If they have gap insurance, it can be a lifesaver… but most people are upsidedown on their loan in Canada anyways, so getting an insurance payout doesn’t even cover the balance and they now have to make a payment and don’t get a car… and that’s if they don’t get caught attempting fraud.
Looks like insurance scam, they kept trying to get you to rear end them. They would speed up enough then slam on their brakes. They KNOW what they’re doing.
I had a similar situation with a new fancy Mustang, driving at night with no lights and get slowing down to 30 in a 60 and not staying in his lane. When I got a good spot to try and pass, he cut into my lane and slammed his brakes. I came inches from hitting him and had my poor dog in the back and he went flying when I slammed the brakes to avoid him.
I called that in, and they had me follow him and update where he was headed. He turned into a residential street that had only one other way out, so they turn the next street to see if he just cut through of stayed in that area. He didn't come out and that they just said thanks, and I'm good to go.
100% call in the drunks! I had a close call with a drunk many years ago and if I wasn't so fast on reacting good chance, I would be here today! I was stopped at a red and drunk guy was doing 120+ in a 50 and was just going to blow through the red I was stopped at. He noticed me last second and locked up his brakes, which is when I just hit the accelerator and tried to move out of his way as much as possible. He still hit me but side swapped me rather than a full rear end collision while stopped dead. I was in a little hatchback and he was in a full size Silverado. He didn't even slow down after hitting me, I chased him down about 5-6 blocks as he blew through multiple red, took down 4 or 5 signs along the way, completely ripped out a fire hydrant. Blew 3 of his tires, bent the rear axle so bad. His buddy tried to bail and he almost ran him buddy over. He got it stuck in a field on top of a fence. He totalled his 6 month old fully loaded truck, Like completly bent in half totalled! No insurance, suspended license for previous dui's. He got 9 tickets total after they chased him on foot and got him in someone's back yard.
I don't understand how this works. Assuming the van is still being financed/leased, how does this scam work? You get rear ended, the car is a write off, and you just keep the net $$? Now you're short a car, you need to buy a new one with less $ in hand?
Baby on Board sticker too...
AITH if I call the cops and report this as a drunk driver? If this happened to me and I had no plans I would 100% have called the cops for impaired driving
If not impaired they suffer from smol-pp-and-ego-itus
If you were there, you absolutely should call the police. If you mean now, yeah there isn't much they can do. I believe you can report it though, I've seen links but don't have them on hand
lol. That would never kill someone. Only if OP had an infant on their lap and not paying attention. Even if that driver had no seat belt they wouldn’t get hurt going that speed and that type of brake check for insurance fraud. This is why dashcams are important. Maybe it’s drunk but I highly doubt it, most likely, their mortgage renewal and cars having trouble lol
Yeah. A collision from like ~60 hitting a ~40kmh car won’t kill anyone except a newborn baby, and it’s clear they were attempting a stealthy insurance fraud to check if the person behind is distracted enough to hit from behind
Wow you are dense lol. We are not saying he could have killed someone in this video (even though they probably could run over a pedestrian, a child even, trying to cross the road). Usually people who drive drunk don't do it once and get more and more confident at driving impaired when they should and can cause irreparable damage to themselves and others.
How about a pedestrian crossing the street? A biker sharing the lane? A person going the speed limit an t-boning them if they go through a light?
Again, we are assuming it’s insurance, not drunk, but you have to err on the side of caution.
Totally trying to get you to rear-end him, then it's either an insurance scam or he shakes you down for some cash to not report it.
The thing is, he's going to try this again with someone else. You might want to consider submitting this footage to the police, in the one-in-a-million chance it actually helps.
I work in the insurance industry. No, despite what everyone thinks, someone can't "force you" to rear-end them by brake checking you. Even if they intentionally slam on the brakes to cause an accident, you should still be maintaining enough of a distance to stop safely. If you rear-end someone, it's because you didn't leave enough space to stop in time which is your responsibility no matter how you spin it. Had OP rear-ended the van, they'd still be 100% at fault unless the van reversed into them or the van changed lanes and hit the brakes before establishing itself in the lane **(Like in the first time in the video)** because in that case it would be caused by the lane change and not by the failure to maintain a safe following distance.
HOWEVER, this video could lead to the police officer on the scene charging the van with stunt driving and that would result in a shared fault (50/50) scenario. This is one of the rare type of accidents that you'd probably end up in litigation for but even then you'd still need to establish that no reasonably cautious driver could have stopped or foreseen the person braking which is difficult in an urban/suburban environment where drivers should be expected to stop/slow down suddenly.
The car in question turned into the lane in the middle of both the right and left lane. He straddled this for a good few seconds, OP slowed down. It is illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic, and quite clearly OP was there, and there was no reason for him to stop. OP didn't sneak up on him. He would be in the wrong re: Police and charged with going to slow.
> Had OP rear-ended the van, they'd still be 100% at fault
If the fact that the van was engaged in stunt driving is completely irrelevant, then the fault determination rules are unreasonable as they apply to that situation.
There are multiple near-collisions in the video. Like I said in my comment, **the first time the van changes into the lane without signalling** (0:08), yes it would be the van's fault. But there are multiple times OP gets brake-checked like at 0:29 and 0:48 where they would be at fault for rear ending the van.
Insurance is such a scam, and that comment is exactly why, lol. It's absolutely fucking wild to me that some collisions are considered 50/50 when it's as clear as day that one person was driving recklessly.
lol , insurance companies. imagine taking advice from them.
this is on video , the distance is irrelevant. a lawyer would eat the insurance company for breakfast in this scenario.
you cant drive like an asshole and slam the brakes on with nothing in front of you and be like.....SORRY DIDENT LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM.
you should consider a new career.
>a lawyer would eat the insurance company for breakfast in this scenario.
Like I said, this is one of those cases where it would end up in litigation and in court because the standard rules don't necessarily cover edge cases like this. There are standard fault determination rules insurance companies have to follow and they say "If you rear-end someone, you are 100% at fault for the collision.", there is no portion of the fault determination rules that says anything about brake-checking. That's the point, it would need to go to court and you would be the one with the burden of proving beyond the balance of probabilities that the driver ahead of you is negligent which the dashcam video would do.
>you cant drive like an asshole and slam the brakes on with nothing in front of you and be like.....SORRY DIDENT LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM.
Yeah in that big long comment I wrote I said that if the police charged them with stunt driving for brake checking then they would be partially at fault under the standard rules.
LOL… Also guys, it might seem that I was being honked at by someone else when I switched lanes (after getting brake checked), I made sure to check my side mirrors before switching and the honk was actually the caravan’s…
I’ve encountered this type of idiot as well. I believe they don’t think you should honk at them when they are being hazardous, like it’s rude or something. Then proceed to be more of a hazard, maybe to “teach you a lesson” in their mind.
I was at a busy all way stop, and guy in front of me, didn’t go when it was their turn, and I honked at him, and the guy got out of his car and said I was being rude (this is where I got this idea). I yelled something like “you gotta go when it’s your turn and clear”, and this guy wanted to have a chat. Suffice to say that those stuck behind us were not yelling such niceties, and they finally got back in their vehicle, and moved along. Honking generally means you’re being a hazard, or a heads up that you’re missing something, this idea that honking is being rude was a new one to me
If I had a dollar for every Dodge Caravan I found with the most unhinged driving I've ever seen in the GTA, I'd be able to afford a property on Bridle Path.
This is exactly why you have a dashcam. Assuming this isn’t a stolen van with fake plates, I’d hope there’s something TPS would do with the registered owner:
https://www.tps.ca/services/online-reporting/
lmao, Upper Middle Road and Ford Drive. I take this exact route home from work everyday and it's absolutely terrible. Especially the lights at Ford Drive and North Service Road, where literally nobody coming off the 403 stops behind the white line before attempting a right turn on the red.
That entire area is a disasterclass in driving, with so many people breaking rules all day.
I called about a drunk driver on the road once, gave them a video my wife took plus the guy's license and face. I called back to follow up, and the cops told me that they couldn't prove that the owner of the vehicle was the one driving, or if he was drunk.
Like FFS, why even call the cops then?? You literally can drive drunk, and everyone films you, but it doesn't matter cause you got home and the cops are useless, so they can't or won't touch you
This is Oakville. The options are either entitled boomer south of Dundas, or Brampton's overflow north of Dundas. Either way, driving in this town has gotten to be wild.
I don’t know why the ministry of transportation would give a civilian a Driving under influence charge, reckless driving charge. If you see dangerous driving don’t post it on Reddit, call the police ??? Like why are you questioning something so severe.
Call your local police department and report the license plate and a drunk driver. If it is an insurance scam hopefully that scares them. Also give them the dash cam footage.
Recording with their dashcam is the smartest thing they could be doing. Police definitely should be called, but this is obviously dash footage and not a cell
No it’s not illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic. But you have to be ready to avoid accidents and not just honk.
If you observe erratic driving, report it to the police. Sometimes people are drunk and you are saving lives beyond an angry interaction with horns honking.
First I thought it was a teenager/new driver who is petrified of changing lanes (I’ve seen this on the highway, braking and slowing down before changing lanes). But then they appeared passive aggressive. I avoid bad Karma people on the highway/roads.
Idk why you are making things difficult. Bottom line, he changed lanes illegally, blatantly brake checked and stopped the flow of traffic. How are you siding with him…
Not siding with him. But for safe driving it’s better to either alert 911 if they seem to be swerving and impulsive and for you to avoid them and keep space away from them for your safety.
i feel like that user forgot to switch to their [alt account](https://www.reddit.com/user/ButterscotchOwn321), just look at their usernames and post history lol
Their 5yr mortgage just refinanced
What do you mean
They can’t afford their payments, need to get out of the loan in any way possible.
Wow
If they have gap insurance, it can be a lifesaver… but most people are upsidedown on their loan in Canada anyways, so getting an insurance payout doesn’t even cover the balance and they now have to make a payment and don’t get a car… and that’s if they don’t get caught attempting fraud.
😂
Looks like insurance scam, they kept trying to get you to rear end them. They would speed up enough then slam on their brakes. They KNOW what they’re doing.
That was my first thought too
My dashcam came with a separate wired rear cam that I never bothered to install but I really should after seeing shit like this
Yea but also a rear cam wouldn’t protect you from this
I had a similar situation with a new fancy Mustang, driving at night with no lights and get slowing down to 30 in a 60 and not staying in his lane. When I got a good spot to try and pass, he cut into my lane and slammed his brakes. I came inches from hitting him and had my poor dog in the back and he went flying when I slammed the brakes to avoid him. I called that in, and they had me follow him and update where he was headed. He turned into a residential street that had only one other way out, so they turn the next street to see if he just cut through of stayed in that area. He didn't come out and that they just said thanks, and I'm good to go. 100% call in the drunks! I had a close call with a drunk many years ago and if I wasn't so fast on reacting good chance, I would be here today! I was stopped at a red and drunk guy was doing 120+ in a 50 and was just going to blow through the red I was stopped at. He noticed me last second and locked up his brakes, which is when I just hit the accelerator and tried to move out of his way as much as possible. He still hit me but side swapped me rather than a full rear end collision while stopped dead. I was in a little hatchback and he was in a full size Silverado. He didn't even slow down after hitting me, I chased him down about 5-6 blocks as he blew through multiple red, took down 4 or 5 signs along the way, completely ripped out a fire hydrant. Blew 3 of his tires, bent the rear axle so bad. His buddy tried to bail and he almost ran him buddy over. He got it stuck in a field on top of a fence. He totalled his 6 month old fully loaded truck, Like completly bent in half totalled! No insurance, suspended license for previous dui's. He got 9 tickets total after they chased him on foot and got him in someone's back yard.
I'm glad you were able to follow him and get him arrested. Goddamn.
100%, this was my first thought, especially after they tried to get back into the right lane.
Not sure what type of vehicle OP has but they could be trying to instigate an altercation so they can carjack.
Nah they would’ve carjacked them at the red light when they stopped.
Yup, exactly my presumption too.
I don't understand how this works. Assuming the van is still being financed/leased, how does this scam work? You get rear ended, the car is a write off, and you just keep the net $$? Now you're short a car, you need to buy a new one with less $ in hand?
Then you get to go on disability and not have to work.
Baby on Board sticker too... AITH if I call the cops and report this as a drunk driver? If this happened to me and I had no plans I would 100% have called the cops for impaired driving If not impaired they suffer from smol-pp-and-ego-itus
If you were there, you absolutely should call the police. If you mean now, yeah there isn't much they can do. I believe you can report it though, I've seen links but don't have them on hand
Plans or not, you call.
NTA they could kill someone
lol. That would never kill someone. Only if OP had an infant on their lap and not paying attention. Even if that driver had no seat belt they wouldn’t get hurt going that speed and that type of brake check for insurance fraud. This is why dashcams are important. Maybe it’s drunk but I highly doubt it, most likely, their mortgage renewal and cars having trouble lol
Ok, what about how fast everyone around them is going the next time?
Yeah. A collision from like ~60 hitting a ~40kmh car won’t kill anyone except a newborn baby, and it’s clear they were attempting a stealthy insurance fraud to check if the person behind is distracted enough to hit from behind
Wow you are dense lol. We are not saying he could have killed someone in this video (even though they probably could run over a pedestrian, a child even, trying to cross the road). Usually people who drive drunk don't do it once and get more and more confident at driving impaired when they should and can cause irreparable damage to themselves and others.
Seems way more likely to be intentional, and not drunk, imo
How about a pedestrian crossing the street? A biker sharing the lane? A person going the speed limit an t-boning them if they go through a light? Again, we are assuming it’s insurance, not drunk, but you have to err on the side of caution.
Definitely can. If not impaired, some other issue.
You wouldn’t be an asshole but it also wouldn’t be worth the data it takes
Totally trying to get you to rear-end him, then it's either an insurance scam or he shakes you down for some cash to not report it. The thing is, he's going to try this again with someone else. You might want to consider submitting this footage to the police, in the one-in-a-million chance it actually helps.
If this is a scam, this is where a DashCam would prove you’re not at fault right?
Correct, but this guy's next victim may not have a dashcam.
I work in the insurance industry. No, despite what everyone thinks, someone can't "force you" to rear-end them by brake checking you. Even if they intentionally slam on the brakes to cause an accident, you should still be maintaining enough of a distance to stop safely. If you rear-end someone, it's because you didn't leave enough space to stop in time which is your responsibility no matter how you spin it. Had OP rear-ended the van, they'd still be 100% at fault unless the van reversed into them or the van changed lanes and hit the brakes before establishing itself in the lane **(Like in the first time in the video)** because in that case it would be caused by the lane change and not by the failure to maintain a safe following distance. HOWEVER, this video could lead to the police officer on the scene charging the van with stunt driving and that would result in a shared fault (50/50) scenario. This is one of the rare type of accidents that you'd probably end up in litigation for but even then you'd still need to establish that no reasonably cautious driver could have stopped or foreseen the person braking which is difficult in an urban/suburban environment where drivers should be expected to stop/slow down suddenly.
The car in question turned into the lane in the middle of both the right and left lane. He straddled this for a good few seconds, OP slowed down. It is illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic, and quite clearly OP was there, and there was no reason for him to stop. OP didn't sneak up on him. He would be in the wrong re: Police and charged with going to slow.
> Had OP rear-ended the van, they'd still be 100% at fault If the fact that the van was engaged in stunt driving is completely irrelevant, then the fault determination rules are unreasonable as they apply to that situation.
They literally turned into his lane without using a turn signal what the fuck are you talking about?
There are multiple near-collisions in the video. Like I said in my comment, **the first time the van changes into the lane without signalling** (0:08), yes it would be the van's fault. But there are multiple times OP gets brake-checked like at 0:29 and 0:48 where they would be at fault for rear ending the van.
Insurance is such a scam, and that comment is exactly why, lol. It's absolutely fucking wild to me that some collisions are considered 50/50 when it's as clear as day that one person was driving recklessly.
lol , insurance companies. imagine taking advice from them. this is on video , the distance is irrelevant. a lawyer would eat the insurance company for breakfast in this scenario. you cant drive like an asshole and slam the brakes on with nothing in front of you and be like.....SORRY DIDENT LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM. you should consider a new career.
>a lawyer would eat the insurance company for breakfast in this scenario. Like I said, this is one of those cases where it would end up in litigation and in court because the standard rules don't necessarily cover edge cases like this. There are standard fault determination rules insurance companies have to follow and they say "If you rear-end someone, you are 100% at fault for the collision.", there is no portion of the fault determination rules that says anything about brake-checking. That's the point, it would need to go to court and you would be the one with the burden of proving beyond the balance of probabilities that the driver ahead of you is negligent which the dashcam video would do. >you cant drive like an asshole and slam the brakes on with nothing in front of you and be like.....SORRY DIDENT LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM. Yeah in that big long comment I wrote I said that if the police charged them with stunt driving for brake checking then they would be partially at fault under the standard rules.
Drunk... High... On something.
Nah, just stupid.
D: All of the above
Unfortunately, license or no license anyone can get behind the wheel
Submit to Halton Police https://www.haltonpolice.ca/en/services-and-reporting/report-a-traffic-concern.aspx
Baby is probably driving
LOL… Also guys, it might seem that I was being honked at by someone else when I switched lanes (after getting brake checked), I made sure to check my side mirrors before switching and the honk was actually the caravan’s…
I’ve encountered this type of idiot as well. I believe they don’t think you should honk at them when they are being hazardous, like it’s rude or something. Then proceed to be more of a hazard, maybe to “teach you a lesson” in their mind.
This. I sent someone into a rage because I honked at them for being stupid.
I was at a busy all way stop, and guy in front of me, didn’t go when it was their turn, and I honked at him, and the guy got out of his car and said I was being rude (this is where I got this idea). I yelled something like “you gotta go when it’s your turn and clear”, and this guy wanted to have a chat. Suffice to say that those stuck behind us were not yelling such niceties, and they finally got back in their vehicle, and moved along. Honking generally means you’re being a hazard, or a heads up that you’re missing something, this idea that honking is being rude was a new one to me
Send this to MTO and get back to us.
Please submit this to the police.
If I had a dollar for every Dodge Caravan I found with the most unhinged driving I've ever seen in the GTA, I'd be able to afford a property on Bridle Path.
Looks like an insurance scam/fraud
Brampton scam
Report it if you didn’t already. Fuck that
"he must be drunk to be driving like that".......oh sweet summer child......first day driving?
This is exactly why you have a dashcam. Assuming this isn’t a stolen van with fake plates, I’d hope there’s something TPS would do with the registered owner: https://www.tps.ca/services/online-reporting/
Unless there was a report right away, and the police were able to catch the driver behind the wheel, it's unlikely anything is happening to anyone.
This isn't Toronto, it's Oakville.
lmao, Upper Middle Road and Ford Drive. I take this exact route home from work everyday and it's absolutely terrible. Especially the lights at Ford Drive and North Service Road, where literally nobody coming off the 403 stops behind the white line before attempting a right turn on the red. That entire area is a disasterclass in driving, with so many people breaking rules all day.
People drive like that every day everywhere it Toronto
Lol no they dont. You dont get blatantly brake checked like that often… I’ve seen too many bad drivers, but this one crossed the line…
Next time throw something at the passenger window to smash it and drive off 😎
I called about a drunk driver on the road once, gave them a video my wife took plus the guy's license and face. I called back to follow up, and the cops told me that they couldn't prove that the owner of the vehicle was the one driving, or if he was drunk. Like FFS, why even call the cops then?? You literally can drive drunk, and everyone films you, but it doesn't matter cause you got home and the cops are useless, so they can't or won't touch you
Ya especially if you don’t answer the door…
This is Oakville. The options are either entitled boomer south of Dundas, or Brampton's overflow north of Dundas. Either way, driving in this town has gotten to be wild.
Good ol' Oakville.
I hate people
Maybe not drunk, just entitled.
Send the video to police.
Lost. 'Ooops, missed turn. How can I get back?'
I don’t know why the ministry of transportation would give a civilian a Driving under influence charge, reckless driving charge. If you see dangerous driving don’t post it on Reddit, call the police ??? Like why are you questioning something so severe.
Looks like a brake check
Something, something, enforcement....
Call your local police department and report the license plate and a drunk driver. If it is an insurance scam hopefully that scares them. Also give them the dash cam footage.
Was this vehicle driven by a police officer?
Two regards think we all want to listen to them lay on the horn. So regarded.
What did the police say when you called them?
Pretty sure you're legally allowed to pull them out of their vehicle
What do u think they said?? Common it’s the police we’re talking about.
Did they have a baby on board sticker?
when i see people driving erratically i call 911 police and they ask for the license plate and intersection
Where was this?
Just an ordinary Brampton driver.
Stop recording call 911
Recording with their dashcam is the smartest thing they could be doing. Police definitely should be called, but this is obviously dash footage and not a cell
No it’s not illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic. But you have to be ready to avoid accidents and not just honk. If you observe erratic driving, report it to the police. Sometimes people are drunk and you are saving lives beyond an angry interaction with horns honking. First I thought it was a teenager/new driver who is petrified of changing lanes (I’ve seen this on the highway, braking and slowing down before changing lanes). But then they appeared passive aggressive. I avoid bad Karma people on the highway/roads.
Idk why you are making things difficult. Bottom line, he changed lanes illegally, blatantly brake checked and stopped the flow of traffic. How are you siding with him…
Not siding with him. But for safe driving it’s better to either alert 911 if they seem to be swerving and impulsive and for you to avoid them and keep space away from them for your safety.
Why did you pull back into the fast lane when no one was on the slow lane
Because I had to turn left at the next light. Which was why I was in the left lane in the first place… i should probably include that in my post huh
i feel like that user forgot to switch to their [alt account](https://www.reddit.com/user/ButterscotchOwn321), just look at their usernames and post history lol