Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Changes To The Highway Code
Comments
-
It funny how this subject seems to polarise so many people on an almost Brexit scale. I drive a car, ride a bike and drive a van and sometimes am even a pedestrian.Like it or not there is a pressing need for all of us to use our cars less. For certain journeys walking or riding a bike is the obvious cost effective alternative. Many people are put off from riding a bike by both the actual and percived risk. Not a lot has actually changed in terms of the law, cyclists have never been obliged to use cycle lanes where present or ride in the gutter, but by being more exlplicit about these things the updated Highway Code has to some extent attempted to address some misconceptions many people have about cars having priority on the roads.
Time will tell how effective this measure will be, but honestly riding a bike on roads can be both scary and dangerous at times and trying to address that surly has to be a good thing if people genuinely want to help protect the environment for future generations. People have mentioned measures such as cyclists taking a test before being allowed on the road, and while in theory I agree with this, it would create another barrier in preventing people taking up an environmentally form of transport. I took a cycling proficency test at school over 35 years ago now and it is still relevant much as my driving test is which I took over 30 years ago. I actually think that if we were serious about making roads safer, part or learning to drive would include having to go out on a cycle, moped or motorbike, car and large sized van. That way road users would have a better appreciation of the unique challenges for each.
In over 30 years of driving and more riding a bike on the road, I have never caused an accident or anyone else harm in a motor vehicle, but I have been crashed into by others with minimal injuries. This despite at times doing very high mileage. I have in this time however had many small incidents riding bikes leading to minor injuries, all caused by others. I have also had two more serious accidents causing significant injury both of which I was lucky not to have experienced much worse. One was caused by being clipped by a bus and the other by a poorly maintained road surface. This is why cyclists often don’t use cycle lanes or ride in the gutter because quite frankly often it is very dangerous to do so.Many people have pointed out the dangerous nature of undertaking a large vehicle that may have big blind spots on a bike and honestly I don’t know anyone who would do this, but that does not mean we should take the onus for looking out for others completely off the drivers. Most vehicles of such a size are commercially owned and it is not unreasonable to suggest they should be fitted with electronic devices that can help alert the driver to what they can’t see. Health and Safety measures after all are expected in all industry.I realise this post will not be popular with many on here, but I would urge everyone to stop and think. Do you really want to do all you can to discourage people from riding a bike? As well as the environmental benefits if more people rode bikes in cities it would actually cut down on traffic congestion (bikes move just as fast in traffic and take up less space on the road) and ease pressure on other public transport, is this a bad idea?
14 -
If I was a cyclist I would be mindful of any vehicle on the road, and most definitely yield to a lorry.
I do in a car, so why not if on a bicycle. Common sense tells you to keep out of their way, surely?4 -
You was starring out the window of Cooke’s waiting for that double double to settle, weren’t ya?Gribbo said:I was witness to a 32t fixed bed muck-away lorry go over a cyclist on the Goldhawk Road a few years ago. They were both at the lights with the woman on the bike holding onto the railings and the lorry indicating to turn left. As the lights turned green, they both took off and the cyclist ended up under the lorry.
There was no legal case to answer as, I presume, the witnesses gave the same account as what I did, re’ the lorry indicating to turn left, but I was contacted shortly after moving to France by an ambulance chasing law firm who said the lady had suffered “life changing injuries” and they were starting a civil case against the company that owned the lorry (Sure it was Tarmac).
My view is that it was completely the cyclist at fault, and it should be down to her to look for the signs that the bigger vehicle might be turning across her path. As I understand it now though, the lorry driver would need to give way to any cyclists who are on his inside (in his blind spot)? If that is the case, I think its going to lead to a lot more accidents with people getting injured and killed.
I’ve always tried to let pedestrians cross if I’m turning into a road, but only if the road I’m on allows it
1 -
Indeed, but that should not exonerate the lorry driver from all blame should there be an accident in my view.ROTW said:If I was a cyclist I would be mindful of any vehicle on the road, and most definitely yield to a lorry.
I do in a car, so why not if on a bicycle. Common sense tells you to keep out of their way, surely?2 -
All seems very sensible to me.0
-
Agreed. One kid pulled across the front of me a couple of weeks ago. He hit my front nearside wing car (I didn't hit him!!!) And he came off his bike. He said he was cutting across the road to go into a petrol station. It was dark and he had no lights a hoodie and had his earphones on. He was lucky he wasn't hurt.SoundAsa£ said:Before my eyes I see youths with hoodies up listening on their headphones thoughts and not a care in the world without looking to see if cars are turning left behind them.
Happens all the time.1 -
Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.0 -
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
2 -
Millions spent on these cycle highways across London, only to encourage people not to use them. Farcical.ForeverAddickted said:Just what the absolute fuck in terms of points four and five???
Whats the point of installing cycle lanes in the first place if they dont have to be used?
As for having a bike either side of a car
Do they want to have a bloody death wish?4 -
I had to check it wasn't the 1st of April when I first saw the changes.
Farcical1 - Sponsored links:
-
I've re-read my post and I made two spelling mistakes. I apologise for any offence that may have been caused to others, in addition to myself.2
-
If somebody is coming round a blind bend they ought to slow down and cover the brakes.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
It could just as easily be a broken down vehicle they encounter rather than a driver doing the right thing by a pedestrian.5 -
Yeah thats where my thinking was going tooCroydon said:
Millions spent on these cycle highways across London, only to encourage people not to use them. Farcical.ForeverAddickted said:Just what the absolute fuck in terms of points four and five???
Whats the point of installing cycle lanes in the first place if they dont have to be used?
As for having a bike either side of a car
Do they want to have a bloody death wish?2 -
Overall this thread is very interesting.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.4 -
Cars break down on the outside lanes of motorways, but it's mechanical failure causing any resulting collision, not an I'll thought out change to current rules.seth plum said:
If somebody is coming round a blind bend they ought to slow down and cover the brakes.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
It could just as easily be a broken down vehicle they encounter rather than a driver doing the right thing by a pedestrian.
But like I said in my post though; even if someone is sticking to the speed limit, it could possible cause an accident. For the sake of a pedestrian waiting a few seconds for the road vehicle to turn off the main road, I cant see what's being achieved by this change. Less said about changes 4 and maybe 5 the better
0 -
As a part-time scaredy cat cyclist and full time motorist I can say hand on heart this will change nothing.
The laws about lane discipline on motorways have been there as long as we have had motorways and ignorant lane hogging is endemic. Not only that, laws like this aren't self-policing. There are hardly any police traffic resources to give the occasional bollocking that reduces some ignorant prick to tears but stops them driving like a nugget again. Its all reactive and reliant on Gatso cameras, dash-cams, and references for insurance claims.
All well and good telling cyclists to ride two abreast, and some of the more thick headed cyclists will do that regardless of traffic build up behind them, who is protecting them? The Law?
And that picture stating cyclists can expect drivers to yield at a left hand turn even if the cyclist is on the drivers off side. I'm sure that is not how kts meant but that's how it reads and looks
Understand the bit about not having to use cycle lanes but I'd only not use one because of the state of them being more dangerous than mixing it up with the traffic.
I've got to say, anyone who goes down the inside/blindside of an HGV is an idiot5 -
A child of ten going about their business, looking both ways when crossing and stuff, is not required to be any more responsible than that.
Every other non pedestrian road user from a skateboarder to an HGV driver is responsible for the safety of that child.
Right of way is one of the most muddled concepts on the highway, and it is often used badly to justify poor behaviour.
The child has the right of way before every other non pedestrian road user and to me that is the long and short of it.
My own experience as a motorcyclist taught me that I was invisible, every other road user hated me and wanted to kill me, but most importantly I should regard every accident I had as my fault, whatever the regulations.
A dent in a car is a mashed up leg for a motorcyclist.0 -
This is absolutely true.
Wife and I went out for a walk this morning to get a few bits and pieces from the shops. To get there, we have to cross a fairly major road which we do using a traffic island in the road where we can cross half way and then wait until it is clear the other way.
This morning, on both crossings, cars saw us waiting on the traffic island to cross and stopped and let us cross! Hardly ever happened before. Will be interesting to see how long this lasts!
PS I also think this stuff about cyclists NOT having to use cycle lanes and being encouraged to cycle down the middle of the road is absurd.2 -
I think those are pretty fair points regarding helmets and headphones personally. I wouldn’t still be here if it wasn’t for cycle helmets.jimmymelrose said:Overall this thread is very interesting.
What it highlights to me is this new norm that people are responsible to more vulnerable people, without those people being asked to take any responsibility themselves.
For example, cycling with headphones on. Just who are these stupid people? I myself get annoyed with anyone in my family who doesn't put on a helmet, of which we have six or seven between us.
It’s interesting that I’ve not seen anyone on here object to number 3, as I think that is the most important change and if everyone stuck to that at all times cycling would be a lot safer and feel a lot safer for those who are put off using a bike because of risk.0 -
We will have to agree to disagree.Gribbo said:
Cars break down on the outside lanes of motorways, but it's mechanical failure causing any resulting collision, not an I'll thought out change to current rules.seth plum said:
If somebody is coming round a blind bend they ought to slow down and cover the brakes.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
It could just as easily be a broken down vehicle they encounter rather than a driver doing the right thing by a pedestrian.
But like I said in my post though; even if someone is sticking to the speed limit, it could possible cause an accident. For the sake of a pedestrian waiting a few seconds for the road vehicle to turn off the main road, I cant see what's being achieved by this change. Less said about changes 4 and maybe 5 the better
To my mind the pedestrian should not have to wait a few seconds, especially if they are a non driver who does not understand the road dynamics, and also especially if it is teeming down with rain.
The driver should wait, and that idea has now been strengthened by the new regulations.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Yesterday, I also witnessed a car two in front of me, stopping to let a pedestrian cross from a traffic island, the road wasn't particularly busy, there was no traffic behind me and the pedestrian wouldn't have had to wait long to cross. A quick check of the first driver's rear view mirror would have alerted to them to the fact that the pedestrian would soon be able to cross without stopping the traffic.Fortune 82nd Minute said:This is absolutely true.
Wife and I went out for a walk this morning to get a few bits and pieces from the shops. To get there, we have to cross a fairly major road which we do using a traffic island in the road where we can cross half way and then wait until it is clear the other way.
This morning, on both crossings, cars saw us waiting on the traffic island to cross and stopped and let us cross! Hardly ever happened before. Will be interesting to see how long this lasts!
PS I also think this stuff about cyclists NOT having to use cycle lanes and being encouraged to cycle down the middle of the road is absurd.
If there is a lot of traffic moving slowly and there is little chance of there being a big enough gap in traffic to allow the pedestrian to cross, then it's courtesy to let the pedestrian cross. Of course the pedestrian then needs to be aware that a line of slow moving traffic may be overtaken by an impatient motorbike or cyclist.0 -
The road from Charlton House to the Standard is an interesting one.
It is used on a very regular basis by horses in a troop. It is used by buses, all the other vehicles, and has what can be rather laughingly called a cycle lane.
The cycle land conflicts with vehicles stopped at the side of the road, appears and disappears, is randomly diverted to allow parking spaces, and is so poorly surfaced it is a danger to ride along.
I have cycled that bit a lot but not been tempted to go on the pavement because that is pedestrian world, but often been tempted to abandon the cycle land for the carriageway due to the nature of the cyclists journey expected on that stretch of road.1 -
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.7 -
I agree that were are all , as car drivers, responsible for the safety of pedestrians.seth plum said:A child of ten going about their business, looking both ways when crossing and stuff, is not required to be any more responsible than that.
Every other non pedestrian road user from a skateboarder to an HGV driver is responsible for the safety of that child.
Right of way is one of the most muddled concepts on the highway, and it is often used badly to justify poor behaviour.
The child has the right of way before every other non pedestrian road user and to me that is the long and short of it.
My own experience as a motorcyclist taught me that I was invisible, every other road user hated me and wanted to kill me, but most importantly I should regard every accident I had as my fault, whatever the regulations.
A dent in a car is a mashed up leg for a motorcyclist.
However as father to three children around that age, I have always taught them, as I expect most parents do, to cross the road at pedestrian crossings and zebra crossings , where you have priority , but must still be careful. Otherwise, you wait until it's safe to cross.
Some people look and because they have seen a car they assume that the car has seen them. This is a big mistake. Car drivers are not robots ( yet unfortunately), they are human so as your life depends upon it, you have to expect mistakes or carelessness.
You can't complain about it when you're dead.0 -
One of my pet hates, people not using their mirrors when being courteous.ME14addick said:
Yesterday, I also witnessed a car two in front of me, stopping to let a pedestrian cross from a traffic island, the road wasn't particularly busy, there was no traffic behind me and the pedestrian wouldn't have had to wait long to cross. A quick check of the first driver's rear view mirror would have alerted to them to the fact that the pedestrian would soon be able to cross without stopping the traffic.Fortune 82nd Minute said:This is absolutely true.
Wife and I went out for a walk this morning to get a few bits and pieces from the shops. To get there, we have to cross a fairly major road which we do using a traffic island in the road where we can cross half way and then wait until it is clear the other way.
This morning, on both crossings, cars saw us waiting on the traffic island to cross and stopped and let us cross! Hardly ever happened before. Will be interesting to see how long this lasts!
PS I also think this stuff about cyclists NOT having to use cycle lanes and being encouraged to cycle down the middle of the road is absurd.
If there is a lot of traffic moving slowly and there is little chance of their being a big enough gap in traffic to allow the pedestrian to cross, then it's courtesy to let the pedestrian cross. Of course the pedestrian then needs to be aware that a line of slow moving traffic may be overtaken by an impatient motorbike or cyclist.
Difficult to get too annoyed at, as they are only trying to be polite, but
FFS look in your mirror and appreciate that no one is behind you.
Them and people who turn into 70 MPH police officers on motorways.
If people wish to go faster, get out the way.
It is not your job2 -
Yes.jimmymelrose said:
I agree that were are all , as car drivers, responsible for the safety of pedestrians.seth plum said:A child of ten going about their business, looking both ways when crossing and stuff, is not required to be any more responsible than that.
Every other non pedestrian road user from a skateboarder to an HGV driver is responsible for the safety of that child.
Right of way is one of the most muddled concepts on the highway, and it is often used badly to justify poor behaviour.
The child has the right of way before every other non pedestrian road user and to me that is the long and short of it.
My own experience as a motorcyclist taught me that I was invisible, every other road user hated me and wanted to kill me, but most importantly I should regard every accident I had as my fault, whatever the regulations.
A dent in a car is a mashed up leg for a motorcyclist.
However as father to three children around that age, I have always taught them, as I expect most parents do, to cross the road at pedestrian crossings and zebra crossings , where you have priority , but must still be careful. Otherwise, you wait until it's safe to cross.
Some people look and because they have seen a car they assume that the car has seen them. This is a big mistake. Car drivers are not robots ( yet unfortunately), they are human so as your life depends upon it, you have to expect mistakes or carelessness.
You can't complain about it when you're dead.
I would not advocate a child should proceed Willy Nilly. I would emphasise to them what I learned as a motorcyclist, that every accident is their fault! You have to be lucky with motorists every time because the likelihood is you’re only going to be unlucky once.
Even with that, a child suddenly running into the road to chase a ball from between parked cars ought to be safe because drivers ought to assume such a thing can happen at any moment…even if they feel that’s an unreasonable expectation.1 -
A motorist behind me (when they drew alongside at the lights) had hooted me shortly before, and then screamed at me that I ought to have looked in my mirror before slamming on my brakes.ROTW said:
One of my pet hates, people not using their mirrors when being courteous.ME14addick said:
Yesterday, I also witnessed a car two in front of me, stopping to let a pedestrian cross from a traffic island, the road wasn't particularly busy, there was no traffic behind me and the pedestrian wouldn't have had to wait long to cross. A quick check of the first driver's rear view mirror would have alerted to them to the fact that the pedestrian would soon be able to cross without stopping the traffic.Fortune 82nd Minute said:This is absolutely true.
Wife and I went out for a walk this morning to get a few bits and pieces from the shops. To get there, we have to cross a fairly major road which we do using a traffic island in the road where we can cross half way and then wait until it is clear the other way.
This morning, on both crossings, cars saw us waiting on the traffic island to cross and stopped and let us cross! Hardly ever happened before. Will be interesting to see how long this lasts!
PS I also think this stuff about cyclists NOT having to use cycle lanes and being encouraged to cycle down the middle of the road is absurd.
If there is a lot of traffic moving slowly and there is little chance of their being a big enough gap in traffic to allow the pedestrian to cross, then it's courtesy to let the pedestrian cross. Of course the pedestrian then needs to be aware that a line of slow moving traffic may be overtaken by an impatient motorbike or cyclist.
Difficult to get too annoyed at, as they are only trying to be polite, but
FFS look in your mirror and appreciate that no one is behind you.
Them and people who turn into 70 MPH police officers on motorways.
If people wish to go faster, get out the way.
It is not your job
What difference would that have been supposed to make?
They were driving too close, but that isn’t why I had to brake, it was for another safety related reason.2 -
You're obviously not understanding the example mate.Gary Poole said:
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.0 -
Is that not where I hang my air freshner?Gary Poole said:
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.0 -
ffs what do you think your rear view mirror is for 😉ForeverAddickted said:
Is that not where I hang my air freshner?Gary Poole said:
In this example with or without the rule change the driver should indicate before going round the bend so that any vehicles behind know that they will either be turning or pulling over. Drivers behind should be paying enough attention to spot this and adjust their spending accordingly.Gribbo said:
Might be common courtesy, but if you're turning off a blind bend on a B road, but have to wait while someone to crosses the side road, its not very courteous to the person who might be coming round the bend behind you (insert Kenneth Williams). Even if they're sticking to the speed limit, it can cause an accident.Cloudworm said:Don't seem much different to me. Thought pedestrians always had priority when crossing at a junction. Common courtesy really.
In Japan bicycles aren't included in their version of the highway code. It's mental.
For any BMW drivers you can find your indicators on a stalk just behind the steering wheel.0
