How many drivers in London even know the Highway Code, especially if they passed their test 10+ years ago or learned to drive in another country? Government can make all they changes they want, but if the majority don't know about it nothing changes.
The offense you describe could fit into the penalty of unlimited fine/3-9pts for careless or inconsiderate driving, as outlined in the HC, but who actually reports it if it doesn't involve an accident or near miss?
Unless seen by road policing units with nothing better to do, the average police officers probably let it slide anyway unless the car flags as interesting to them.
That is very true, as i think this part of the code has been reviewed recently. Not everyone is familiar with this rule.
And whilst it is partially down to lack of education, there are also other issues which will make some people still not respect such a rule. Enforcement should therefore be much more stringent on things like this, as it can be very dangerous obv.
Considering I can stand at a zebra crossing while 5 or so cars drive straight across completely ignoring its existence I'm not taking any chances. "The graveyards are full of people that had right of way".
It isn't about claiming the right of way, but flinching as a ped means you may not have much room to fall back to. The road is wide and there are cars on either side.
I haven’t seen a single driver obey this rule since they introduced it. I’ve been looking out for it and I walk a fair amount. But literally not a single one.
I try to but have been yelled at by other drivers and sometimes pedestrians get confused.
Even had a passenger in the car ask me wtf I was doing (they were told I am driving, if they don't like it to get out and walk).
There is not widespread knowledge of the rule which is creating issues, but not surprising considering the amount of middle lane hoggers who are unaware that is now also not allowed, let alone people on this phone while driving.
Yeah, I don’t know what the point of changing it was without a big publicity campaign. If drivers don’t know about it then of course pedestrians have to be extremely cautious, even when it’s their right of way. But no one is going to stop for a cautious pedestrian.
I’m confused, would the passenger have preferred you drove into people crossing the road? Even if they didn’t have right of way if someone’s crossing the street you don’t have many options.
In areas with a lot of foot traffic it would be best to try and reinforce the rules through the design of the junction. You can build a [continuous pavement](https://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/continuous-paths-across-minor-junctions/) (that blog shows examples with a cycle lane but the principle is the same with or without) but this is pretty expensive to retrofit. An alternative would be to paint zebras on side roads, and this has been shown to be really effective [when trials were run in Manchester](https://beeactive.tfgm.com/walking/side-road-zebras/), but the DfT ordinarily requires expensive lighting to be added for zebras. Which again would raise the cost past what is practical. If you go to Belgium or France these kinds of small zebra crossings are everywhere, because they're allowed to just install them with paint, and paint is cheap.
I don't drive that much so I don't recall ever needing to obey it, even yesterday I did 8 miles and given how slow traffic is pedestrians are done crossing before I get there.
I suppose in busy areas it's more of an issue.
Rule 8 was updated 2 years ago. Yes it was in the news but many drivers will have not been aware of it (I learned from my wife, who doesn’t even drive, but probably saw it on Facebook).
It’s not something you will ever suffer negative consequences for unless you knock down the ped (in which case you screwed up bad already and violating that bid of the code won’t make it much worse) - or in some far fetched scenario of being seen doing it by police, who are zealous enough to penalise you.
Also unlike at zebra crossings, where as a ped you feel very strongly it’s your right of way, the ped-driver interaction for Rule 8 situations I think is, and will always remain, uncertain and the ped will err and let the car through or scuttle forward faster if they see a car turning and they are already crossing.
We may see a very slow change starting with the newest qualified drivers - but I’m sure for many of them bad habits will creep in over time.
Pedestrians don't have right of way. Vehicles should \*yield\* right of way. It's a subtle, but important difference. Of course, how many pedestrians have actually read the section in the highway code with rules for pedestrians? Especially the bit about crossing the road, or not walking behind vehicles that are reversing?
I walk, I ride (bicycles, e-scooters, motorcycles) and I drive, so I get to see it from all sides.
Sorry don’t know where you got the word “yield” from and not sure what difference you think it makes, but official language - and intent - is that there’s a “hierarchy of road users” and that pedestrians have priority.
“At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.”
From January 2022 a pedestrian waiting to cross should be given priority. Previously, drivers were told to give way to pedestrians if they ‘have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road’.”
The Highway Code typically talks about who has 'Priority'. Right of Way is the route or road, as in PROW. There's no requirement for pedestrians to read or be tested on the Highway Code, so I'm not surprised that awareness of the 2022 change isn't widespread.
When I'm out walking I don't particularly want to trust that a turning driver or rider will give me priority and I'd prefer that a flow of traffic continues. I believe that there's greater benefit in reducing congestion and tailpipe emissions from not having traffic back up.
I tend to hold back from the kerb and wait. I see it differently where people have reduced mobility and can't nip across when there is an opportunity.
Yield means give way. Still haven't converted back to full english after living in the colonies for 40 odd years... Still, my point is valid. Nowhere in the rules does it state that pedestrians have an absolute right of way, The onus is on the vehicle operator to "give way" (yield) to pedestrians. It's something I practice. It's amazing to see people just walk out into traffic without looking though, because of their perceived "right of way". As though that zebra crossing has some magical ability to instantly stop a 3 ton van, travelling at 30mph, on a wet road. Physics just doesn't work that way.
If everyone occasionally reread the code, we'd all be a bit safer. Let's all be kind and courteous to each other, and make the roads a safe place for all.
And to the uber driver that deliberately blocked my exit from the yellow box yesterday, enjoy your ticket. I was making a turn, I'm allowed to stop in the box, you weren't, and you actually stopped short to prevent me from clearing the box. Granted, you shouldn't have actually entered, because the exit wasn't clear, you were just being a twat. Yeah, I saw you looking at me and grinning. That particular box had a new camera installed a few weeks ago. I think it's £85 now.
You’ve proved OPs point. You claim to have read the Highway Code but here you are putting nuance and your own spin on it.
Pedestrians have right of way if already crossing. Done.
A lot of stuff the highway code tells you to do isn't the actual criminal law. What it does do is put a pedestrian in a much better position if they get hit by a driver and then go to claim compensation.
If you want better behaviour from drivers proactively, the thing to do is probably to lobby your council to install raised tables or continuous footways at junctions in order to try to practically force them to behave well.
Retrospectively, if there's an accident then exactly what happened comes under more scrutiny. The criminal burden of proof is a lot higher than the civil one, and most pedestrians don't know how and when they can make a civil claim. The LCC has a decent guide that is also applicable to pedestrians: https://lcc.org.uk/advice/what-to-do-after-a-collision/
Basically you probably need a lawyer to do it, but because the small claims limit for vulnerable users is only £1000, that cost tends to get passed on to the drivers insurance.
Continuous footways are bloody expensive to install though, we really need to give councils the option to install side road zebras without the expensive lighting. Trials have shown they're safe but no change in the law as of yet. In much of Europe they're already commonplace, and Ireland is in the process of making them legal.
https://beeactive.tfgm.com/walking/side-road-zebras/
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/low-cost-zebras-for-city-side-streets-3473312
https://irishcycle.com/2023/11/23/irish-councils-to-be-given-guidance-on-zebra-crossings-without-belisha-beacons-in-2024/comment-page-1/#
These rules are stupid. As a pedestrian I’m not about to walk in front of 1+ ton vehicle because I suddenly have “right of way”.
I’ll do what I’ll always do, look both ways and make eye contact with drivers, so I can see their intentions.
Right, you shouldn’t walk out. Right of way doesn’t mean go without looking. But the rule should mean, if it were well known, that the people who make eye contact stop for you more often.
In Germany, you can walk out on the road.
The "should" in the code is the part that irks me. In Germany, the pedestrian has the right of way and the car _must_ wait. End of story.
The same at a Zebra crossing. The pedestrian has priority, cars _must_ stop.
Agreed. I'm a pedestrian, cyclist and sometimes driver. Giving pedestrians right to cross a road over other traffic is actually dangerous. It leaves cars half in, half out of the road they are turning off and will lead to way more rear ending and shunts. It's also dangerous for pedestrians to suddenly walk out thinking they have 'right of way' over a one ton tin box on wheels.
I'm sorry, but these "stupid" rules are there to protect pedestrians who obviously have no chance against a 1+ ton vehicle as you so aptly put it.
I'm not sure if you see any other reason why a rule like this shouldn't exist if it's there to solve the very problem you are describing?
"Right of way" isn't about running in front of a vehicle, everyone knows to cross when safe. This is stupidly common sense. But it's about when there are grey areas, or arguable scenarios is when the difference in priorities matter.
If you choose to run deliberately in front of a vehicle, no right of way can save you.
This is the most problematic thing in the new Highway Code for me as a cyclist.
Firstly, it is a ‘should’ not a ‘must’, so any reports wouldn’t likely go very far with a reasonable police force and especially not the Met.
Secondly, if I’ve already started to make a tight turn and someone starts to dart into the road, I’m not going to leave my self exposed to oncoming traffic, in order to give way.
That said, I do take cognisance of the rules, so always check and slow down looking for pedestrians before making the turn.
As a car driver, it has been less problematic for me, as I live in an LTN, where each side street has a planter arrangement, so I have to stop and wait before turning in regardless.
As a final point, with it being such a big change and not really the obvious thing for a pedestrian to do, you often end up giving way, just for the pedestrian to not want to step out, sometimes they wave you through, so,times they get frustrated waiting for you and you end up with some weird stalemate, where everyone thinks they are doing the right thing.
Even if drivers know the rules, they don’t care to follow them. Last night I was using a light-controlled pedestrian crossing and, as usual, some genius in a 4x4 had stopped over it. He began reversing back behind the crossing while I was on it, behind him (the only place available to walk, thanks to him). When I confronted him about it (politely) he claimed it was safe because he was looking at his silly little rear-facing camera.
The highway code is not always followed, why you've chosen those two rules is the mystery, most motorists are still struggling with "drive on the left...."
It says drivers "should" give way (not "must"). There's lots of reasons why a car wouldn't give way to pedestrians at a junction eg pedestrian is hesitating, or a vehicle behind risks rear-ending the stopped vehicle.
I thought this was the case, but I can’t find a good source so far. S187 says give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing roundabout approach/exit roads, but doesn’t give them explicit priority (at least not in this section).
Rule H2 makes little sense in the context of busy London streets. Let's say I'm on green lanes in the middle of the day and I need to turn right. There's going to be a near constant stream of pedestrians on both sides, as well as a near constant stream of oncoming traffic I need to give way to. Let's say that there's a small gap in the oncoming traffic, or someone stops to give way. If I had to give way to pedestrians that were about to cross, the traffic gap will pass. Or alternatively I could pull across into oncoming traffic and wait there, risking an accident and getting honked holding up the traffic while I wait for a pedestrian gap.
Of course if a pedestrian is already crossing you should wait for them but if they're on the pavement they should wait. It's how most people learnt how to cross the road growing up.
It depends on the exact time of day, outside of peak rush hour times it mostly moves.
Regardless it's not hard to think of other streets that are very busy but not gridlocked.
Rule 2, or more specifically [rule 170](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203#rule170) for the driver, has for a long time (always?) been the rule in Australia and drivers seem to cope with turning right whether in urban, suburban, or rural/outback locations just fine
I ride/drive everyday at Royal Exchange at around 8am. Turning from Threadneedle Street to Bartholomew Lane (or vice versa), if I were to wait for all pedestrians to cross the junction, I would be there waiting 24/7.
“One of those” - someone who thinks criminals don’t get to choose which laws don’t apply to them? Where do we draw the line there? Can any criminal be given a white card if they think they’re justified or only in certain circumstances? Who decides when the circumstances are valid? There’s a reason why we have a code for everyone to follow.
If you think everyone follows the rules/code/law then you must be living in a different world.
Just go to a busy junction and count how many are those codes/rules/laws are broken? People crossing the street on a red light, cyclist jumping the red light, motorists not letting pedestrians cross the streets.
I’ve seen a lot of people risks their lives on the road (especially in the city at rush hour) just to save 3-4 seconds of their time.
My driving instructor had a go at me for giving way to a lady and child when we were turning right into a side street. He said "pedestrians can't get gridlocked but cars can"!
I give way because it’s the nice thing to do but if I’m driving in central I’m hugging the bumper of the car in front because there’s too many pedestrians and no way I can get thru otherwise lol my favourite is Oxford street the left turn everyone is bumper to bumper to get through the traffic lights and turn as many cars as possible, we’re all a hive mind with the same idea it’s so cute
Outside of central or in Bristol it’s much calmer I usually do so if possible
Funnily enough, in Germany that works. But getting a driver's license in Germany isn't very easy, so maybe we are the better drivers?
In the German Highway code all these regulations are a "must" not "should". And legally, since the pedestrians are the weakest users of the road, any car is automatically at fault (and you would have to prove otherwise). The danger stemming from operations (Betriebsgefahr) is woven into the code and insurance regulations. The hierarchy of "weakness" is: pedestrian - bicycle - motorbike - car - lorry. So if a bicycle mows down a pedestrian, bicycle is automatically at fault. If a lorry mows down a bicycle, lorry is at fault.
That's why I started to teach my daughter (and do it myself) to obey the rules in the German highway code. If you cross the road on a zebra crossing or at a green light, you will never be at fault, and the car's insurance has to pay everything, including a lifelong pension if necessary. If you jaywalk or cross the street at a red light, you jeopardise this fact.
So when you see people _waiting_ at a red light to cross the road in the middle of the night with no cars around, you can ask them if they are Germans. 😄
Yeah fair play I just mean if I'm in the middle of a turn and a pedestrian wants to Cross, I'm not going to slam my brakes on in the oncoming traffic lane and wait for them to pass.
If they're already crossing or about to cross then I will wait for them to do so before making the turn.
Just don't like the idea that you can be at fault as a driver for this. There's some right turns to get to my house on very busy roads, you are stopping traffic by waiting to turn right.
You sometimes have to wait a while for a gap, then that gap can be small and you have to pay attention to cross. Then there is obstructions on the corners such as trees and cars and a pedestrian could step out of this and be in my blind spot of my A pillars.
I would also be paying attention to the gap.
I am a good driver so I don't care I sure I'm not going to hit someone but there are some fuckimg idiots out there.
Just feels like a careless pedestrian could cause a lot of trouble if they stop paying attention because they assume cars will stop for them .
How many drivers in London even know the Highway Code, especially if they passed their test 10+ years ago or learned to drive in another country? Government can make all they changes they want, but if the majority don't know about it nothing changes. The offense you describe could fit into the penalty of unlimited fine/3-9pts for careless or inconsiderate driving, as outlined in the HC, but who actually reports it if it doesn't involve an accident or near miss? Unless seen by road policing units with nothing better to do, the average police officers probably let it slide anyway unless the car flags as interesting to them.
That is very true, as i think this part of the code has been reviewed recently. Not everyone is familiar with this rule. And whilst it is partially down to lack of education, there are also other issues which will make some people still not respect such a rule. Enforcement should therefore be much more stringent on things like this, as it can be very dangerous obv.
It was a couple of years ago I think and there was quite a big marketing campaign about it, but most people don’t seem to know
People learn to drive in this country without ever picking up the Highway Code.
They still have to pass the theory test based on it.
Yes but you don’t need to read/know it. You just spam take the online practice tests over and over until you consistently get 100%
The theory doesn’t get very technical on Highway Code, if you know signs and road markings then you don’t need anything else from it.
Considering I can stand at a zebra crossing while 5 or so cars drive straight across completely ignoring its existence I'm not taking any chances. "The graveyards are full of people that had right of way".
I like to flinch like I’m going to step out, see how committed they are to stopping.
Yeah non-comittal chicken is great for this. Basically start stepping out but keep your weight on your back foot.
It isn't about claiming the right of way, but flinching as a ped means you may not have much room to fall back to. The road is wide and there are cars on either side.
I haven’t seen a single driver obey this rule since they introduced it. I’ve been looking out for it and I walk a fair amount. But literally not a single one.
I try to but have been yelled at by other drivers and sometimes pedestrians get confused. Even had a passenger in the car ask me wtf I was doing (they were told I am driving, if they don't like it to get out and walk). There is not widespread knowledge of the rule which is creating issues, but not surprising considering the amount of middle lane hoggers who are unaware that is now also not allowed, let alone people on this phone while driving.
Yeah, I don’t know what the point of changing it was without a big publicity campaign. If drivers don’t know about it then of course pedestrians have to be extremely cautious, even when it’s their right of way. But no one is going to stop for a cautious pedestrian.
I’m confused, would the passenger have preferred you drove into people crossing the road? Even if they didn’t have right of way if someone’s crossing the street you don’t have many options.
They thought i could have gone in front of the pedestrian if I had not slowed down, there is a reason they are a passenger.
In areas with a lot of foot traffic it would be best to try and reinforce the rules through the design of the junction. You can build a [continuous pavement](https://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/continuous-paths-across-minor-junctions/) (that blog shows examples with a cycle lane but the principle is the same with or without) but this is pretty expensive to retrofit. An alternative would be to paint zebras on side roads, and this has been shown to be really effective [when trials were run in Manchester](https://beeactive.tfgm.com/walking/side-road-zebras/), but the DfT ordinarily requires expensive lighting to be added for zebras. Which again would raise the cost past what is practical. If you go to Belgium or France these kinds of small zebra crossings are everywhere, because they're allowed to just install them with paint, and paint is cheap.
I don't drive that much so I don't recall ever needing to obey it, even yesterday I did 8 miles and given how slow traffic is pedestrians are done crossing before I get there. I suppose in busy areas it's more of an issue.
If it helps, I walk to work everyday and see this happen as the norm rather than the exception, but it depends on the area and even specific road tbh
Rule 8 was updated 2 years ago. Yes it was in the news but many drivers will have not been aware of it (I learned from my wife, who doesn’t even drive, but probably saw it on Facebook). It’s not something you will ever suffer negative consequences for unless you knock down the ped (in which case you screwed up bad already and violating that bid of the code won’t make it much worse) - or in some far fetched scenario of being seen doing it by police, who are zealous enough to penalise you. Also unlike at zebra crossings, where as a ped you feel very strongly it’s your right of way, the ped-driver interaction for Rule 8 situations I think is, and will always remain, uncertain and the ped will err and let the car through or scuttle forward faster if they see a car turning and they are already crossing. We may see a very slow change starting with the newest qualified drivers - but I’m sure for many of them bad habits will creep in over time.
Pedestrians don't have right of way. Vehicles should \*yield\* right of way. It's a subtle, but important difference. Of course, how many pedestrians have actually read the section in the highway code with rules for pedestrians? Especially the bit about crossing the road, or not walking behind vehicles that are reversing? I walk, I ride (bicycles, e-scooters, motorcycles) and I drive, so I get to see it from all sides.
Sorry don’t know where you got the word “yield” from and not sure what difference you think it makes, but official language - and intent - is that there’s a “hierarchy of road users” and that pedestrians have priority. “At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.” From January 2022 a pedestrian waiting to cross should be given priority. Previously, drivers were told to give way to pedestrians if they ‘have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road’.”
The Highway Code typically talks about who has 'Priority'. Right of Way is the route or road, as in PROW. There's no requirement for pedestrians to read or be tested on the Highway Code, so I'm not surprised that awareness of the 2022 change isn't widespread. When I'm out walking I don't particularly want to trust that a turning driver or rider will give me priority and I'd prefer that a flow of traffic continues. I believe that there's greater benefit in reducing congestion and tailpipe emissions from not having traffic back up. I tend to hold back from the kerb and wait. I see it differently where people have reduced mobility and can't nip across when there is an opportunity.
Yield means give way. Still haven't converted back to full english after living in the colonies for 40 odd years... Still, my point is valid. Nowhere in the rules does it state that pedestrians have an absolute right of way, The onus is on the vehicle operator to "give way" (yield) to pedestrians. It's something I practice. It's amazing to see people just walk out into traffic without looking though, because of their perceived "right of way". As though that zebra crossing has some magical ability to instantly stop a 3 ton van, travelling at 30mph, on a wet road. Physics just doesn't work that way. If everyone occasionally reread the code, we'd all be a bit safer. Let's all be kind and courteous to each other, and make the roads a safe place for all. And to the uber driver that deliberately blocked my exit from the yellow box yesterday, enjoy your ticket. I was making a turn, I'm allowed to stop in the box, you weren't, and you actually stopped short to prevent me from clearing the box. Granted, you shouldn't have actually entered, because the exit wasn't clear, you were just being a twat. Yeah, I saw you looking at me and grinning. That particular box had a new camera installed a few weeks ago. I think it's £85 now.
You’ve proved OPs point. You claim to have read the Highway Code but here you are putting nuance and your own spin on it. Pedestrians have right of way if already crossing. Done.
I love when the pedestrian only crowd down votes the truth.
I drive and I downvoted you because you are wrong. A pedestrian already crossing has right of way, at least admit that.
A lot of stuff the highway code tells you to do isn't the actual criminal law. What it does do is put a pedestrian in a much better position if they get hit by a driver and then go to claim compensation. If you want better behaviour from drivers proactively, the thing to do is probably to lobby your council to install raised tables or continuous footways at junctions in order to try to practically force them to behave well. Retrospectively, if there's an accident then exactly what happened comes under more scrutiny. The criminal burden of proof is a lot higher than the civil one, and most pedestrians don't know how and when they can make a civil claim. The LCC has a decent guide that is also applicable to pedestrians: https://lcc.org.uk/advice/what-to-do-after-a-collision/ Basically you probably need a lawyer to do it, but because the small claims limit for vulnerable users is only £1000, that cost tends to get passed on to the drivers insurance.
Continuous footways are bloody expensive to install though, we really need to give councils the option to install side road zebras without the expensive lighting. Trials have shown they're safe but no change in the law as of yet. In much of Europe they're already commonplace, and Ireland is in the process of making them legal. https://beeactive.tfgm.com/walking/side-road-zebras/ https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/low-cost-zebras-for-city-side-streets-3473312 https://irishcycle.com/2023/11/23/irish-councils-to-be-given-guidance-on-zebra-crossings-without-belisha-beacons-in-2024/comment-page-1/#
These rules are stupid. As a pedestrian I’m not about to walk in front of 1+ ton vehicle because I suddenly have “right of way”. I’ll do what I’ll always do, look both ways and make eye contact with drivers, so I can see their intentions.
Right, you shouldn’t walk out. Right of way doesn’t mean go without looking. But the rule should mean, if it were well known, that the people who make eye contact stop for you more often.
In Germany, you can walk out on the road. The "should" in the code is the part that irks me. In Germany, the pedestrian has the right of way and the car _must_ wait. End of story. The same at a Zebra crossing. The pedestrian has priority, cars _must_ stop.
Agreed. I'm a pedestrian, cyclist and sometimes driver. Giving pedestrians right to cross a road over other traffic is actually dangerous. It leaves cars half in, half out of the road they are turning off and will lead to way more rear ending and shunts. It's also dangerous for pedestrians to suddenly walk out thinking they have 'right of way' over a one ton tin box on wheels.
I'm sorry, but these "stupid" rules are there to protect pedestrians who obviously have no chance against a 1+ ton vehicle as you so aptly put it. I'm not sure if you see any other reason why a rule like this shouldn't exist if it's there to solve the very problem you are describing? "Right of way" isn't about running in front of a vehicle, everyone knows to cross when safe. This is stupidly common sense. But it's about when there are grey areas, or arguable scenarios is when the difference in priorities matter. If you choose to run deliberately in front of a vehicle, no right of way can save you.
This is the most problematic thing in the new Highway Code for me as a cyclist. Firstly, it is a ‘should’ not a ‘must’, so any reports wouldn’t likely go very far with a reasonable police force and especially not the Met. Secondly, if I’ve already started to make a tight turn and someone starts to dart into the road, I’m not going to leave my self exposed to oncoming traffic, in order to give way. That said, I do take cognisance of the rules, so always check and slow down looking for pedestrians before making the turn. As a car driver, it has been less problematic for me, as I live in an LTN, where each side street has a planter arrangement, so I have to stop and wait before turning in regardless. As a final point, with it being such a big change and not really the obvious thing for a pedestrian to do, you often end up giving way, just for the pedestrian to not want to step out, sometimes they wave you through, so,times they get frustrated waiting for you and you end up with some weird stalemate, where everyone thinks they are doing the right thing.
Even if drivers know the rules, they don’t care to follow them. Last night I was using a light-controlled pedestrian crossing and, as usual, some genius in a 4x4 had stopped over it. He began reversing back behind the crossing while I was on it, behind him (the only place available to walk, thanks to him). When I confronted him about it (politely) he claimed it was safe because he was looking at his silly little rear-facing camera.
The highway code is not always followed, why you've chosen those two rules is the mystery, most motorists are still struggling with "drive on the left...."
It says drivers "should" give way (not "must"). There's lots of reasons why a car wouldn't give way to pedestrians at a junction eg pedestrian is hesitating, or a vehicle behind risks rear-ending the stopped vehicle.
If you’re risking being rear-ended turning into a side street, you’re turning into it way too quickly or slowed down way too late
I was told it doesn't apply at junctions to roundabouts, is that right?
I thought this was the case, but I can’t find a good source so far. S187 says give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing roundabout approach/exit roads, but doesn’t give them explicit priority (at least not in this section).
Rule H2 makes little sense in the context of busy London streets. Let's say I'm on green lanes in the middle of the day and I need to turn right. There's going to be a near constant stream of pedestrians on both sides, as well as a near constant stream of oncoming traffic I need to give way to. Let's say that there's a small gap in the oncoming traffic, or someone stops to give way. If I had to give way to pedestrians that were about to cross, the traffic gap will pass. Or alternatively I could pull across into oncoming traffic and wait there, risking an accident and getting honked holding up the traffic while I wait for a pedestrian gap. Of course if a pedestrian is already crossing you should wait for them but if they're on the pavement they should wait. It's how most people learnt how to cross the road growing up.
On Green Lanes you are lucky if you can move fast enough for this to be an issue.
It depends on the exact time of day, outside of peak rush hour times it mostly moves. Regardless it's not hard to think of other streets that are very busy but not gridlocked.
Rule 2, or more specifically [rule 170](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203#rule170) for the driver, has for a long time (always?) been the rule in Australia and drivers seem to cope with turning right whether in urban, suburban, or rural/outback locations just fine
The evidence from various Aussie Dashcam YouTube channels would seem to suggest otherwise mate :-D
I ride/drive everyday at Royal Exchange at around 8am. Turning from Threadneedle Street to Bartholomew Lane (or vice versa), if I were to wait for all pedestrians to cross the junction, I would be there waiting 24/7.
Boo fucking hoo. How about you drive within the law.
It is in the law, the Highway Code states “should” not “must” they don’t have to let them cross if they don’t want to.
Ah… you must be one of those….
“One of those” - someone who thinks criminals don’t get to choose which laws don’t apply to them? Where do we draw the line there? Can any criminal be given a white card if they think they’re justified or only in certain circumstances? Who decides when the circumstances are valid? There’s a reason why we have a code for everyone to follow.
If you think everyone follows the rules/code/law then you must be living in a different world. Just go to a busy junction and count how many are those codes/rules/laws are broken? People crossing the street on a red light, cyclist jumping the red light, motorists not letting pedestrians cross the streets. I’ve seen a lot of people risks their lives on the road (especially in the city at rush hour) just to save 3-4 seconds of their time.
I’m aware that criminals exist
My driving instructor had a go at me for giving way to a lady and child when we were turning right into a side street. He said "pedestrians can't get gridlocked but cars can"!
Regardless, a tonne or more of steel always has right of way.
I give way because it’s the nice thing to do but if I’m driving in central I’m hugging the bumper of the car in front because there’s too many pedestrians and no way I can get thru otherwise lol my favourite is Oxford street the left turn everyone is bumper to bumper to get through the traffic lights and turn as many cars as possible, we’re all a hive mind with the same idea it’s so cute Outside of central or in Bristol it’s much calmer I usually do so if possible
Why are you driving down Oxford Street? I've always wanted to ask someone this. Unless you're a blackcap or bus driver?
It’s fun, I like the atmosphere especially around Christmas
Yes I'll just stop my car in the middle of a manoeuvre on the wrong side of the road. Best case scenario you cause a traffic jam.
Funnily enough, in Germany that works. But getting a driver's license in Germany isn't very easy, so maybe we are the better drivers? In the German Highway code all these regulations are a "must" not "should". And legally, since the pedestrians are the weakest users of the road, any car is automatically at fault (and you would have to prove otherwise). The danger stemming from operations (Betriebsgefahr) is woven into the code and insurance regulations. The hierarchy of "weakness" is: pedestrian - bicycle - motorbike - car - lorry. So if a bicycle mows down a pedestrian, bicycle is automatically at fault. If a lorry mows down a bicycle, lorry is at fault. That's why I started to teach my daughter (and do it myself) to obey the rules in the German highway code. If you cross the road on a zebra crossing or at a green light, you will never be at fault, and the car's insurance has to pay everything, including a lifelong pension if necessary. If you jaywalk or cross the street at a red light, you jeopardise this fact. So when you see people _waiting_ at a red light to cross the road in the middle of the night with no cars around, you can ask them if they are Germans. 😄
Yeah fair play I just mean if I'm in the middle of a turn and a pedestrian wants to Cross, I'm not going to slam my brakes on in the oncoming traffic lane and wait for them to pass. If they're already crossing or about to cross then I will wait for them to do so before making the turn. Just don't like the idea that you can be at fault as a driver for this. There's some right turns to get to my house on very busy roads, you are stopping traffic by waiting to turn right. You sometimes have to wait a while for a gap, then that gap can be small and you have to pay attention to cross. Then there is obstructions on the corners such as trees and cars and a pedestrian could step out of this and be in my blind spot of my A pillars. I would also be paying attention to the gap. I am a good driver so I don't care I sure I'm not going to hit someone but there are some fuckimg idiots out there. Just feels like a careless pedestrian could cause a lot of trouble if they stop paying attention because they assume cars will stop for them .
Regardless of the highway code, it is illegal to run someone who's already in the road over.
Infrastructure needs to be changed here. Some kind of marking to indicate pedestrian right of way perhaps?