Taxi hit and run by firetruck...

[claRkEnt]

that's the problem with the abusive use of wang-wangs, sirens, etc... these things should be used in emergency situations but they had been and stillbeing used indiscriminately nowadays that some motorists' impression is they are not into real emergency. kaya hayum, sometimes, when they hear sirens, ignore ang iba.

[Memphis Raines]

This is also one of those issues of qualification. Qualification on WHO SHOULD BE FIT TO DRIVE Emergency service vehicles.

In the states, particularly L.A and Las Vegas, their drivers for Ambulances and Fire Trucks are entirely separate from the rest of the crew. Aside from the firefighting training, firetruck drivers are the primary decision makers during transport or mobility meaning that it is their prerogative to make sure that, if ever they cause damage to property or injure citizens in the course of mobile deployment, they are to "immediately assist victims or acknowledge responsibility for damaged property regardless of the emergency at hand".

This rule is simple common sense.

Our local BFP here should enforce such ruling and qualification so as not to endanger more lives by being reckless or inconsiderate

[Sarsi]

imo, any emergency vehicle does not free them from any liability when they hit another vehicle. Yes, OTEP is correct that they can settle it on a later time and proceed to their emergency(if any). nowadays, it hard for other driver to identify vehicles that are on real emergency and other pretending to have one just to get out of the mess on the road. i have seen a lot of times that an ambulance have their blinkers and sirens "on" even if hey don't have any patient inside, to make things worse, they use it so they can use the expressways for free

[sirmykel]

minsan kahit ala naman emergency ginagamit pa rin yung wang wang
lalo na kung trapik para mapabilis sila...

napansin ko na to before yung ambulance nagmamadali naka wang wang
pero pag tigil nila nakita ko bahagyang bukas na kurtina nila,
amp kumakain lang yung mga gago walang nakahiga o anuman basta
nakaupo lang at kumakain.

*topic
baka cguro ndi natantsa ng driver nung firetruck yung manuever
nya kaya tinamaan yung taxi at hindi nya napansin to.

kawawa naman yung taxi driver.

[Memphis Raines]

*topic
baka cguro ndi natantsa ng driver nung firetruck yung manuever
nya kaya tinamaan yung taxi at hindi nya napansin to.

kawawa naman yung taxi driver.

That's why these drivers need to be qualified, like undergo training for their driving skills. These trucks have very high center of gravity and are not exactly agile especially at high speed.

[Supierreman]

...i have seen a lot of times that an ambulance have their blinkers and sirens "on" even if hey don't have any patient inside, to make things worse, they use it so they can use the expressways for free

meron po instances when an ambulance is responding to an emergency call papunta pa lang sya dun sa kukunin na patient kaya pwede pa rin gamitin yung siren kahit walang patient sa loob.

The thing is we should give way to these vehicles na may karapatan gumamit ng wangwang (ambulance, firetrucks but not including those civilians na nakawangwang or those politicians and their escorts.)

[mfo]

Minalas naman ung taxi, kaya ingat pagka may makakasalubong na Firetruck

[starbutt]

imo, any emergency vehicle does not free them from any liability when they hit another vehicle. Yes, OTEP is correct that they can settle it on a later time and proceed to their emergency(if any). nowadays, it hard for other driver to identify vehicles that are on real emergency and other pretending to have one just to get out of the mess on the road. i have seen a lot of times that an ambulance have their blinkers and sirens "on" even if hey don't have any patient inside, to make things worse, they use it so they can use the expressways for free

no offense meant, but only for purposes of discussion: i need to know your basis in saying that an emergency vehicle has no liability when it hits another vehicle. i am saying this is the context where such vehicle is being used in an official business with audible signal being made. i could be wrong, and you could be right, but there must be some basis as to your proposition. the point is: if we cannot clear this matter, some of those reading this thread may think that it is perfectly alright not to respect the right of way of an emergency vehicle because at the end of the day, any damage caused by its driver on other vehicles, which driver failed and/or refused to obey the law, will just be settled.

by the terms of the law i quoted, the police car, fire truck or ambulance operated on official business technically and literally owns the road such that all other vehicles must yield to it. you are right though that this right of way is abused, but for me, that is not an excuse of all other drivers of other vehicles to disobey the law. i do not suppose that on the road, all other drivers have the discretion to decide whether the police car, fire truck or ambulance is on real emergency and that they (the all other drivers) have the option to obey the law or not.


ot: in advance states, they observe high level of traffic safety. most, if not all, drivers are well-trained, not only the driver of the firstruck, and they know and observe the traffic rules.

in advance states, they also observe high level of fire safety. firemen constantly have fire drills, which include moving from the firetruck from station to the scene of the fire through the best possible route. firetruck drivers already map out the routes to all possible areas within their jurisdiction, and these mapped out routes are being tested during the drills. the state itself provides for fire lanes (which are free from any obstruction at all times) where firetrucks pass through and installs fires hydrants on regular intervals (where no vehicle is allowed to park nearby).

dito sa atin, walang fire lane (lalo na sa mga squatters area) at walang regular fire drill (meron naman pero every march lang).

[redorange]

no offense meant, but only for purposes of discussion: i need to know your basis in saying that an emergency vehicle has no liability when it hits another vehicle. i am saying this is the context where such vehicle is being used in an official business with audible signal being made. i could be wrong, and you could be right, but there must be some basis as to your proposition. the point is: if we cannot clear this matter, some of those reading this thread may think that it is perfectly alright not to respect the right of way of an emergency vehicle because at the end of the day, any damage caused by its driver on other vehicles, which driver failed and/or refused to obey the law, will just be settled.

by the terms of the law i quoted, the police car, fire truck or ambulance operated on official business technically and literally owns the road such that all other vehicles must yield to it. you are right though that this right of way is abused, but for me, that is not an excuse of all other drivers of other vehicles to disobey the law. i do not suppose that on the road, all other drivers have the discretion to decide whether the police car, fire truck or ambulance is on real emergency and that they (the all other drivers) have the option to obey the law or not.


ot: in advance states, they observe high level of traffic safety. most, if not all, drivers are well-trained, not only the driver of the firstruck, and they know and observe the traffic rules.

in advance states, they also observe high level of fire safety. firemen constantly have fire drills, which include moving from the firetruck from station to the scene of the fire through the best possible route. firetruck drivers already map out the routes to all possible areas within their jurisdiction, and these mapped out routes are being tested during the drills. the state itself provides for fire lanes (which are free from any obstruction at all times) where firetrucks pass through and installs fires hydrants on regular intervals (where no vehicle is allowed to park nearby).

dito sa atin, walang fire lane (lalo na sa mga squatters area) at walang regular fire drill (meron naman pero every march lang).

I think you need to read the post of Razaec racing again, he actually says they are liable for the damage caused.

razaec racing imo, any emergency vehicle does not free them from any liability when they hit another vehicle.

As someone here has already posted just because you have the sirens blaring does not mean you can just run over other cars. If driving an emergency vehicle and you come to an intersection you are supposed to slow down and still make sure that it's clear to cross. If you observe police chases here in the US you can see that police cars slow down on intersections and do not assume that it's clear before proceeding with the chase. Rushing to an emergency to save lives and taking a life on the way there by hitting other motorist negates the process.

[k2tingx]

way back 1994 when our wrangler together with 3 other vehicles were hit by a firetruck on his way to water refill, the truck lost control thus causing the mishap.

since the firetruck was not " on-call" that time, the vehicle was liable for all the damages incurred (afawk), one car owner happened to be "prestigious" lawyer of lucena city so we were able to file a complaint against the fire dept (DILG) ,officer of DILG contested our protest and the govt didnt drop a dime..

since there was a suit filed against the driver of the firetruck, the poor driver shoulder all the expenses..

im too young to understand then, but i still pity the hapless driver..