If they were crossing across the road you were turning into/out off then you are meant to anticipate and stop for pedestrians crossing or about to cross and so you should be stopping.... So says HWC new rules.
Your bad driving encounters/irritations
- Thread starter Stu999
- Start date
If they were crossing across the road you were turning into/out off then you are meant to anticipate and stop for pedestrians crossing or about to cross and so you should be stopping.... So says HWC new rules.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 2,188
- Location
- Oxfordshire
I really wish that in the dark people stopped saying “thanks” by flashing their lights…your not being polite
But snitches get stitches
The HWC is specific.
"Already crossing or WAITING to cross".
It doesn't include keeping at a constant pace, not checking your surroundings and stepping off the pavement
Oh, I realise this.... But I if you want to bring "HWC Specifics" into it, it doesn't say "pedestrians should check their surroundings prior to crossing"
Of course, common sense would suggest that they do considering very very few drivers actually obey the new rules for pedestrians who ARE waiting to cross correctly.
Purely anecdotal but, a few weeks ago, I stopped to allow pedestrians to cross who were already on the road and the van driver behind me got upset, roared around me aggressively and blasted his horn. All because I delayed him for circa 3 seconds of his life as I didnt want to mow some pedestrians down (see HERE)
Oh, I realise this.... But I if you want to bring "HWC Specifics" into it, it doesn't say "pedestrians should check their surroundings prior to crossing"
HWC rule 7 & 8 cover checking surroundings before crossing, specifically referencing the Green Cross Code.
The issue with the new rules is, and I've said this before, they've been misinterpreted to a point that people think that pedestrians (and in certain circumstances, cyclists) have the right of way and there's no personal responsibility.
We have a crossing in the heart of the city, pedestrian light controlled and pedestrians will just walk straight out despite the Red man signal, often not bothering to look at the traffic that's coming from either direction. In an attempt to mitigate collisions it's been made a 20mph limit yet NOTHING has been done to tackle the errant pedestrians.
Last edited:
Rule 8D or 170 needs updated as they are contradictory
8D - If traffic is coming, let it pass. Look all around again and listen. Do not cross until there is a safe gap in the traffic and you are certain that there is plenty of time. Remember, even if traffic is a long way off, it may be approaching very quickly.
Rule 170 - give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way
So which is it Highway Code?
- Let oncoming traffic pass or oncoming traffic to stop to allow waiting peds to cross? (this is a general questioning of the HWC, not directed at you)I agree however it has also been misinterpreted by drivers who use the "should" aspect as giving permission to barrel on and not let peds cross.
Last edited:
So which is it Highway Code?
And this goes to how badly the new rules were written and rushed into the code.
The H rules were just shoehorned in and not checked against existing guidance.
On my way to work was the 2nd car behind an old lady doing 38MPH on a wide open NSL A road (and about 36MPH through the 30s and 40s before that)... car in front of me just went for it with traffic coming the other way the first chance they got - good thing it wasn't one of those muppets who speed up when someone commits to overtaking them or it would have made for a dicey situation, fortunately I managed to get past after the cars coming the other way cleared, felt sorry for the person behind me who was going to be stuck behind them for the next few miles.
Last edited:
The rules wouldn't have needed clarifying if drivers paid more attention to the existing ones. Prior to the changes, the HC said pedestrians at juctions had priority if they had stepped into the road. That was almost completely ignored by drivers, who routinely expected pedestrians to only cross junctions when it was clear. Drivers approaching junctions simply assumed they had priority, which has never been the case.
There have been no changes to the actual law, which is that pedestrians in the road have always had priority. The onus is on motorists to recognise when that might be likely - someone approaching a junction being an obvious case - and drive accordingly.
Agreed. I regularly stop if I see someone looking to cross and this also includes on entrances to roundabouts. I tend not to do it if I am exiting a roundabout unless no other vehicles are behind me as it would be too easy for them to rear end you. I realise they should be paying attention and not driving too close but you know how some people are
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,581
I thought the HC said should not must for giving way to pedestrians. It sounds pedantic, but I'm sure must is a rule, whereas should is just advice.
Not sure what part of my post you're referring to? I didn't mention either 'should' or 'must'.
FWIW, my understanding of the difference is that anything saying 'must' has a law associated with it. Not giving way to pedestrians at junctions isn't specifically illegal, but it's an offence if you actually hit someone in the road when they have priority. The *advice* therefore being to give way.
It's really no different to speed limits. You law says you must not exceed the maximum, but the HC suggests circumstances where you should drive slower.
FWIW, my understanding of the difference is that anything saying 'must' has a law associated with it. Not giving way to pedestrians at junctions isn't specifically illegal, but it's an offence if you actually hit someone in the road when they have priority. The *advice* therefore being to give way.
It's really no different to speed limits. You law says you must not exceed the maximum, but the HC suggests circumstances where you should drive slower.
I don't think the courts will take the "should not must" into account when dealing with someone that has mowed down pedestrians
In all seriousness though - its common courtesy to allow peds to cross at junctions, the way and in the spirit of what the HWC is saying. It's highly likely that the driver failing to do so would be annoyed if they were the pedestrian trying to cross a busy junction and no one stopping to allow it. Its common for people's mindset to change as soon as they are in their protective bubble (car) though whereby they become more arrogant.
going W of Peterborough on undulating a605 at weekend - me & guy in front waiting to overtake a 50mph car in 60, guy in front about to move, ambiguous flash from oncoming vehicle 500m away,
which turned out to be plain white camera van - two cars behind us obviously didn't think and barreled past at 70mph+ once oncomer had passed,
we then all saw the van together, which perhaps failed to get a good lock on them as they were still on the wrong side of the road, now braking, with us in between them and van.
I don't use waze when travelling but I'd be curious if people are dropping pins for cameras.
which turned out to be plain white camera van - two cars behind us obviously didn't think and barreled past at 70mph+ once oncomer had passed,
we then all saw the van together, which perhaps failed to get a good lock on them as they were still on the wrong side of the road, now braking, with us in between them and van.
I don't use waze when travelling but I'd be curious if people are dropping pins for cameras.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 9,581
Oh I get it if you hit them, but it has caused a lot of confusion. Especially if you have something like a high speed road turning into a low speed one where you can't exactly stop as you'll overhang into the carriageway. I'd still expect a ped to look and wait if a car is coming, but I see more and more where they step out without even checking the roadI don't think the courts will take the "should not must" into account when dealing with someone that has mowed down pedestrians
In all seriousness though - its common courtesy to allow peds to cross at junctions, the way and in the spirit of what the HWC is saying. It's highly likely that the driver failing to do so would be annoyed if they were the pedestrian trying to cross a busy junction and no one stopping to allow it. Its common for people's mindset to change as soon as they are in their protective bubble (car) though whereby they become more arrogant.
.Yes 9 times out of 10 you'll get an alert for camera vans/police cars