A Surrey garage worker has good reason to believe his bosses will "kill him" after he pranged a client's £200k Ferrari 612 Scaglietti. The unnamed lad, in his early 20s, had taken the 196 mph motor for a "quick road test" following an MOT in New Malden. In the process, he somehow managed to hit a lamppost and jump a two-foot …
It looks much less dangerous after the prang. One less idiot buggy on the road.
I do like the Suns report, which captions the picture as a £130k Ferrari and has a headline valuing it at £220k. What fine journalists Rupert employs. I can't wait to pay him for his web-sites.
220K was what it was worth before the prang, but now it is worth 130K?
i guess you prefer to travel on a high-horse?
A few things to ponder:
Would you be saying the same thing if innocent bystanders/other road users had been hurt/had property damaged as a result of the idiot using the "idiot buggy" wiithout permission?
Do you have statistics for accidents involving cars like this one and their relative likelihood as compared to other kinds of vehicle? Or are you generalising and moralising in order to satisfy some poisonous prejudice of your own that is probably motivated by jealousy and a sense of personal failure?
Would you really like to get rid all kinds of cars you don't like (perhaps by crashing them into lamp posts and roundabouts)? Will this make the world a better (safer, more environmentally-friendly) place?
Are you sure?
lulz, I wish Murdoch would hurry up with his paywalls, instead of announcing pre-accouncements.
UncleRant asks "Would you really like to get rid all kinds of cars you don't like...? "
I think that Andy Miller just wants to complain about cars that he can't afford.
What makes you think he was using the "idiot buggy" without permission? Is that not just a wild assumption you've made?
Road testing a complex high-performance car after an MOT-required modification (new brakes, exhaust, whatever) isn't exactly unreasonable. You can be quite sure that if they hadn't tested the work and the owner had been handed back the car in anything less than perfect running order, he'd have been almost as annoyed as he probably is right now - so what are they supposed to do?
@Tim, good point but
couldn't they test the brakes, exhaust emissions in the garage?
if they can test brakes to ensure safety on a rolling road (as part of the MOT) then why would they need to drive it? likewise the emissions
but I take your point...
if they have to do a road test (and indeed they might, I suppose) then they'd need someone experienced with this kind of car - may be that's the real error, here?
RE: Enhanced Safety
".....One less idiot buggy on the road...." Oh dear, I see your prejudice didn't let you see the obvious fact that the garage will have to pay for a replacement or repairs to the original. I'm also pretty sure the owner won't be short of a penny or two, so if he's really upset he can buy a new one. So, sounds like the same number of "idiot buggies" will still be in circualtion to annoy you!
What amuses me is your prejudice, one not too uncommon in a modern day society that has been spoonfed the idea that cars are nasty and evil. It is apparently OK to spend money on enjoyment in other areas - obscene amounts of money if you are a patron of "the arts" - but appreciating fast cars and their technology is a crime against humanity? I'm sure in your case it's based on jealousy, but I have to inform you that not all fast car drivers are rich toffs. Trackday meets I go to are attended by fast car drivers from all walks of life, including plumbers, doctors, soldiers, even rather left-of-center teachers. Some make sacrifices in other areas of life, such as a DBA I know who lives in a tiny bedsit in Surbiton so he can afford to drive his Cobra at the weekends. Why should he be looked down upon by people like you?
After all, I have been in three serious accidents in my life, all the fault of other drivers in "sensible" cars. I'm guessing that makes them the real idiot buggies, and people like you that drive them - whilst turning green at the sight of other people enjoying a car your lifestyle can't afford - the real idiots.
Is a super car more likely to be speeding then a VW Polo? Yup!
Is a Porche 911 more likely to spin than a Ford Ka? Yup!
Is a super-car driver more likely to be reckless that a Toyota Prius Driver? Yup!
Is that the reason we like this article? No! Its simple Schadenfreude.
Would the world be safer if we crashed them all? Probably not.. but it would be fun to watch!.. can we start with yours?
One thing to ponder
Do you by any chance drive a Ferrari?
If so, didn't you buy it *because* other people would be jealous? Bit late to complain now.
They could have maybe got someone else to drive the car other than the blatant boy racer who was going too fast or just didn't know how to handle such a precision car.
Is a super car more likely to be speeding then a VW Polo? Nope. A supercar is more likely to be owned by a middle aged man with some sense. There are more ideot 17 year olds driving like loons in Polos.
Is a Porche 911 more likely to spin than a Ford Ka? Nope, not a modern one anyway. See above. Old ones are diffrent, but thats not due to them being fast cars.
Is a super-car driver more likely to be reckless that a Toyota Prius Driver? Nope. Never been cut up by a super car or sports car. I am often cut up by Prius's that don't use mirrors. Here in Oxford there is lots of both.
I want to down-vote you so badly for that smug-arse "idiot buggy" comment but I'm with you on Murdoch, so I also want to up-vote you. Damn, damn and double-damn. :-)
".....Is a super car more likely to be speeding then a VW Polo?...." Actually, no! In fact, the chances of you speeding apparently are more linked to the driver's age and sex than the cost or style of the car. Young male drivers are the worst and riskiest - they crash cheap cars much more frequently than the average Porsche or Ferrari driver. Then they settle down, up until the mid-30's when they seem to get a bit over-confident and think fifteen-odd years of driving (probably also because they now have the cash to afford more powerful motors) leads to more dangerous driving. It may also be becaue the average mid-30s male simply drives more miles and gets complacent, but the insurance stats show another peak in risk for them which also coincides with them being more likely to be caught speeding or driving under the influence. Then we get another period of calm before old age starts to affect driving ability, at which point we get another rise in risk as pensioners. Nothing to do with the car.
"....Would the world be safer if we crashed them all?...." Actually you'd probably be safer in the sportscar for several reasons. I know "sensible" car drivers whitter on about how they're fave piece of tin scores in EuroNCAP tests, but that's what is called secondary safety, and is how the good the car is AFTER the crash is a foregone conclusion. Volvos used to be a great example of secondary safety. Primary safety is how good the car is at helping the driver in AVOIDING the crash in the first place, something Volvos used to be absolutely awful at. Primary safety is a matter of how good a car is at braking, handling, visibility and accellerating (yes, you can accellerate yourelf out of danger too). Most sportscars score very well on primary safety (rear-visibility is one problem for most mid-engined sportscars). Then you have the fact most sportscars (especially Porsches and Ferraris) are designed with the idea that it might crash at high speed, and have better crash properties than cheaper hatchbacks where the focus is on getting past the low speed EuroNCAP tests. So your Polo is actually not such a good idea.
One less idiot buggy...
This was no bus wreck.. it was a car! LOL!! Why is it that these holier-than-thou types oppose freedom of movement?
IMHO mass-transit is not freedom of movement, it's control of movement, and takes place in an environment through which disease can spread like flames across dry grassland.
Ferraris are so fucking ugly! They're styled for the tasteless - rather like Dubai is. But instead of 'idiot buggy' he should probably have called it a 'Beckhamobile'.
No Polo has ever been too slow for speeding, I was caught speeding with my mothers in 1979 and a year later with my first own car, a 1972 850cc Mini!
A Ford Ka can spin, but usually it just goes straight where you want it to turn, like most small front driven cars, albeit at a speed where a 911 doesn't show any problems staying on the road.
Don't know about the Prius drivers, are they better than other drivers driving cars in that price range?
Schadenfreude is ok, it's the most sincere form of enjoyment :) Especially when no one is hurt.
What would Simon do to someone who wrecked his car?
"My boss will kill me"
Before or after the owner of the Ferrari?
Mine's the one with somebody else's car keys in the pocket.
MOT test drive?
Why does an MOT test require a test drive?
Was this lad insured to drive it?
Re: MOT test drive?
Too wide and/or low for the MOT brake-test rollers.Same goes for AWD vehicles...
...99.99% of the time, there is F**K all reason to road test a car after an MOT. Hope the git gets fired.
And it's not an isolated incident.
Of course, that's why you fit alarm / imobilizer system with garage mode, that limit the speed of the car , to stop prats like this.
It's why you drive a sensible car in the first place and don't throw your money away on expensive "statements". Accidents can and will happen, especially in cars that are clearly too powerful for the average British road (or roundabout).
Nobody was hurt, I'd say that was more important than a car getting bent, however posh.
It happened in Eastbourne (according to the commentards) in January.
@ Tim Cook
"It's why you drive a sensible car in the first place and don't throw your money away on expensive "statements"."
MMMmmmmmm, so come on, what's your weakness? An expensive bottle of wine at the weekend or maybe an expensive gadget or two?
Just because one man treats himself to a sports car after possibly many years hard work you want to criticise?!!!!
Why don't people in this contry put people down when they've done well?
cars that are clearly too powerful for the average British road
I challenge you to find a car that is not powerful enough to crash into a lamp post, or to mount a kerb. (Childrens plastic cars with pedals do not count).
I don't recall ever reading about a car that it is impossible to crash because it is "sensible". I would say that chance of an accident has more to do with the fleshy part in the seat than the mechanical parts...
You're right the important thing is no-one was hurt ... at least not yet anyway :/
But the bit about sensible cars is not right, the accident is more than likely down to inexperience rather than it being too powerful for the road and it wasn't mentioned in the quote here about the oink travelling too fast or recklessly. And as we all know speed is rarely a significant factor in accidents, not taking proper attention to the road and conditions or lack of ability are.
Now here is the ironic thing in my reply and this is absolute fact :) A work colleague also named Tim Cook had an accident a few years back, this was also on a roundabout and again with no-one else involved. The car? A tiny 2 seater Diahatsu convertible thing that looked like a rollerskate or the car from Noddy and Big Ears, 3 cylinder 950cc or something silly like that.
He skidded on some ice and popped the tyre on the curb. Not exactly a case of the car being too powerful for the road (although waste of money is true).
"It's why you drive a sensible car in the first place....." Nope, I drive a "sensible" car most of the time because I can't afford to drive my weekend toy all the time. It also doesn't have a roof so not much good in the winter! But it is a lot more fun than my "sensible" car, even at legal speeds.
".....especially in cars that are clearly too powerful for the average British road....." A complete fallacy. No car has a constant power outptut, it is the driver that controls the power with the accellerator. A Ferrari is just as well suited to the average British road as a VW Polo mentioned above, it is the driver that is the variable. It's exactly the same as that old favourite of the safety brigade - "speed kills!" - when the reality is it is not speed per se but INAPPROPRIATE speed that kills. You can do stupid speeds in just about any car available to the public (I remember a car review for the old Fiesta several years ago that asked why do even the lowliest hatchbacks need to be capable of anything more than 70mph?). Speed alone does not kill otherwise racing drives would all have a one-race career.
Inappropriate speed is a driver issue, and it is effectively a time compression issue. If you are going fast, you will travel a certain distance in a shorter time - simple physics. If that distance is the one you have before crashing then you have more time to react if you are going slower than if you are going fast. Inappropraite speed reduces the time you have to react to the unexpected, it would be better to say it is the lack of time to deal with the unexpected that kills you. If you are travelling down an urban road at the legal speed and a pedestrian steps out in front of you, you will have more time to stop or swerve round them than if you are speeding, whether you are in a Ferrari or a VW Polo (the Ferrari will actually stop better). Same goes for racing down country roads - you should always go into a corner thinking "what will I do if there is something in the roadway ahead?". If you are going too fast to avoid the accident then you are going too fast, regardless of the car you are driving. But, if you are on a completely open straight, with clear visibility for miles, then 100mph is just as safe as 60mph. If you have a controlled environment like a track it is even better and safer. And a track is recommended for finding out exactly how your car behaves on the limits, as you really don't want to be finding out for the first time in the example above with the pedestrian.
As you gain experience you get better at predicting problems. Bikers, for example, learn to look for diesel spills at the exits of petrol stations as that is when they are accellerating away, and where trucks often spill fuel from over-filled tanks (this is even worse in the rain as diesel stains will seep to the surface of tarmac in the rain, making for a very slippery combination of water and oil). Experience will help you judge the appropraite speed (and this includes knowing when it is actually better to slow down to LESS than the speed limit), an advanced driving course will also help. But the best advice is to assume every other road use is a complete twonk and will do the worst possible thing at the worst possible time (a given for Volvo drivers, it seems!).
And as for roadtests, my weekend toy gets serviced by a shop up near a proper circuit and also take it for a spin round the track, to make sure it is behaving as it should at high speeds. I wouldn't give it to an oridnary garage to test as I wouldn't expsct them to test it the same way. Maybe the Ferrari owner from Eastbourne assumed the mechanic was just going to take it for a crawl down the Kings Road, where most UK urban Ferraris spend their time! :P
I expect the owner is gutted as well
sack the gormless chancer
not the most expensive car accident....
Almost as bad as the person who did £300k of damage to a £500k Pagani Zonda S, that he borrowed for a test drive. However, these pale into insignificance compared to some of these
Top accident - a Ferrari 250 GTO worth the best part of $30M which was badly damaged after it rear-ended another car at a classic car track day.
Given Ferrari build quality
He probably caused £50,000 worth of improvements to it.
> Police said the incident constituted a "one car accident", and that no investigation was necessary.
Soon to be followed by a "one golf club accident" when the owner finds out.
It does happen...
Its inevitable when you think about it: with the number of vehicles on the road some of them are bound to involve vehicles on road test. I remember n my days in the bike trade I once had to explain to a customer that no, his new bike was not ready to pick up after its first service, owing to some damn Volvo driver having helped our mechanic off the road...
To the credit of the owner he seemed a lot more concerned about the damage to our mechanic (fortunately minimal) than to his bike...
In this case however there doesn't seem to have been a Volvo involved (or these days more likley a Post Office van or a young lady under 35, which categories seem to have changed from pretty safe to bloody dangerous in recent years).
As a motorcyclist...
I can tell you that the majority of near misses I have had have been from Audis, BMWs and Mercedes (Mercedeses?) pretty much in that order. I have discovered that you also need to keep an eye on drivers of minis (old and new) as they have a tendencey to make sudden unannounced manoeuvres.
Having said that, the one incident I had where I was hit by another vehicle did involve a Volvo. However both my bike, and the Volvo were stationary immediately before the accident and it was the woman travelling at high velocity in the Audi behind the driver of the Volvo that did the damage...
@as a motorcyclist
I fully concur with your list of badly driven cars, but I think you forgot the sports 4x4s like cayennes etc... There seems to be some sort of special exam to make sure you are qualified to drive one..
1) Do you use mirrors when manouvering your vehicle?
2) Do you occasionally check your mirrors even when not manouvering?
3) Are there any road conditions during which you would consider driving at less than 120mph?
4) Would you ever consider leaving more than a few centimetres between yourself and the motorcyclist ahead of you on a narrow spiral slip-road in the rain?
You answered no to all questions, congratulations here's the keys to your Cayenne Turbo
Mine's the one with the Gixxer 1000 keys in the pocket.
Volvos do seem to be the embodiment of sensible cars driven by people who dont pay attention...
Its lorrys, vans, Jags and VW's that cause the problems for me. Mostly when they are on the phone and not looking at there mirrors.
As the daily driver of ...
a classic (i.e. pre-BMW) Mini, I would like to point out that I always move over towards the kerb when a motorcycle is behind me on the road, to give them clear sight of the road ahead and room to pass should they choose to.
I also keep checking my mirrors to make sure I know exactly where they are.
Finally, if they do decide to pass, I speed up a little and recklessly pull into their path. It's all in preparation for getting an Audi one day.
OK, joke over. On a more serious note, my Mini-based unannounced manoeuvres are often due to other road users underestimating:
a) the speed at which I'm travelling, even when well under the posted limit
b) the distance between my car and theirs
particularly when they are pulling out of junctions or changing lanes - also typical bad spots for motorcyclists, I believe.
Perhaps that's one reason why I can wholeheartedly concur with your list of "causers of near misses", though I've never had a Ferrari do it. Yet...
Being just out of the danger-zone...
...Of the 17-22 year old 'idiot bracket', I have to say one thing to you, my friend's dad bought an old boxy volvo estate for my friend while he was learning for two reasons:
1) its so heavy that he can't really be a prick in it
2) theres about 6ft of bonnet before the cockpit, so if he does hit a wall, he'll go through it before the car crumbles and takes his legs.
Also, to those saying about the road test, are you mad? Had there been a road test done on my, sporty, chavvy and all around monster of a 1.8 diesel ford escort estate, then my wheel wouldn't have fallen off on the roundabout on the way home (I did get a new set of front discs out of it though, and some new underwear). Just taking it for a spin for 5 minutes is not unheard of, just to check that everything is bolted back on and such, which can't be found on a rolling road- tracking, wheel balance and things are almost impossible to tell unless you give it a welly. Of course, in the case of a ferrari, this may be slightly different, as giving it a welly often means you spin...
Plus it was just an accident. And yes he will be insured (I happen to know a mechanic owner, and insurance over all the cars they fix/MOT etc is a killer, but a neccesity).
Gutted for the kid.
@Being just out of the danger-zone..
he must watch topgear then.
Goes to the current shape 2 litre turbodiesel Audi A4 estate.
I reckon that the prequisite for being sold one of these is to walk into an Audi showroom with a large rubber penis securely fastened to your forehead. Never in all my years of motoring have I seen one single model of car that popular so universally driven by complete and utter pillocks.
All part of the service. Guv!
Why is this News?
The young lad is none the worse for wear. All he needs to do now, is report back to his boss that the £200k Ferrari 612 Scaglietti failed it's road test.
The car owner should think himself lucky, he was saved from a future accident.
Badgers: just one of the many hazards tested.
Ferrari + Boy racer = what could possibly go wrong
I had no idea what 'pranging' meant before this article. Thanks, El Reg. This site is like an education.
They should be able to get him for quite a lot
If he hadn't cleared it with his boss to do a burn up^W^Wtest drive, surely he's liable for taking and driving away? On top of the reckless driving etc.
Taking a fast car in for repair and expecting them not to thrash it looks about as safe as taking a computer in for repair and expecting them not to search the disk for JPEGs
This reminds me of my first boy racer car a PUG 205 GTI, oh spinning it on roundabouts so i was facing on coming traffic those where the days.
Now i listen to Radio 2 and drive 5mph slower than the speed limit, althoguh i still have a large 0.5K sound system in the boot so the hill is a gentle up gradiant at the moment, although the top is insight.
And yes he'll be sacked taking a 200K car thats not yours for a spin is a no-no when it comes to work.
Why is it that when I was a kid, Radio 2 was something yer dad listened to, and now I'm approaching early middle age (yikes!), Radio 2 is *still * something yer dad listens to?
(I mix Radio 1, 1Xtra (no, really!) & Radio 4 to get Radio 2.5Xtra, meself)
Like this point if you noticed the nested parenthesis...
No investigation was necessary?
Why? Just because no one else was involved this time doesn't mitigate the crime. I hope the scrote will be charged with dangerous driving and theft. His employer should be charged with being an accessory.
I think not. A little too much right foot I imagine, and he lost the back end. Not uncommon for people unused to high powered cars. But not dangerous driving.
Although he would have fallen foul of the Oz Hoon laws that got Lewis Hamilton.
Well, actually no. Currently the police are only investigating the accident. Since there was one car involved, its pretty clear who's fault it was, thus no investigation is really necessary.
However if the owner of the car or the garage manager / owner want to bring a criminal charge pertaining to the kid maybe stealing the car, that is a separate investigation.
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Hi-torque tank engines: EXTREME car hacking with The Register
- Review What's MISSING on Amazon Fire Phone... and why it WON'T set the world alight
- Product round-up Trousers down for six of the best affordable Androids
- Why did it take antivirus giants YEARS to drill into super-scary Regin? Symantec responds...