but woukd you not be guilty of casuing an obstruction on the highway, to allow a pedestrian to cross a road not at a crossing?
NIP - Driving without due care and attention
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
- Status
but woukd you not be guilty of casuing an obstruction on the highway, to allow a pedestrian to cross a road not at a crossing?
Soldato
What if the NIP relates to another incident entirely? Something else could have happened that's not on cam?
Soldato
Care to point out either within legal texts or the highway code that this is written, outside of a marked crossing (zebra)?
As far as I'm aware if the pedestrian is still on the pavement then the car has right of way. It's a shame we haven't adopted 'jay-walking' laws like quite a few countries have.
Caporegime
Rule 170 of the highway code.
Man of Honour
The short summary for everyone else is that having seen the video, and if I were in the position of the OP's wife, I would likely challenge this in court. I can't afford to have a due care and attention conviction though, so the stakes are a little higher for me.
Man of Honour
That only states "Started to cross" standing on the pavement wouldn't class as started to cross as far as I'm concerned.
https://news.sky.com/story/drivers-...estrians-under-highway-code-shake-up-11528398
looks like they thought about clarifying it but I can't see any mention of that on the .gov highway code.
Caporegime
If they're stood and have looked are they not starting to cross? You're right, it's a very loose bit of text.
we can't see the video to see if they/pedestrian had moved/stepped back ... if it was a left bend, it's possible they did, and camera didn't catch it.
.. if they had looked left/right and had momentum towards the road, too - that's starting to cross I think.
20-30m after a bend should be within 30mph stopping distance, your're meant to drive too conditions anyway. eg. you come up on a parked school bus.
.. if they had looked left/right and had momentum towards the road, too - that's starting to cross I think.
expected standard measure applies too.
20-30m after a bend should be within 30mph stopping distance, your're meant to drive too conditions anyway. eg. you come up on a parked school bus.
Soldato
As others have pointed out, 170 states 'started to cross'. If they are still on the pavement, as is stated that the footage shows in this instance then they have not started to cross.
Caporegime
Not if they're still on the pavement and have some form of motion or momentum. Then they've definitely started.
Man of Honour
No, stopping for a hazard is not causing an obstruction on a highway.
Underboss
Soldato
So you just walk out into the road without looking to check that it's safe to do so?
Were you never taught 'the green cross code'?
Caporegime
Look at my previous post. You'll notice I specifically mentioned that.
However yes, some people do.
Associate
I guess the point is not whether they had started to cross or not but whether the driver in question could have stopped if they were in the middle of crossing having come round a corner too quick for the visible distance they had. Is that not the difference between 'driving without due care and attention' and 'causing death or injury through careless driving'. The failure of the driver is the same - it is just the outcome which is different.
However in the case in point without good evidence of speed actually being driven I am not sure how they can prove the case.
However in the case in point without good evidence of speed actually being driven I am not sure how they can prove the case.
Man of Honour
The evidence will be the officer's statement.
- Status