"Rod" wrote in message
...
:Jerry: wrote:
"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
snip
Learn to read, you half baked ****. snip more total ignorance

Stop talking to yourself. Were, what, when is irrelevant, the
control we are talking about here is safety critical, if the driver
can't operate the control (s)he should not be using the vehicle. A
parking prawl in a autobox is not an equivalent to the parking
brake - for all the reasons given previously in this thread.

You can always slam the box into R as an emergency brake. :-)

Regardless of your (and my) opinions on the matter, the fact is that
a considerable number of people have driven vehicles fitted with
such brakes but been unable to use them as you suggest - as an
emergency brake. Indeed, many have probably been unable to use them
for parking.

Indeed, many people do think that the parking pawl can be relied on to
hold a vehicle only to discover that their vehicles have disappeared
when they return (they are normally found at the bottom of the hill,
embedded into what ever they collided with....


Given the circumstances in which people might have been presented
with a vehicle so fitted, it might not have appeared
sensible/reasonable/possible to decline to drive it. Further, many
people will simply hnot have known the issues at all. (Given my
experience of car hire, the only thing they seem keen to tell you is
that you must sign your life away.)


None of which is an excuse that could be used in a court of law and
there is a real possibility that the insurance company will also
refuse to pay out on the claim or if they do, only pay the third
party...