Highway Code

[clubchamp98]

This might be for all the morons on their phones just stepping into the road.
It puts the onus on the driver but it’s impossible to guess what a Ped is going to do.

Some of the worst crashese I have seen are car drivers letting another car out and that gets hit by one overtaking the stationary car.
What happens if a driver stops for a ped and another car overtakes it the peds dead.

I was very sternly told off by a US cop for jaywalking and he did let me have it.
I was unaware of that law in my defence.
We should go that way imo and cross only on crossings.
But need safer places to cross.

This will be changed I think in future.
As a cyclist I will not be undertaking anything even if I have the right.

 

[RichA]

This might be for all the morons on their phones just stepping into the road.
It puts the onus on the driver but it’s impossible to guess what a Ped is going to do.

Some of the worst crashese I have seen are car drivers letting another car out and that gets hit by one overtaking the stationary car.
What happens if a driver stops for a ped and another car overtakes it the peds dead.

I was very sternly told off by a US cop for jaywalking and he did let me have it.
I was unaware of that law in my defence.
We should go that way imo and cross only on crossings.
But need safer places to cross.

This will be changed I think in future.
As a cyclist I will not be undertaking anything even if I have the right.

Maybe it's to sharpen up the morons on their phones driving down the road.

 

[clubchamp98]

Maybe it's to sharpen up the morons on their phones driving down the road.

Possibly but selfish drivers won’t even know of these changes imo.
there is only one loser in that scenario.
Moron on the phone walking = dead.
Moron on the phone driving= killer .

My biggest concern here is someone just stepping out in front of a car claiming they have right of way.
You know it’s going to happen.

 

[larmen]

I drive like that already. I learned in a Germany and that’s the norm there.you turn, pedestrian traffic going straight has priority. In 20 years here I have never been rear ended. These situations don’t happen on 40mph roads around here, mostly on 20 mph streets anyway.

As a pedestrian I never assume anything. If I can’t see the driver looking at me I don’t cross. Even if they are going straight, too many people see indicators use as optional, and not just beamers.

Now on the scooter when filtering i never filter all the way to the front if there isn’t a clear space. I am fine going past plenty of standing cars and be 2nd across, I don’t have to go into someone’s blind spot to shoot out 1st. And I am especially careful around HGVs, even more so on roundabouts.
I am probably the slowest rider out there, still faster than cars and a lot cheaper than public transport.

 

[Backache]

I avoid traffic lights or not press the button never mind zebra crossings. I tend to just use a normal bit of road and look and cross safely of my own volition. Motor vehicles should always have right of way being the majority, fastest and slowest to stop.

In Towns & Cities I don't think motor vehicles are the majority. They are also the most dangerous in terms of speed and mass it therefore is behoven on them to exhibit the greatest care.

 

[Swango1980]

Going back to my OP, and taking the quoted guidance, how would it apply to the following:

I'm driving 60mph on a national speed limit A Road. There is a priority junction coming up, but I am just going straight on. I see a ped on the footway of the A Road, and it looks like they are waiting to cross the main carriageway.

Do I stop on the main carriageway and give the pedestrian priority? Traditionally, I'd have just kept going, once it is clear the ped is actually waiting and not going to jump out in front of me of course.

 

[Backache]

Going back to my OP, and taking the quoted guidance, how would it apply to the following:

I'm driving 60mph on a national speed limit A Road. There is a priority junction coming up, but I am just going straight on. I see a ped on the footway of the A Road, and it looks like they are waiting to cross the main carriageway.

Do I stop on the main carriageway and give the pedestrian priority? Traditionally, I'd have just kept going, once it is clear the ped is actually waiting and not going to jump out in front of me of course.

Doesn't sound like there is any indication that you do not have right of way in those circumstances , if I was concerned that someone might step out into the road I'd slow up though.

 

[Swango1980]

Doesn't sound like there is any indication that you do not have right of way in those circumstances , if I was concerned that someone might step out into the road I'd slow up though.

That is what I hope, it is just the wording I read simply said at a junction, it didn't clarify it only applies to turning traffic.

 

[Golfmmad]

Going back to my OP, and taking the quoted guidance, how would it apply to the following:

I'm driving 60mph on a national speed limit A Road. There is a priority junction coming up, but I am just going straight on. I see a ped on the footway of the A Road, and it looks like they are waiting to cross the main carriageway.

Do I stop on the main carriageway and give the pedestrian priority? Traditionally, I'd have just kept going, once it is clear the ped is actually waiting and not going to jump out in front of me of course.

Surely if a pedestrian is expecting priority in that situation it puts them at great risk. If that is the case then the rule should be scrapped!

 

[Foxholer]

Going back to my OP, and taking the quoted guidance, how would it apply to the following:

I'm driving 60mph on a national speed limit A Road. There is a priority junction coming up, but I am just going straight on. I see a ped on the footway of the A Road, and it looks like they are waiting to cross the main carriageway.

Do I stop on the main carriageway and give the pedestrian priority? Traditionally, I'd have just kept going, once it is clear the ped is actually waiting and not going to jump out in front of me of course.

Are there any such roads? I would have thought it likely that a footway (at least one adjacent to the road) would 'disqualify' the road from being a NSL one. That said, the Code says 'should' and not 'must'. So it likely depends on whether, and how close any following traffic is.

 

[Jamesbrown]

In Towns & Cities I don't think motor vehicles are the majority. They are also the most dangerous in terms of speed and mass it therefore is behoven on them to exhibit the greatest care.

I’d hope the city and towns roads were majority motor vehicles otherwise I’d be questioning why it isn’t pedestrianised completely.

Perhaps it’s just me but being the most vulnerable as a pedestrian I would expect myself to exhibit the greatest of care as I do anyway. but then I’m not one to blame others for my own stupidity. If I was to get hit at a junction crossing the road it could only and should be my fault unless exceptional circumstances such as speeding driver irregardless of what the Highway Code says.

I shall continue to give motor vehicles right of way as that’s the most common sense and logical behaviour.
These two hedgehogs will save your life.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I understand the rule in a sense, as you almost want to enforce that the turning driver must yield to the undertaking driver (who would inevitably be a cyclist), as there have been many horrific accidents of cyclists getting killed after an HGV turned into them. Although, if something goes wrong and the driver does turn into them, does that make them liable (more so than before), or can they defend themselves if they simply did not see the cyclist, who may well have come flying up the inside?

Practically, you just want to tell all cyclists NOT to undertake vehicles as they approach a junction turning left. Which the second part of that Rule 76 appears to be edging towards.

Yes well undertaking by cyclists was always a dangerous and therefore wrong thing to do.
I am of the view that this Highway Code amendment has been cobbled up by those who have looked st the stats for how injuries etc have occurred to cyclists and made priorities for them with no regard as to whether what the cyclists were doing was the wrong thing or not.
How dare they agree to legitimise (specific) wrongful acts by cyclists (because it injures or kills them) and thus make criminals out of vehicle drivers doing what was the right way to do it beforehand?
As someone as rightly said, "Carnage will follow"

 

[Swango1980]

Are there any such roads? I would have thought it likely that a footway (at least one adjacent to the road) would 'disqualify' the road from being a NSL one. That said, the Code says 'should' and not 'must'. So it likely depends on whether, and how close any following traffic is.

Yeah, everywhere in Lincolnshire anyway. I often go running on them

 

[Foxholer]

Yeah, everywhere in Lincolnshire anyway. I often go running on them

Could well cause a few issues with the new code then!
While the 'should' gets around some of the issues, seems (to me) there's some disasters possible, which is what the Code should seek to eliminate.

 

[Imurg]

Going back to my OP, and taking the quoted guidance, how would it apply to the following:

I'm driving 60mph on a national speed limit A Road. There is a priority junction coming up, but I am just going straight on. I see a ped on the footway of the A Road, and it looks like they are waiting to cross the main carriageway.

Do I stop on the main carriageway and give the pedestrian priority? Traditionally, I'd have just kept going, once it is clear the ped is actually waiting and not going to jump out in front of me of course.

No you don't because you're not turning into or out of a side road...thats where the priority changes.
If you were turning ,eft out of the side road and the pedestrian was waiting on the A road then, if it's appropriate, you give way.
But if youre pulling out of a T junction onto a 60 limit you probably don't want to hang about as anything coming from the right is going to catch you pretty quick if you've slowed to let the pedestrian cross...so in that scenario it's probably not appropriate....
See how confusing it is?
How many pedestrians have read the new changes? Do they fully understand them?
Not many and probably not would be my answers.

 

[Backache]

I’d hope the city and towns roads were majority motor vehicles otherwise I’d be questioning why it isn’t pedestrianised completely.

Perhaps it’s just me but being the most vulnerable as a pedestrian I would expect myself to exhibit the greatest of care as I do anyway. but then I’m not one to blame others for my own stupidity. If I was to get hit at a junction crossing the road it could only and should be my fault unless exceptional circumstances such as speeding driver irregardless of what the Highway Code says.

I shall continue to give motor vehicles right of way as that’s the most common sense and logical behaviour.
These two hedgehogs will save your life.

The greatest duty of care should be exhibited by those who can cause the most damage. Pedestrians include children , the elderly people with impairments when using roads that are also occupied by pedestrians vehicular road users should go slowly be able to stop immediately and allow them passage.
None of which is to say that pedestrians should not also look out for themselves. As stated I wait at zebra crossings when I'm a pedestrian but that doesn't mean the car should not stop which I also do in a car.

 

[Imurg]

The greatest duty of care should be exhibited by those who can cause the most damage. Pedestrians include children , the elderly people with impairments when using roads that are also occupied by pedestrians vehicular road users should go slowly be able to stop immediately and allow them passage.
None of which is to say that pedestrians should not also look out for themselves. As stated I wait at zebra crossings when I'm a pedestrian but that doesn't mean the car should not stop which I also do in a car.

Somewhat bizarrely, previously there was no requirement to stop at a Zebra unless the pedestrian was actually on the crossing...goes back to the black and white rule of On the road- Give way, off the road don't.
But if a pedestrian was waiting to cross and, on your driving test, you didn't stop..you would fail....

 

[clubchamp98]

I drive like that already. I learned in a Germany and that’s the norm there.you turn, pedestrian traffic going straight has priority. In 20 years here I have never been rear ended. These situations don’t happen on 40mph roads around here, mostly on 20 mph streets anyway.

As a pedestrian I never assume anything. If I can’t see the driver looking at me I don’t cross. Even if they are going straight, too many people see indicators use as optional, and not just beamers.

Now on the scooter when filtering i never filter all the way to the front if there isn’t a clear space. I am fine going past plenty of standing cars and be 2nd across, I don’t have to go into someone’s blind spot to shoot out 1st. And I am especially careful around HGVs, even more so on roundabouts.
I am probably the slowest rider out there, still faster than cars and a lot cheaper than public transport.

Spot on personal responsibility seems to have gone out the window these days.

 

[drdel]

I might be wrong but wasn't the advice to pedestrians: don't cross near a junction, brow a hill etc?

 

[Foxholer]

I might be wrong but wasn't the advice to pedestrians: don't cross near a junction, brow a hill etc?

Irrespective of whether there was such advice, there doesn't appear to be so now - which is all that matters. In fact, there are diagrams that specifically show pedestrians crossing near a junction.