Moving out of the way of an emergency vehicle

[Haggisman]

The police are allowed to direct traffic. They can overrule any existing traffic controls in place.

You are not breaking the law by listening to the police officer.

But do they have to be actively "directing traffic" (e.g. an explicit instruction to move out of the way), or is a police car behind you with blue lights/siren sufficient "direction"? The highway code mentions police vehicles under rule 219, which would suggest the former.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Wouldn't it be great if once or twice a month, say just before/after the evening soap opera's start on BBC1 to hit the maximum amount of people, the Government showed a 30 sec "reminder" video of what the actual, legal rules for driving are i.e -

What to do if you've a blue light vehicle behind you.
How to use a slip road.
What lanes to use on a Motorway.
What the NSL speed is on different roads.
etc

Because far too many people don't seem to be able to remember, or are actively doing something different because "well everyone else does it" etc.

and they could also include "And you realise that nobody pays a mythical Road Tax so don't pick on cyclists" bit.

 

[Uther]

and they could also include "And you realise that nobody pays a mythical Road Tax so don't pick on cyclists" bit.

Well cyclists take no notice of red lights anyway so...

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Well cyclists take no notice of red lights anyway so...

I was out in my car yesterday and saw at least 15 cars in front of me go through red lights at different traffic lights, far more cars do it than cyclists.
The worst one was me pulling off and a car came straight past in front of me.
I didn't see one cyclist yesterday.

 

[Nasher]

Wat? Cyclists go through reds constantly, often in bunches and even at pedestrian crossings with people already crossing! I see it pretty much every morning at the same sets of lights, I've personally witnessed loads of near misses. I very rarely see cars doing it and when they do it's a couple of seconds after it turns red at the most, so they are still well out of the way before it cycles. All of the accidents which have happened locally at traffic lights are cyclists jumping reds and getting squashed.

Electric scooters suddenly pulling across the front of you is now a thing too. But at least if you run them over they will get done for using an unlicenced vehicle when the police show up.

 

[MissChief]

Wouldn't it be great if once or twice a month, say just before/after the evening soap opera's start on BBC1 to hit the maximum amount of people, the Government showed a 30 sec "reminder" video of what the actual, legal rules for driving are i.e -

What to do if you've a blue light vehicle behind you.
How to use a slip road.
What lanes to use on a Motorway.
What the NSL speed is on different roads.
etc

Because far too many people don't seem to be able to remember, or are actively doing something different because "well everyone else does it" etc.

I once witnessed someone joining a motorway in front of me and they started BRAKING towards the end of the slip road, couldn't have been doing more than 40mph and I can only assume didn't think they'd be able to join safely. Very nearly caused an accident behind them as everyone else was accelerating and had to suddenly brake!

 

[Uther]

I once witnessed someone joining a motorway in front of me and they started BRAKING towards the end of the slip road, couldn't have been doing more than 40mph and I can only assume didn't think they'd be able to join safely. Very nearly caused an accident behind them as everyone else was accelerating and had to suddenly brake!

Might have been their first time so panicked a bit. I don't think motorway driving when learning is done is it, or if it is now it certainly never used to be. Someone can go from trundling about at 50 mph with an instructor to suddenly joining the M40 on their own in rush hour...

 

[MissChief]

Might have been their first time so panicked a bit. I don't think motorway driving when learning is done is it, or if it is now it certainly never used to be. Someone can go from trundling about at 50 mph with an instructor to suddenly joining the M40 on their own in rush hour...

Lessons should ideally include at least some dual carriageway driving with a 70 limit. My instructor purposefully took me onto one during my lessons. Really helped me adjust to motorway driving.

 

[ianh]

Lessons should ideally include at least some dual carriageway driving with a 70 limit. My instructor purposefully took me onto one during my lessons. Really helped me adjust to motorway driving.

Same here, straight after I passed my test the instructor drove us and another student back and went through how to join a Motorway etc then demo'd it using a couple of junctions about a mile apart to join, rejoin etc a few times as we went back/forward between the junctions for about 20 mins.

 

[Nasher]

I once witnessed someone joining a motorway in front of me and they started BRAKING towards the end of the slip road, couldn't have been doing more than 40mph and I can only assume didn't think they'd be able to join safely. Very nearly caused an accident behind them as everyone else was accelerating and had to suddenly brake!

I see this sometimes, people almost stopping at the end of slip roads. If they do this I'll either blast down the inside of them or pull out early in to the inside lane and go by them. It's less dangerous.

It should be part of the test and a major fail if they get it wrong. It's where almost all accidents happen on motorways.

 

[tom_e]

But do they have to be actively "directing traffic" (e.g. an explicit instruction to move out of the way), or is a police car behind you with blue lights/siren sufficient "direction"? The highway code mentions police vehicles under rule 219, which would suggest the former.

Yes a uniformed constable needs to explicitly tell you to move iirc

 

[Haggisman]

I was out in my car yesterday and saw at least 15 cars in front of me go through red lights at different traffic lights, far more cars do it than cyclists.
The worst one was me pulling off and a car came straight past in front of me.
I didn't see one cyclist yesterday.

That's only because there are far more cars than cyclists on the road.

Relatively speaking, more cyclists than cars go through red lights.

In the case of cars it tends to also be mostly "Amber gamblers" (or at least nipping through when it's just turned red), whereas i've seen plenty of bikes happily ride past a queue of cars at a red light and carry on straight through, the same is true of zebra crossings

 

[Merlin5]

They’re vehicle/pedestrian sensors for figuring out when to let pedestrians cross

You’ll be fine

Thank you, good to know.

 

[Burnsy2023]

If the ambulance was sat behind you with blues & sirens whilst being held by the lights then the crew failed to adhere to regulations. If you're held by the lights and unable to LEGALLY move out of the way then they are required to silence the siren and wait, not pressure you into breaking the law.

Whilst it would be counter to the training and good practice, none of this is explicitly defined in law. There are no regulations that this hypothetical ambulance would be breaking.

Sure but they won't care when you get the automated fine through the post, or have to deal with the hasstle of it.

You do run the small risk of the officer sticking you on for failure to adhere to an traffic instruction which has the same penalty though.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

I was in the right side of lane at these traffic lights today,

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.6...yl2ZNVSl7s8l9wkKQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-GB

Lights were red and an ambulance was coming through behind me. When it was right behind me with it's lights flashing and siren blaring, I moved through the red light to allow it through. I thought that was always the done thing. According to this police article, I'm still breaking the law and would have to prove an emergency vehicle needed access as a mitigating circumstance. How would I prove it and am I likely to get fined and 3 points?

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q699.htm

Same with me, at red lights ambulance behind and i dont move till its green since you can and will be fined for going through red light.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

I would and have in the past gone through red lights to allow an ambulance past and never heard a thing even from one in derby with a camera that flashed. I assumed because it flashed the ambulance as well then the person in the other end applied common sense!

Its all automated no person checks on other end.
https://metro.co.uk/2021/10/18/surr...th-fine-when-she-walked-in-bus-lane-15439916/

 

[TheVoice]

That's interesting, since the introduction of more 24/7 bus lanes in London recently I see plenty of EMS (actually, pretty sure only police) vehicles in bus lanes without lights & sirens, just saving themselves time. I'm sure if tickets were issued it wouldn't be so prevolent, they seem to do it with impunity.

Emergency warning equipment doesn't need to be active to drive under exemptions.

 

[Resident]

and they could also include "And you realise that nobody pays a mythical Road Tax so don't pick on cyclists *" bit.

* But only if you're a ridiculous pedant and/or aren't educated enough to understand that 'Road Tax' has become a collequal term used to convey the actual term of Vehicle Excise Duty and not referencing an actual tax on the roads...

 

[Conscript]

* But only if you're a ridiculous pedant and/or aren't educated enough to understand that 'Road Tax' has become a collequal term used to convey the actual term of Vehicle Excise Duty and not referencing an actual tax on the roads...

It might be pedantry, but I've lost count of the amount of arguments I've witnessed where the general attitude of "cyclists don't pay road tax" is used to imply that they therefore have less "right" to use the roads. It's scary the amount of people who seem to think it's quite literally a "road tax", as if paying it should therefore grant you special privilege or access to use of the highway.

In those cases, I think it's justified to point out the difference and reiterate that no such concept exists, because I genuinely think it's a dangerous attitude to have.

 

[Werewolf]

Emergency warning equipment doesn't need to be active to drive under exemptions.

Yup one of the myths that people seem to be under is that the police etc need to have their lights/sirens on to use their exemptions, iirc in law there are basically no limits, but they have to follow their force/service rules*.
From memory the emergency services get a lot of stick for using their sirens, so usually try to not use them too much and might even turn off the lights if the police are trying to get somewhere quietly in an emergency.

Re the red light, i've seen comments by emergency service people (including the police) saying you don't have any exemption for crossing it to let say an ambulance through, but that if you do get a fine and can show you did so safely the magistrates/people giving the fines can waive it, however that was a few years back.


*The reason most forces have rules in place so that officers need to get permission/inform the control room if they're going to speed (above a certain level?), and why a few years back a police officer doing very high speeds was found not guilty when he claimed he was "training" in his police car whilst on duty, apparently his force didn't have that specific rule in place so he wasn't breaking the law in terms of speeding because as an on duty officer he was exempt, and his employing force hadn't put it in the regs that he needed permission to do it.