Interesting points raised, and differing opinions. @J.R. is right, the more you look at the video the more you see. Not sure about an oncoming car in the distance - need to watch it on a screen bigger than my phone.

Is it me seeing things or does the OP move further right towards the verge as the red Ferrari start to move out? Seems there was a split second decision - move over and [more] power/acceleration OR back off and hit the brakes.

About 20-30 years ago I’d have just kept my foot in; today, I wouldn’t have tried the overtake (and feel good about saving a millilitre of fuel 🙄).

 

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

I was never to blame in my then mind for any of the accidents I was involved in when I drov like the roads were my personal racetrack, indeed the insurance companies agreed with me but in hindsight every one was avoidable if I had been thinking

Somehow I managed to avoid several accidents when I had no right to do so. Quite frightening when I look back at some of those very, very near misses.

1 hour ago, Graham Butcher said:

You're correct about its tax status and the SORN statement, however, that does not actually mean that is the real situation. When I went to Mansfield to collect my  current car, I had to tax it before I could drive it home. I paid the tax on line and it was a few days later before the DVLA updated the status of it so any police car could have pulled me over if they had their ANPR cameras switched on. All I had to prove that it was taxed was the online receipt email on my phone.

 

Looking at the MOT history, the Ferrari has only been doing about 200 miles each year for the past few years.

 

The last time the V5 was issued for the Ferrari was 28 March 2019, so presumably that was when the current owner purchased the Ferrari.

 

The Ferrari was first registered in 10 April 2008 and has 420g/km CO2 emissions, which puts it in the £695/year road tax bracket.

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by Carlston

16 hours ago, TheWanderer said:

Hacked off with a certain driver this afternoon.

 

As the Ferrari is not taxed, it might not be insured.

 

According to the MOT history, it has only been doing about 200 miles/year since 2019 when the current owner appears to have purchased the vehicle.

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by Carlston

Or she or non-binary.

 

Lets hope it was the owner or registered keeper and not just someone that borrowed it. 

He. He's about 60-65 years old. 

So if the vehicle is SORN where does that leave me?

 

I'm unhurt just damage to the car, I know that means he's untaxed, does that also mean no insurance? 

1 hour ago, Graham Butcher said:

... however, that does not actually mean that is the real situation.

 

+1 - I've been pulled over for no tax and insurance on a car I owned that was taxed and insured.  The Traffic officer was really good and said i'd quite likely get stopped again before the relevant databases were updated.

 

I have a lot of empathy for TW.  Our roads down South can be very busy, and there are roads I know very well, and therefore know where to overtake and where not to.  In TW's place, I'd have likely given the Ferrari three chances to go where I would have.  After the third I'd assume they were happy behind the silver/grey wagon, and I'd be planning to overtake two vehicles (assuming that slotting in between the Ferrari and van might not be an option, even if it should).

 

2 hours ago, Jorgeminator said:

The overtake is totally unnecessary to begin with, there's an intersection 0.7 miles up where you'll end up standing anyway...

 

Most overtakes are unnecessary.  If I were the OP, I might've considered it better to get past the van when the opportunity prevailed, so that I wasn't stuck behind them at said intersection, where I might be able to get away when they can't.

 

Either way, a duff experience for TW.

 

Gaz

 

33 minutes ago, TheWanderer said:

So if the vehicle is SORN where does that leave me?

 

I'm unhurt just damage to the car, I know that means he's untaxed, does that also mean no insurance? 

http://ownvehicle.askmid.com

Run his reg through the insurance database it will tell you ,no tax dont mean no insurance 👍

1 minute ago, Mickvrs220 said:

http://ownvehicle.askmid.com

Run his reg through the insurance database it will tell you ,no tax dont mean no insurance 👍

 

Strange that you answered my question as I was about to say the same thing. It is still it IS insured but untaxed though and shouldn't have been on the road. I'm leaving it to the legal team of Privilege to deal with as that's what I pay a legal protection fee on my insurance policy for. 

@TheWandererwas 'He'  the owners / registered keeper, as in gave you all the details and chatted? 

 

Cover for 3rd party so @TheWanderershould be fine, but for the Policy Holder then who knows. 

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by toot

But the intrinsic fact is the driver was driving an untaxed vehicle at the time, however I will be leaving it to the insurance company legal team to deal with, because that's why I pay the legal premium on my insurance policy each year.

22 minutes ago, TheWanderer said:

But the intrinsic fact is the driver was driving an untaxed vehicle at the time, however I will be leaving it to the insurance company legal team to deal with, because that's why I pay the legal premium on my insurance policy each year.

 

The law changed many years ago.

 

In the old days, innocent victims of uninsured drivers didn't get paid out.

 

Nowadays, if a driver is uninsured you still get paid out because the UK motor insurance industry was forced to set up a fund to pay out in the case of uninsured drivers. A small percentage of everyone's motor insurance premiums goes into that fund.

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by Carlston

Be interesting to see the outcome of this. 
 

WRT the overtake itself. Meh, not sure I have enough info to decide if I’d have done the same. Had you already been sat behind those two, through multiple other NSL sections and the Ferrari driver hadn’t taken any opportunity to pass, then I’d have done exactly the same (assuming that section is safe to complete a double pass, I have no local knowledge of it).  On the other hand, if this was the first ever opportunity to pass, I’d probably not have bothered. For me, I need some kind of confirmation from the car in front that it’s not going to take an opportunity, should it present itself. 

16 minutes ago, SC03OTT said:

Be interesting to see the outcome of this. 
 

WRT the overtake itself. Meh, not sure I have enough info to decide if I’d have done the same. Had you already been sat behind those two, through multiple other NSL sections and the Ferrari driver hadn’t taken any opportunity to pass, then I’d have done exactly the same (assuming that section is safe to complete a double pass, I have no local knowledge of it).  On the other hand, if this was the first ever opportunity to pass, I’d probably not have bothered. For me, I need some kind of confirmation from the car in front that it’s not going to take an opportunity, should it present itself. 

 

If the Ferrari driver was taking his driving test, and had performed that manoeuvre, it would have been an instant failure...even if there had been no contact with the OP.

 

The driving test examiner would have said, "I don't feel safe with you driving" and the test would have been terminated immediately.

 

The Ferrari F430 has 490PS, 196mph, 0-60mph 3.6seconds, etc. High performance cars and low performance drivers don't mix.

 

The problem for any driver only doing 200 miles/year is that they are going to be very rusty and accident prone. It's why insurance companies increase the premiums of drivers who do very low mileage, perhaps less than 3,000-6,000 miles/year.

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by Carlston

I always think its a bit wierd when you have to overtake a super car ,its like should i be doing this in a skoda 😂😂

The UK,s Theory test & the 'Hazard perception test',  is something that we should maybe all have to take every 10 years. 

 

There are at least 2 'Blue light drivers' on this forum.

Maybe they can comment on how they do an overtake at a location like that if not lit up and on a mission.

 

 

In the Lane Keep Assist thread, pity the Ferrari driver had not 'Lane Keep Assist' that might have at least had an indicator go on or 'blind spot warning' 

But all the new tech gear is no use if just not paying attention. 

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/486388-lane-keep-assist-is-danger

4 hours ago, TheWanderer said:

But the intrinsic fact is the driver was driving an untaxed vehicle at the time, however I will be leaving it to the insurance company legal team to deal with, because that's why I pay the legal premium on my insurance policy each year.

As I pointed out earlier, it might be the DVLA were slow in updating the database and the driver might have just very recently purchased the car and taxed in online, as I did with my recently purchased car. 

2 hours ago, toot said:

the Ferrari driver had not 'Lane Keep Assist' that might have at least had an indicator go on

That is not how lane enforce works.

13 minutes ago, Paws4Thot said:

That is not how lane enforce works.

Correct. I think he meant to say Side Assist.

Thankfully neither driver was hurt.

I think most of us have been guilty at some point of a little impatience.

As an ex motorcyclist the best advice I was even given was the "life-Saver" a last look over the shoulder before executing the manoeuvre. I still do this in the car out of habit especially on motorways before changing lane, would of stopped the Ferrari driver maybe pulling out.

The other thing I was told it's better a bit late in this life than early to the next.

 

Hope you get the car fixed quickly,I would be gutted if I pranged mine for sure.

11 minutes ago, GrumpyOldGit said:

Thankfully neither driver was hurt.

I think most of us have been guilty at some point of a little impatience.

As an ex motorcyclist the best advice I was even given was the "life-Saver" a last look over the shoulder before executing the manoeuvre. I still do this in the car out of habit especially on motorways before changing lane, would of stopped the Ferrari driver maybe pulling out.

The other thing I was told it's better a bit late in this life than early to the next.

 

Hope you get the car fixed quickly,I would be gutted if I pranged mine for sure.

 

I still do the life saver check in the car and with the dashcam it makes me much more aware that I'm being watched by something (which should be used being a former train driver) that can save my neck or slay me.

 

As it shows the driver of the Ferrari appears to be quite happy to follow the silver van, so once the silver van when the other way, I dropped it down a gear in sport mode, indicated and went and as I went past him he decided to go too without any indication whatsoever. If he'd used his mirror (done a life saver) he'd have seen me.

 

Still the dash cam footage has been sent and as far as I'm concerned it's down to the insurance company to sort out.

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by TheWanderer

Was that the same footage editted to end before the incident was concluded as you posted on here?

 

Any chance of seeing the continuation of the recording?

 

Am I the only one to have an open mind on what seems to be the accepted narrative that the Ferrari driver was attempting to overtake the van and not having a peek to see if it was safe to?

 

If it was an intended overtake then his manoeuvre was far more gentle than the OP's he is not even accelerating or gaining any ground on the van.

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by J.R.

5 hours ago, Carlston said:

The problem for any driver only doing 200 miles/year is that they are going to be very rusty and accident prone.

 

The car may only do 200 miles a year but there is no suggestion that is all the driver does.

11 minutes ago, J.R. said:

The car may only do 200 miles a year but there is no suggestion that is all the driver does.

 

His daily runner probably doesn't have almost 500HP and do 0-60mph in 3.6 seconds.

 

He clearly isn't a skilled driver.

 

Maybe sell the Ferrari and take some basic lessons before even attempting advanced lessons...he certainly needs them.

 

He should have been well away from the van in front so that he could have a good view of the road ahead and plan and execute the manoeuvre correctly.

 

100% fault with the Ferrari.

 

Edited 20 July, 20232 yr by Carlston

 

He was well back from the van in front in order to (in my opinion) have a clearer view of the road ahead before deciding whether an overtake was safe, it wasn't and it certainly was not so to overtake 2 vehicles.

 

I appreciate that its difficult to judge the scene from a fixed focus camera and will be happy to be proved incorrect if the OP would show the video of the incident in its entirety and not cut off at a critical time, I somehow doubt it will be forthcoming.

 

11 minutes ago, Carlston said:

100% fault with the Ferrari.

 

No doubt the insurers will take that position but one party being deemed to be 100% responsable does not mean that the other was whiter than white or blameless in this incident but hindsight is 20/20 vision.

 

I think the vehicle that the 3rd party was driving is influencing your judgement and equally may have influenced the decision of the OP to make a risky overtake.