many times I've had to brake, or swerve, or whatever suddenly to avoid running one of them over.

    But on the other hand, the very real risk of accidents and injuries aside (which to be honest, is mostly to them considering the pretty dinky looking motorised scooters they mostly ride), they're at least out doing work to support themselves instead of just living off the dole, probably being paid pennies for a pretty thankless job. So eh. I try to cut them some slack when I'm not swearing at them from behind the wheel.

    • elgrande on 16/07/2019 - 17:57
      +1

      Welcome back..!

      • HighAndDry on 16/07/2019 - 18:04

        Thanks =D

        • payton on 16/07/2019 - 18:29
          +1

          Glad you're back m8
          /thumbs

          • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 09:54

            @payton: Cheers. (No idea why anyone would neg this. Seriously - haven't ppl got better (worse?) things to use them on?)

            • payton on 17/07/2019 - 10:16

              @HighAndDry: jokes on them, neg votes are in limited supply per day =)

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:52
      +1

      I agree, but I think it combines some of the worst traits that tend to cause accidents. Generally, it seems that the two most annoying traits on the road are unpredictability and not knowing where one is going. UberEATS riders tend to have both - they are always trying to go into any space they can, even if it's dangerous and they generally are too busy looking at their phone because they don't know the roads.

      which to be honest, is mostly to them considering the pretty dinky looking motorised scooters they mostly ride

      Yeah, but when they start cutting onto footpaths and not respecting pedestrian crossings, it becomes very dangerous to other people too.

      • db87 on 18/07/2019 - 13:56
        +1

        Biggest thing I've noticed is lack of indicators plus the use of half meter or so between parked cars and moving traffic, WHILST looking at their phone for directions. They move off with traffic or just dart out of parked spaces from a stand still and cruise along these tiny spaces without the slightest care or regard for anybody else around them or the traffic/relevant speed conditions.

        I'm equally surprised that there hasn't been more reported accidents or even deaths, they're dodging bullets the way they ride. Also, the closer to the cbd you get, the more prevelant it is.

        Victoria here and rider myself and I'm shocked and appalled at what they're being allowed to get away with. As if motorcycle riders didn't already have a hard time being accepted and recognised (in Victoria at least).

        An extension to this topic is the uber car drivers skill level. At least when in taxis, they're bright yellow and identifiable. Uber vehicles need some sort of ID themselves if you ask me (the front window sticker is near on useless from the side/behind) so that you can drive/ride accordingly. I know I take extra care when riding near taxis given how many times I've nearly been taken out by them cutting across lanes to pickup some silly pedestrian waving them down. This has just turned into a guessing game with uber vehicles.

        • IgG on 19/07/2019 - 01:46
          +1

          UberEats Cyclist here and your comment is 100% true, especially the need for stickers on the backs of cars. The amount of times I've nearly been knocked of my bike by the stupid scooters as well is ridiculous. Puts bogans in commodores to shame!

          Surprisingly, I tend to be given a heap more space and get less aggression with my UberEats backpack on as compared to regular riding / commuting. Which is odd as I'm certainly slower and take up more space.

          • p1 ama on 21/07/2019 - 02:18
            +1

            @IgG:

            Surprisingly, I tend to be given a heap more space and get less aggression with my UberEats backpack on as compared to regular riding / commuting.

            Do you usually wear lycra when commuting or riding regularly? My cyclist friends tell me that if you substitute lycra for normal clothes, you tend to get less hate.

    • geoffs87 on 18/07/2019 - 07:35
      +2

      Someone had a really good theory on this sort of behaviour, Darwin I think.

    • AustriaBargain on 19/07/2019 - 02:19
      +2

      Besides, they are usually bringing me food so I cannot complain.

  • salbee28 on 16/07/2019 - 17:10
    +5

    This is a common topic of discussion between friends & I, especially the ones who also ride motorbikes. This type of riding makes a lot of car drivers dislike other motorcyclists as well, even when they ride to the rules. It's incredibly frustrating & i have lost count of the number of times I have almost been involved in an incident with these type of riders because of their poor riding skills.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:54
      +4

      It's incredibly frustrating & i have lost count of the number of times I have almost been involved in an incident with these type of riders because of their poor riding skills.

      I agree - one of the things I like is the stringent requirements to get a motorcycle license. It means that most riders are good and they have a good understanding of how to be safe on the road (given how dangerous it is to ride). Some of these idiotic UberEATS riders do all the things that everyone hates on the road.

      • salbee28 on 17/07/2019 - 10:31
        +5

        I have always been in favour of how stringent the motorcycle license course is, I think unfortunately the major problem with these riders is riding on international licenses who haven't had to do the mandatory 2 day course (in VIC at least) to obtain an Australian license.

        I have long said that anyone driving on an international license should have to re-take a driving test in Australia to get their license converted, just because there is so much variance on how people drive in different countries & to ensure they know the road rules here, or maybe they are just really terrible drivers either way 🤷🏼‍♀️

        • OneIdiot on 18/07/2019 - 07:03
          +3

          To make matters worse, overseas students on temporary visas, don't even have to complete the mandatory 2 day course they could just ride on the overseas licence by default for as long as long as they have the student visa.

          The government should definitely change rules for at least overseas motorcycle licence holders either temporary resident or permanent.

        • geoffs87 on 18/07/2019 - 07:37
          -1

          I think the issue is, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks… just because they do the mandatory training/licensing - will they improve? Maybe… maybe not, but given their amount of time spent on the bike, they’re probably not going to fail the closed course p’s test either.

  • EFC94 on 16/07/2019 - 17:40
    +1

    Natural selection. If they want to ride dangerously outside of the appropriate rules then it ain't my problem if they get hit.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:55

      Yeah, but when you have them going onto footpaths and disobeying pedestrian crossings, it becomes a public hazard.

  • tsunamisurfer on 16/07/2019 - 18:10
    -2

    You beeped and saved the UberEats life.

    I would have brought out the popcorn.

  • PandaExpress on 16/07/2019 - 19:16
    +4

    Isn't it true for most delivery drivers around the world, specially those on motorcycles or scooters? When you pay per delivery this kind of behavior is incentivized.

    • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 10:22

      If that's offered as an excuse, it's a bit of a cop out. You'd think avoiding a trip to the hospital would be enough incentive to drive/ride safely. Or that avoiding a fine/liability for a crash would be incentive too.

      We don't say: "When everything costs money, it incentivises bank robbers…"

      • Hardlyworkin on 19/07/2019 - 17:28
        +2

        If I were an international student trying to stay afloat in Australia, I'd probably be riding around like a madman too. When I was living in the UK I came very close to signing up to some of those medical trials. People in need of money don't make the rational decisions the rest of us make.

        • HighAndDry on 19/07/2019 - 17:32
          +1

          Oh yeah definitely. Read my other comment where I note they're at least doing something to support themselves financially instead of mooching off others.

          But if someone's in that kind of situation, if it's not riding recklessly for Ubereats, it'd likely be something else equally ill-advised.

    • THICKnSLOW on 20/07/2019 - 05:01

      Nail firmly hit bang on dead centre on the head PandaExpress.

      Fact of life motorbikes and scooters are more agile in traffic and better acceleration than a 1000+kg vehicle, more cost effective to operate, lower maintenance costs etc etc etc.

      Blame Uber deliveroo Menulog for convenience food. Perhaps they should carry additional insurance policy to cover nuisance delivery personnel.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:57
      +6

      I surely hope you're not joking. I was behind that driver and 100% knew what he was doing and I stopped to wait for him to get into the spot like any normal person. The UberEATS rider proceeded to pass me on my left (which is illegal on a road, I don't know about carparks) with no awareness of what's actually going on.

        • tranter on 17/07/2019 - 07:19
          +1

          I have noticed this too, far more people reverse park these days. In some situations I can see the advantage but many times it puzzles me as to why they do it. For example in shopping centre car parks it's easier to load your shopping in the back if you park nose-first.

          • Quantumcat on 17/07/2019 - 09:38

            @tranter: What brad1-8tsi said, plus with reverse cameras it can be way easier to reverse park

            • tranter on 17/07/2019 - 12:35

              @Quantumcat: I've heard people say that before, that it's safer. Well maybe it is, I don't know. Is there any studies to show that it is in fact safer?

              What I do know is that it takes longer overall. Very rarely do I see somebody completing the park in one go. More often than not it's at least an extra move forward then back to get the car aligned properly in the parking space.

              • coin saver on 17/07/2019 - 16:35

                @tranter: "More often than not it's at least an extra move forward then back to get the car aligned properly in the parking space" the cars turning circle improves when it is in reverse.

          • ATangk on 18/07/2019 - 10:17
            +1

            @tranter: Cars are getting bigger and longer, so it is harder to nose in first without having to reverse and adjust. Reversing in is a 1 hit wonder and lets you get out so much easier.

        • brad1-8tsi on 17/07/2019 - 08:21
          +17

          You reverse into a parking spot so that it's safer to leave the spot.

          I'd suggest that if it's causing so much angst then you are following to close to the car in front.

        • p1 ama on 17/07/2019 - 14:58
          +12

          I disagree wholeheartedly with what you've written. The most dangerous move in a carpark is reversing out of a parking spot, because it's the only time where you're potentially reversing into oncoming traffic. Reverse parking into a spot makes it much less likely to have an accident.

          Either way, your argument about delays is basically invalid. So many times I've been behind someone who's waiting for someone else to reverse out of a parking spot so they can get in and the person reversing takes 5 goes to get out. I don't think what you're saying is a fair assessment. You have to reverse at some point, either to get in or to get out.

          Reverse parking like this is a fairly modern phenomenon. Decades ago, one would never do this unless required to park that way by law. I know the downvotes will be primarily from those that drive this way themselves.

          Yes, but decades ago, you also didn't have SUVs which basically block any view you have if you've put your nose in first. I used to drive an MX-5, it's impossible to see traffic if you're sandwiched between two SUVs. The only way to see traffic when exiting a parking spot would be to park the boot in so I can have a clear view.

          A bit like whether your toilet paper should hang at the front or against the wall — you explain the advantages but they insist on doing it their way.

          There's advantages and disadvantages both ways. There are situations and places where it's better to put nose in, some where it's better to put boot in. It doesn't have to be an ideological thing. Even if you always put nose in, there are going to be other people who want to put boot in. I've never had any issues with it, seems like you've had a few bad experiences and are generalising.

          • endotherm on 17/07/2019 - 17:42
            -6

            @p1 ama: As predicted, there are supporters for and against. However I am not convinced by the arguments for backing in. I find it to be selfish and inconsiderate to other users. I feel that the priority of using the road is for movement of vehicles and not to be held up. The road rules for the most part encourage this movement.

            Being caught behind someone waiting to drive into a spot isn't as intrusive as you just come to a stop and wait. Having someone backing up into the space you occupy moves the onus on to you to solve their problem and take risks on their behalf. That should not be required. The road rules do not require you to give way to reversing vehicles.

            I couldn't care less if someone chooses to back in if there is no other traffic. However they tend to do it regardless of the amount of traffic behind them. Maybe the car parks I frequent are busier than most and there is always busy cross-traffic. I'm not following too close either. It's just by the time I stop, I'm still at least a car length behind, but I'm across the spot they want.

            The advantage of driving nose-in is that you can generally get in in one go, stop and wait for cross-traffic to clear, then straighten up if necessary. Only the one vehicle potentially inconvenienced. Out of the flow of traffic with minimal impact and delays. By backing in, half a dozen waiting behind are inconvenienced and have to reverse/overtake to get out of the way. It has to happen now, regardless of the conditions. Again, selfish and inconsiderate.

            When leaving, it is argued it is safer to drive straight out. Why? Was it magically safer when you backed in? Sure, you can shoot off when there is a gap and have minimal impact on the traffic flow (just as much impact as driving nose-in would.

            The advantage (to the greater number of people) of reversing out is that you are required to give way to other traffic. You don't commence the maneuver if there are other vehicles in the vicinity. When it is clear you can complete your departure without holding anyone up, or requiring them to move now. You are required to wait, until everyone else is clear. This is in line with the road rules philosophy of keeping traffic moving. Of course conditions or circumstances mandate that you have to take 4 or 5 goes at getting out, usually that is true of inexperienced drivers, or cramped conditions etc. But that also happens whether you are a nose-in or reverser.

            One reverse and one forward motion is required for each method, neither is safer or more dangerous than the other. However, when you re-write the road rules to suit yourself and shift the responsibility of who has to give way, or if it is inconvenient, that makes you selfish and inconsiderate. Nose-in parking is hands-down the most considerate method, and follows the spirit of the law. Reverse/angle parking is only mandated on wide streets where there is an additional lane or sufficient space for the traffic to continue to flow, therefore no obstruction occurs. Trying to transpose that method to a shopping centre car park or narrow road is counter-productive. In fact it is required by law to drive in and drive out of a centre of the road parking bay as seen in the city of Melbourne for example. Reversing from a bay is an offence.

            Those are my reasons for coming to my conclusion. There are more pros to the nose-in method and more cons for the reverse-in. I've not heard a convincing argument why reverse-in isn't shifting the onus to give-way or that it isn't an inconsiderate time-consuming maneuver. It creates unique problems that aren't present with the other method.

            P.S. On the question of hanging toilet paper:
            OVERHANG PROS:

            • you can see the end of the sheet and find it quickly and safely
            • it is presented to you and is closer

            CONS:
            none that I can think of

            UNDERHANG PROS:

            • flat against the wall it is allegedly tidier and you don't trip over it [sarcasm](however I don't see too many loose ends on overhang)

            nothing really makes it a superior method

            CONS:

            • you can't see the next sheet, or it requires effort to spin the roll to "get your bearings"
            • you have to fish your fingers blindly behind the roll to feel for the end of the sheet — more effort required
            • you might catch a screw head or splinter under your finger nail as you are fumbling in the dark so close to the wall
            • there might be something objectionable stuck between the roll and the wall, e.g. a cockroach or waste left from a previous user.
            • once you tear off a length you have to go through the same objectionable procedure again and again

            In this case I can see good arguments for overhang and good arguments against underhang. Yet people will argue blindly that the other method is better, without coming up with a list to support their view. It is usually a case of Ford vs Holden, or Telstra vs Optus — people will defend their decision to use one over the other, regardless of whether or not it is the best choice.

            • p1 ama on 17/07/2019 - 20:58
              +1

              @endotherm: I think you're confounding two separate issues here. Most of the issues you're raising with putting a boot in is that people take a long time to do it (most notably that people take several goes). This is not an issue with reverse parking as it is with people being incompetent drivers. I can put my nose or my boot in almost equally quickly.

              Yes, sure, it might be holding up traffic, but it's extreme to say that it's selfish and/or inconsiderate given the small amounts of time involved and the low level of danger involved in either manouvre.

              When leaving, it is argued it is safer to drive straight out. Why? Was it magically safer when you backed in? Sure, you can shoot off when there is a gap and have minimal impact on the traffic flow (just as much impact as driving nose-in would.

              You haven't really addressed my major point which is that, in some smaller/lower slung cars, it's impossible to see anything when you're nose in sandwiched between two SUVs.

              In fact it is required by law to drive in and drive out of a centre of the road parking bay as seen in the city of Melbourne for example. Reversing from a bay is an offence.

              This doesn't support your point. This actually supports the counter point - that when possible you should avoid reversing out of a spot, which is the most dangerous move as you're reversing onto oncoming traffic.

              Either way, this is a dumb argument. If you dislike people reversing into a parking spot then you can buy a block of land and develop a car park then ban people reversing in. Until then, people are gonna do it regardless of what you think about it. Better to just let it go than try and fight a crusade over a minor issue.

              • endotherm on 18/07/2019 - 02:00
                -5

                @p1 ama:

                Most of the issues you're raising with putting a boot in is that people take a long time to do it

                No, that's not the issue at all. They can take all the time they like. They can reverse to their hearts content. It's just that they shouldn't do it when there is other traffic around. That is when it becomes inconsiderate. The issue I have is that they want to use some of the road behind them that they have no right to, that I am using to drive forward, to complete the move. The fact that I am expected to get out of their way for them (failing to honor their obligation to give way to me) makes it a selfish act. Becoming annoyed for shifting the onus to me is not an extreme view. If I can't back up for them, because I am blocked by the guy behind, whose fault is it that we are all stuck there for much longer than necessary, with nobody being able to get to where they are going? This is how traffic flow is interrupted and why people are late and road rage is born. The front of my car would beg to argue with you regarding the "low level of danger involved".

                You haven't really addressed my major point …

                Not sure why you quoted the next bit, it has nothing to do with your question. Sure, if I were sandwiched between vehicles I couldn't see through or past, I'd need to inch out very cautiously until I had sufficient view to determine there was nothing coming. If there were, I could drive forward again and get out of the way, (and fortunately I'd be driving forward so I can do it quickly and safely, according to your argument). However the same situation applies to a vehicle driving forward out of the bay — your view is still obstructed (admittedly not as much), you still have to inch forward to see what's coming (don't forget the hulking great engine section at the front that you need to put into the line of traffic before your window is clear to see into the lane). Implying that it is primarily an issue for smaller/low slung cars is irrelevant, it applies to any size car if your view is blocked by a truck/van parked next to you. Invariably the vehicles I see often doing the move and causing the most inconvenience seem to be large 4x4 SUV types.

                This doesn't support your point.

                It does, but you missed it. The law exists so that you don't stop in the line of traffic, then try to back in, holding up fast flowing city traffic. It also applies when you are leaving so that you don't hold up traffic to complete a reverse-out maneuver. The fact that you are required to drive out forward is a bonus. You still have to give way. If you tried a reverse-out stunt, you'd have someone so far up your clacker that it would be impossible to find a gap to do it.

                Your arguments all seem to revolve around finding good reasons for driving forward while conveniently ignoring the issues around the reverse move, which is my major point. I'm not disagreeing that driving forward is preferable to reversing.

                Until then, people are gonna do it regardless of what you think about it.

                Again, I don't care if people want to do that. I have an issue with them doing it when there is other traffic around. What part of the fact they are required to give way when reversing, not everyone else, are you having a problem understanding? If they are going to do it no matter what and complete their park and make it my problem, contrary to law, then I have a problem with that. Once they realize there is traffic behind them and they have mistimed their move, they should abandon it and drive forward and try again somewhere else where there isn't traffic.

                let it go than try and fight a crusade over a minor issue

                Nice way to dismiss my genuine concern over a legitimate issue of having someone reverse when unsafe in contravention of the law. How would you feel if I dismissed your "insignificant" concerns of a bike passing on the left in a car park and called that a minor issue?

                Let me boil all of this down. It is nothing to do with the actual parking and leaving while within the bay. There are arguments that one method is better/safer than the other, but the arguments don't support it. They are pretty equal. Supporters like saying it makes driving out much easier and quicker, but conveniently ignore the disruption caused getting in there. It's a self-centered view — I am going to back in there now and screw everyone else they can get out of my way and wait. I can leave quickly when I want. THAT is my issue. On the other hand, drive-in parking is more considerate and beneficial to others — when entering the bay I'm out of the traffic flow quickly with minimal to no disruption. I don't/can't leave until there is no approaching traffic and clear. A "greater good" view.

                • p1 ama on 18/07/2019 - 11:16
                  +3

                  @endotherm:

                  This is how traffic flow is interrupted and why people are late and road rage is born. The front of my car would beg to argue with you regarding the "low level of danger involved".

                  You are late because you didn't leave early enough. You road rage because you entitled. The front of your car does not argue or have any emotions. You didn't die, you couldn't have died, therefore it is by definition not dangerous (where danger is the possibility of injury or death).

                  I have an issue with them doing it when there is other traffic around. What part of the fact they are required to give way when reversing, not everyone else, are you having a problem understanding?

                  Great, you have an issue. What are you gonna do when someone does that? Fight them? Again it goes back to my original point, there are going to be people who reverse park, why get worked up about it?

                  How would you feel if I dismissed your "insignificant" concerns of a bike passing on the left in a car park and called that a minor issue?

                  I honestly wouldn't care very much. You seem to be road raging even when not on the road.

                  I am going to back in there now and screw everyone else they can get out of my way and wait. I can leave quickly when I want. THAT is my issue.

                  Again, people are gonna be selfish. What are you gonna do? Fight them?

                  • endotherm on 18/07/2019 - 18:45
                    -3

                    @p1 ama: You know nothing about me, your accusations, insults and conclusions are ridiculous and without merit. A poor argument and worse debater.

                    • p1 ama on 18/07/2019 - 22:50
                      +1

                      @endotherm:

                      You know nothing about me, your accusations, insults and conclusions are ridiculous and without merit. A poor argument and worse debater.

                      You still haven't answered my question. What would you do if you saw someone reverse parking?

        • RyanMK on 17/07/2019 - 18:26
          +3

          The problem here is that they go past the empty car spot before indicating. When I reverse park, I usually signal as I approach the spot, slow down to further highlight my intention to park to the car behind, before moving forward and reversing in.

          I don't see one way being better or saving more time than the other. Even if we assume you are correct that a car reversing in takes more time to park, it will take less time to move out of the car park and go on it's merry way. More often that not, cars who are reversing out of their carpark are reversing at a very slow speed because they can't see oncoming traffic from the driver's position, especially if there are cars parked on either side. On top of that, they might need to manouver two or three times to get the right angle if it's a tight/small parking area.

          • endotherm on 17/07/2019 - 19:06
            -6

            @RyanMK: I thank you for being more considerate than most. However, if you put yourself in the position of the person behind you, how does he know whether you are just stopping because there is an obstruction, or pulling to the side due to a breakdown, or indicating to go into a bay forward of your position? They have no idea you are intending to reverse, until such time you put it in reverse and activate your reversing light. Unfortunately we don't have reversing "indicators" announcing your intention of going into reverse.

            I don't agree that being able to drive straight out makes up for the time lost backing in. I know I can pull in to a bay to get out of the line of traffic in exactly the same time a car can drive out (and I wait until the traffic is clear before maneuvering to get the right angle if necessary — no interference to traffic). The problem is that reversing in when there is traffic behind means that it invariably causes ALL cars to be delayed, as everyone has to stop and wait until the maneuver is completed. Driving in without stopping is immediate and does not have such a flow-on effect. The situation is severely aggravated when the cars behind have come to a stop in the space that you require to reverse in to. Now there is severe disruption to smooth traffic flow. When driving out, you still have to wait for a gap in the traffic flow and give way to oncoming vehicles. Reversing out, I have to do the same thing, and I'm not holding anyone up because I'm waiting for a gap! I don't cut anyone off or delay them because I am required to give way.

            I honestly don't care what method you use, it is all about what is the minimum disruption you can cause. And I can't see how the reverse-in method is faster overall, safer or better than any other system, as it is the least conducive to normal traffic flow. If there are cars behind, it will cause delays.

            • tranter on 17/07/2019 - 20:34
              +1

              @endotherm: Reversing parking can also become a potentially more dangerous situation if impatient drivers behind try to overtake as you're performing the manoeuvre.

              I can see the advantages and disadvantages of both parking methods depending on the situation. I'm not convinced reverse parking is inherently safer.

        • geoffs87 on 18/07/2019 - 07:42

          What about reverse parallel parking… can’t really nose into them… so often here in Sydney I have my indicator on, approaching a park, slowly, and sure enough some stupid driver is blocking the park.

          My number 1 driving rule (after safety and road rules of course) is show courtesy on the road, less accidents will occur, and everyone would be happy!

  • whooah1979 on 16/07/2019 - 20:09
    +2

    the guy in front of me to reverse into a parking spot

    Drivers that are reversing are required to give way to pedestrians and other vehicles.

    • Lexan on 16/07/2019 - 21:03
      -1

      That's impossible to park if you have to give way to other vehicles.

    • p1 ama on 16/07/2019 - 21:59
      +6

      The police ended up coming because of the physical altercation. I gave them some verbal evidence. They were in agreement that what the UberEATS rider did was completely idiotic.

      • whooah1979 on 17/07/2019 - 05:40
        +1

        We see drivers and riders from all walks of life behaving badly on the road every day. It's just how it is when it comes to living in the big cities.

        • tranter on 17/07/2019 - 07:33

          Yeah I think ubereats drivers are down the list a bit. My other half nearly got wiped out by a garbage truck on the way to work this morning. There's a lot of dangerous behavior on the road from so many quarters.

        • Ozbargainite on 17/07/2019 - 14:09

          Part and parcel?

    • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 10:23
      +4

      But in a single-lane of traffic, a scooter shouldn't be trying to get around cars at all. I'm pretty sure lane-filtering doesn't apply here.

  • brad1-8tsi on 17/07/2019 - 08:30
    +1

    I think food delivery riders are fully aware of the road rules and choose to ignore them.

    The parent company should take some responsibility as the riders breach so many sections of the WHS Act and the parent company is the PCBU.

    • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 10:24

      If the riders know the law and are wilfully ignoring them, what can the parent company do? It's not as if they can penalise them (at all) more than the police already can.

      • brad1-8tsi on 17/07/2019 - 13:08

        Where I work the contractors can have their contract terminated or the particular individual is banned from site if their poor driving is linked to one of our projects. As a PCBU we are responsible for the actions of who we hire while they are doing work for us.

        If it's an employee and they continually break the rules of the road then they are sent for ongoing education / training followed by temporary ban from using a work vehicle followed by an extended ban. This then becomes a major pain for everyone else and the usual outcome is they stop making us look bad while in a company vehicle or they leave.

        Even the simple fact that they are riding at night with insufficient PPE, that the reflective tape on their storage containers is worn out and the bicycles and motorcycles often have defects is a breach and the PCBU should be ensuring they take all reasonably practical steps to ensure their contractors are working safely.

        • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 13:23

          Except who has ever reported an Ubereats or Deliveroo or other rider/driver? I know I haven't. Because of how they work (no centralised HQ, no physical interaction, etc - there's a really high level of plausible deniability for breaches of traffic regs and WHS regs).

          • Ozbargainite on 17/07/2019 - 14:22
            -1

            @HighAndDry: 'What consumers may not know is that restaurant owners have to sign up to some dubious contract terms if they want Uber Eats to deliver meals for them.

            One of these terms is: "You acknowledge … Uber is a technology services provider … [which does not] provide any delivery or logistics services."

            https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-22/uber-eats-criticis…

            Uber and the internet in general were a mistake.
            The sooner Skynet becomes self aware the better.

            • HighAndDry on 17/07/2019 - 15:10

              @Ozbargainite:

              if they want Uber Eats to deliver meals for them.

              "If". Free country. Used to be a restaurant would have its own staff deliver, don't see why that's not still possible.

    • Cluster on 18/07/2019 - 15:31
      +2

      It's Uber. It's above the law. The drivers aren't employees and they aren't contractors, depending on which is most convenient for the corporation at the given time.

  • [Deactivated] on 17/07/2019 - 09:16

    Lane splitting on single lane roads, using right or left turn lanes to filter, I turn at traffic lights. Those are the major ones that will cause them injuries cause I can’t see/not expecting it.

  • Seraphin7 on 18/07/2019 - 09:09
    -5

    Basically the sort of behaviour you expect from motorcycle/scooter riders regardless of whether they're delivering food or not.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join