Category: Verkehr & Sicherheit Forum

Hello, I have retrofitted my MB with a soot particle filter and the corresponding entries have also been made. A green badge is also issued. Since I still have a non-repaired windscreen, I have not yet glued the badge. So, now I had a roll on it and I am accused of the following: Existence: With a motor vehicle despite traffic ban to reduce harmful air pollution (sign 270.1, 270.2) participated in the traffic. § 41 para. 2, Nr. 6, § 49 para. 3, Nr. 4, StVO; § 24 StVG; 153 BKat set of rules in Euro (EUR): 40 EUR Points: 1 Is anyone familiar with this?? I admit, yes I have no badge, but with a vehicle that meets the requirements of a traffic ban, I did not participate in the traffic. Or are the requirements already fulfilled with missing badge?? Thanks in advance

Hello people… I have a RIESENROBLEM and am on the edge of the white glow!!! I hope someone can help me… I bought a VW Golf 3 station wagon a while ago…as a small project car so to speak… I drove to the workshop, had it checked through and in the end had some repairs made for new TÜV. (new brake hoses, spark plugs, etc.) …even in this workshop. After that I started to get financial problems and could not trigger the car any more. ll it’s 6 months… I talked to the owner of the workshop, he agreed to wait and possibly arrange a installment payment in case of emergency. I know it’s not nice and fair to let him wait so…but he agreed… As far as so good…Yesterday I look out my window and there actually drives my car! Fully registered, radio built in, bla bla bla… I fell out of all the clouds!! He also had the vehicle letter because of TÜV.. I got him sof ort called and asked for clarification…but he didn’t want to talk to me and hung up again and again!What am I supposed to do? Can he do that? Is there a law? I would be really glad about any help in our good motorist community…Please… LG Phil

Old people are a threat to road traffic! The topic comes up here again and again and in the thread around FallSoWireless’s grandfather germinated a discussion about it, which, however, could not be meaningful due to the lack of meaningful figures.Previous: The topic is merely a thesis and deliberately very provocatively chosen. I am curious if there are not the first indisputable objections in the course of the discussion. Probably the one then did not read more than the topic. I In the current motor world, there is the statistics that have been missing so far for a qualitative evaluation of the topic. Unfortunately, I have not got the thing at hand anymore.In each case, percentages of the kilometers driven and shares of the accidents are shown.In the rough it looks like that the drivers between 18 and 25 only get a relatively small part of the kilometers driven for you, but a percentage of many times the accidents. group! The only group, which also causes percentage accidents as kilometers, is the one, at 65 years and more on the hump. However, this is from memory and after eye measurement of the beams but about 1:1.4. In any case a significantly (!) better ratio than with beginners. Likewise, the tendency is to notice that the ratio of driven kilometers and accidents from ~40 (from memory) slowly and strictly monotonously gets worse. The greatest potential danger in road traffic is, according to groups, the very young driver. Second largest of the pensioner, but with considerable distance! What is not examined more precisely in statistics is accident liability in the second row. In other words, accidents caused by indirect provocation, e.g. by a creeping pensioner. As a result, one cannot make a proper statement here either. Nor is the group 65+ divided again. Ergo It is not possible to say whether the group 70+ is critical. I consider it critical to assume to the ADAC that this inaccuracy has been chosen in the awareness that the differences within the group are negligible. I do not think much of the association. However, I see through these statistics the thesis that very old people can cope with the traffic situation less well than “younger” (explicitly NOT “young”. I therefore still consider it useful, I don’t think it would take much more than a simple visual test, a simple reaction test and a rudimentary test for the mobility of the head. I guess that would eliminate the actual risk potential for the most part. And, of course, the limits for such a thing should be reasonably set. The reaction time of a thirty-year-old can no longer be expected, just as little as abs Olut error-free vision. Only the rough cases, which the age-related inferior abilities can no longer compensate by experience and appropriate caution should be the aim of such a thing. Someone of the 2 seconds reaction time, can no longer turn the head or the environment can only schematically perceive belongs no longer on the road. But much more urgent I see the group up to 25. Here there is much more potential for optimization of the accident event. However, it is less because of the lack of basic physical fitness, but rather because of psycholgotic factors. It is also clear to me that this group, just like the particularly old drivers, will never produce as little accidents as those of the 35-40 year olds. My personal impression is that especially young drivers in terrifyingly many individual cases do not adhere to speed limits at all or almost no assessment for overtaking possibilities This is why I would call for a tightening of the fines here. This really hurts the self-employed, often not even financially, and therefore creates the necessary pressure to keep the ball flat against their own feelings. At the same time, I find it extremely useful that the stick includes the carrot, at the same time imposing binding measures towards “driver training”. The resulting costs are likely to be considerably low. I would be happy to have a scan or other useful playback of the data.

Can anyone tell me in which regulations / laws / … one finds something which structural conditions (road width, footpaths… ) a road must have so that there is speed 50 valid? Background, we live on a rather long dead end street, without footpaths, where only on one side are houses. The road curvy, quite steep and it is so narrow that 2 cars cannot meet without one of the two drivers partially directing his vehicle on the green strip. The speed is 50. You can’t drive them and nobody drives from the locals so fast, but here we have a pub with a parking lot and near a football field and many visitors think that they can now race up and down the road in search of a parking lot. In the whole street stop ban applies. I would now be interested whether in such a road at all speed 50 is allowed. to set down to 30 and whether then actually also slower is on a completely different sheet.

This morning I did not find my vehicle where I had parked it yesterday evening. On the footpath next to my original parking bag (parking regulations along the sidewalk) earthwork was carried out this morning, my vehicle did not disturb directly, but the place was needed to allow the pedestrians to walk around the raised hole. Apparently a tow truck was ordered, which took up the moose and parked about 20 m further on the other side of the road, intere It is important that the construction work was not announced and not signposted. Moreover, the company is already a few days in the process of lifting various holes at other points in our road. In this respect, it is not to be assumed that this is a short-term emergency measure. Question: On what legal basis can a construction operation take away properly parked vehicles, which are the most expensive vehicles in the world? As I said, the building area was not blocked or signposted beforehand. Wouldn’t it have been necessary to try to contact the owner of the vehicle here primarily by means of a holder registration (order office/car registration office)? I am standing in the telephone book and was at home at the time and would of course have moved the vehicle away immediately. Damage did not occur, but it is annoying when someone attacks my vehicle.

Hello dear MT-Talk municipality. Have just read this and hope that it really comes that way and that the E10 makes the fly!

www.bild.de/…/disastered-campaign.html Question to you are you also for that the E10 is taken from the market again? I am happy when it comes to it. Mav0 Edit: Here who does not believe the picture still a report

http://auto.t-online.de/…/index Here’s another

Consumer refuse E 10

I had my dealer mount the winter bikes. When I drove from the yard I noticed a small sticker with the inscription wheels after 50Km on the inside mirror. Now I wanted to know if this was absolutely necessary? Or is this just a precautionary measure of the dealer to pull himself out of the responsibility if a wheel is lost? I do not want to pull 20 plastic caps off the wheel screws to pull the wheels with my hand. I don’t have one either.

Hello, as you all know, there are navs with warning function when stationary speed cameras are approaching. In general it is said that the stationary speed cameras are in dangerous places, where often too fast is driven. Thus one wants to bring the drivers to the proper driving. So far so good. That I think that the things largely serve the cash register filling, does not matter. If these devices really are to serve the traffic safety, then why are the bl I mean you can see it that way, if I know that there is a speed camera at this point, then I don’t drive too fast to not be flashed. So you have lowered the general accident risk at the place. But fine or something is not collected. If you don’t have a speed camera warning, you run the risk of rattling in there, for example, if 50 meters behind a 70s sign is a starry box, and you drive maybe 92km/h (just one hour). So, one was clearly too fast, has increased the risk of accidents, in case of a case one might not have been able to slow down in time and the like. So, but the fine is going on, and that just goes to the cash register from the circle, or country, however. So, I am convinced that the lightning alarms are forbidden because, if they were allowed, one of course does not drive too fast, and the county (or the one who collects the money) is not allowed to move too fast. You can say, of course, that you want to ensure that the drivers always drive according to the rules…….. But if the road safety would REALLY be in the foreground and would not be a hypocritical justification, then the speedometer alarms would be allowed, because, as I said, you would not drive too fast in the dangerous places. I would like to hear your opinions about it. See that too or what Do you think about it ? Greetings

In principle (but hardly to the extent) was to be expected, but now it is “officially”: quote: If all vehicles registered in Germany were equipped with xenon light, more than 50 percent of the serious accidents during night trips on rural roads could be avoided, the TPV in Cologne reported. On motorways it is more than 30 percent of the serious accidents. Probably an important step to avoid the xenon light from the Premium Blender Drängler corner (which is largely based on prejudices). In the long run, Xenon can only be expected to be more and more part of the standard equipment, to reduce the extra costs and to help it become a safety feature. At the moment, unfortunately, many buyers are still afraid of the extra costs and in the small car segment it is usually not available. If you look at the above figures, you can no longer neglect it as a reasonable person, unless you save at all ends (see ESP). In the long term, you can only hope that Xenon is more and more part of the standard equipment, that the extra costs will decrease and that the e Availability in the entry-level segment is increasing.

People I can KOTTEN So today at noon 14 o’clock Dormtund B1 3 tracky Außerorts, limited to 60. In front of me a little Turk driving like crazy circles and constantly groping around in the hair dryer as if he had been from the other shore. I drove 60, was too cracked with the guy so I was overtaken at short notice and crept again. At the moment I am flashed. I had 100 things on it What can I do??? Pay penalty or explain to the judge what happened?! Or does it bring nothing.