there's lots of different points of view, name calling, throwing toys out of the cot etc....
AS I SEE IT THROUGH MY ONE NARROW :cyclops: EYE
all the responsibility lied with myself in this incident for the following reasons
1. it was my discression and choice to recover or not recover the vehicle.
2. as my safety is my personal responsibility the point of connection to both vehicles is at my discression to check. There are other accepted and safe connection points that can be used on either vehicle such as solid diff housings chassis's etc
3. I've been around long enough to know about the forces involved in recoveries and know about the forces that can be exerted and having pulled a hook off a landrover 10 years ago complete with bullbar and bits of box section chassis attatched I know first hand what can happen
4. I've got a 10 ton cruiser with a chev V8 that can easily produce forces well in excess of what would be considered safe to use
5. I was in sole control of the amount of force put on the recovery
although I wouldnt consider the amount of force applied to be excessive or extreme it was 2 or maybe 3 pulls of incrementing force and the attempt that dislodged the hook was a hard pull
I think John DeBurgh is the only one so far that has considered the recovery technique as well as the hook on the vehicle being recovered
jdeburgh wrote:
The other thing is recovery technique, how much of a part did this play in the result? Not being there i can't comment.