• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Priorities of road users to be changed to place responsibility on those that pose the greatest danger to others.

Status
Not open for further replies.

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
The highway code is to be radically changed to improve safety for more vulnerable road users, (e.g. pedestrians and cyclists) vs those that present the greatest riskd, i.e. motor vehicles. This is a complete change from the current situation where vehicles have priority everwhere except on pedestrian crossings and short pedestrian crossing phases where signals hold traffic at junctions. The DfT saysthat the new hierachy would ensure that:

"road users who can do the greatest harm", (such as those in cars, vans and lorries), "have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger they may pose to others".

See here:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450

I expect the road lobby (as in drivers) will come up with a truckload of straw man arguments why this can't shouldn't and won't happen. It will presented as the endo of civilisation as they know it, (not necessarily a bad thing IMO, - and I say that as a driver, cyclist and of course pedestrian).
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Re 4/4

Member
Joined
30 Jun 2018
Messages
181
Location
Bristol
This sounds like a big headline with nothing all that radical behind it - are there any elections coming up I don't know about?

Drivers will need to give way to pedestrians at pedestrian crossings. That is already how it's worked for decades in many part of the continent, as those of us who drive abroad know, and makes a lot more sense than telling the car they don't have to stop until the pedestrian has started, and the pedestrian that they shouldn't start until the car has stopped or is clearly intending to.

Legislation on electric scooters, that would be something more radical.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,598
Location
Somerset
The highway code is to be radically changed to improve safety for more vulnerable road users, (e.g. pedestrians and cyclists) vs those that present the greatest riskd, i.e. motor vehicles. This is a complete change from the current situation where vehicles have priority everwhere except on pedestrian crossings and short pedestrian crossing phases where signals hold traffic at junctions. The DfT saysthat the new hierachy would ensure that:



See here:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450

I expect the road lobby (as in drivers) will come up with a truckload of straw man arguments why this can't shouldn't and won't happen. It will presented as the endo of civilisation as they know it, (not necessarily a bad thing IMO, - and I say that as a driver, cyclist and of course pedestrian).
Basically in favour - with the proviso that pedestrians should be encouraged ( required) to cross one car length back from the junction, so that the front car driver can concentrate on the traffic they’re pulling out into. My early driving years were spent in Germany where what is proposed here already occurs - and the amount of driver frustration ( which can so easily lead to an accident) that is caused by the sole gap in the traffic being “ blocked “ by a pedestrian is great
 
Last edited:

Kez

Member
Joined
8 May 2021
Messages
73
Location
Scotland
Great News !

Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)
 
Last edited:

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
The changes certainly seem positive (and partially codify existing current practice)

I'm curious though, updating the highway code like this surely only means that those learning it (or being re-taught on a course!) now surely means that most people will remain unaware of the change - bar hearing this news! Most people I know don't recreationally read the highway code!
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
The changes certainly seem positive (and partially codify existing current practice)

I'm curious though, updating the highway code like this surely only means that those learning it (or being re-taught on a course!) now surely means that most people will remain unaware of the change - bar hearing this news! Most people I know don't recreationally read the highway code!
I would imagine that readership of the HC amongst those who have been driving a long time might increase when the first cases come to court where the new rules have been 'ignored'. It's always been recommended that all road users (which includes pedestrians) regularly read the HC in order to keep abreast of new laws, let alone recommendations.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
The changes certainly seem positive (and partially codify existing current practice)

I'm curious though, updating the highway code like this surely only means that those learning it (or being re-taught on a course!) now surely means that most people will remain unaware of the change - bar hearing this news! Most people I know don't recreationally read the highway code!
They used to regularly include leaflets about changes with tax disc correspondence…. I expect someone decided that cost too much…
 

Factotum

Member
Joined
10 Jun 2021
Messages
172
Location
Stockport
Great News !

Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)
I once crashed into car at nearly 40mph on my bike. Damage to the car: nill Bike written off. Cyclist damage: considerable.
I have twice had pedestrians step off the kerb without looking and knock me over. Pedestrian damage: nil. Cyclist damage: considerable.
 

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,469
Location
Glasgow
Drivers will need to give way to pedestrians at pedestrian crossings. That is already how it's worked for decades in many part of the continent, as those of us who drive abroad know, and makes a lot more sense than telling the car they don't have to stop until the pedestrian has started, and the pedestrian that they shouldn't start until the car has stopped or is clearly intending to.
That wasn't already the rule here? I just thought there were a lot of rude drivers :o
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Basically in favour - with the proviso that pedestrians should be encouraged ( required) to cross one car length back from the junction, so that the front car driver can concentrate on the traffic they’re pulling out into. My early driving years were spent in Germany where what is proposed here already occurs - and the amount of driver frustration ( which can so easily lead to an accident) that is caused by the sole gap in the traffic being “ blocked “ by a pedestrian is great
However that may put the pedestrian out of sight to a driver until they are part way through the turn, when they are focused on making the turn itself and have possibly mentally committed to completing it.
The changes certainly seem positive (and partially codify existing current practice)

I'm curious though, updating the highway code like this surely only means that those learning it (or being re-taught on a course!) now surely means that most people will remain unaware of the change - bar hearing this news! Most people I know don't recreationally read the highway code!

I would imagine that readership of the HC amongst those who have been driving a long time might increase when the first cases come to court where the new rules have been 'ignored'. It's always been recommended that all road users (which includes pedestrians) regularly read the HC in order to keep abreast of new laws, let alone recommendations.
There really needs to be some kind of public education programme for a rule like this. Waiting for it to come to court may mean waiting until someone has been killed.
That wasn't already the rule here? I just thought there were a lot of rude drivers :o
If I recall correctly drivers are supposed to give way to pedestrians when turning at a junction, and when they are actually on a crossing, but not when they are waiting at the kerb at a crossing.
Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)
The person who is in charge of several tonnes of metal, including numerous features that protect them in the event of hitting someone more vulnerable, clearly has a greater moral responsibility than that vulnerable person.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I once crashed into car at nearly 40mph on my bike. Damage to the car: nill Bike written off. Cyclist damage: considerable.
I have twice had pedestrians step off the kerb without looking and knock me over. Pedestrian damage: nil. Cyclist damage: considerable.

In any case cyclists hardly ever do 40mph, only generally on a decent road bike going downhill. More typically it will be between 10 and 20mph.
 

TheSel

Member
Joined
10 Oct 2017
Messages
855
Location
Southport, Merseyside
There really needs to be some kind of public education programme for a rule like this. Waiting for it to come to court may mean waiting until someone has been killed.
Something like;

WE ARE INTERRUPTING THIS BROADCAST TO BRING YOU A MESSAGE FROM THE PRIME MINISTER

[Boris Johnson looks earnestly into the camera]

From tonight, you MUST ... read the Highway Code.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,598
Location
Somerset
However that may put the pedestrian out of sight to a driver until they are part way through the turn, when they are focused on making the turn itself and have possibly mentally committed to completing it.
That already applies when turning into a side road - there may be an obstruction just around the corner which you can’t see as you turn in ( only really applies when turning left)
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
... There really needs to be some kind of public education programme for a rule like this. Waiting for it to come to court may mean waiting until someone has been killed. ...
Yes you are right, but many drivers only get educated when they are being prosecuted. How many drivers know that the HC says that at least 1.5m should be allowed when overtaking a cyclist and that increases to more than 2m on faster roads? In the case of pedestrians having the right of way when already crossing side roads over motorists turning into them has been the rule for some time. But there are some drivers who will turn right whilst a pedestrian is in the middle of a road either stranding them until they have pushed through or even blasting them or hurling abuse for being in the way of a car. The changes being announced will put the onus on the motorist to obey the rules and in the event of a collision, they will be liable by default.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
That already applies when turning into a side road - there may be an obstruction just around the corner which you can’t see as you turn in ( only really applies when turning left)
I must admit as a pedestrian I like that change when you are crossing a side road, you look behind, no cars are indicating so you start to cross. Full horn from a car that turns from the main road onto the side road and hasn't indicated. This is the dangerous part, but as long as I have taken reasonable care before I start to cross the cars must wait for me and anticipate I may cross the road. Dangerous I know but I feel it does protect the pedestrian more. In the same way that driving past a school and a child runs out in front of them, I interpret the change that they are more likely to be held liable than previously. I know you can't have 360 vision, but having a child run out in front of you in front of a school also shouldn't be a surprise so you shouldn't really be going that fast and anticipating such an event.

For the cyclist, it make no difference, the kind of motorist that passes that giving them only 10cm or turning passing them and immediately turning left in front of them won't read the highway code anyway.

Yes you are right, but many drivers only get educated when they are being prosecuted. How many drivers know that the HC says that at least 1.5m should be allowed when overtaking a cyclist and that increases to more than 2m on faster roads? In the case of pedestrians having the right of way when already crossing side roads over motorists turning into them has been the rule for some time. But there are some drivers who will turn right whilst a pedestrian is in the middle of a road either stranding them until they have pushed through or even blasting them or hurling abuse for being in the way of a car. The changes being announced will put the onus on the motorist to obey the rules and in the event of a collision, they will be liable by default.
I didn't know the pedestrian crossing a side road was already law, I thought it was courtesy but not actually law. Best read up myself.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
There really needs to be some kind of public education programme for a rule like this. Waiting for it to come to court may mean waiting until someone has been killed.

I suppose that a fairly simple campaign that takes over some of the motorway (and other roadside) dot matrix signs, along with some adverts on the back of busses, bus stops and other roadside hoardings should help raise awareness fairly well
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Great News !

Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)

Yes, but not sure if it need to be.

A cyclist who killed a mother-of-two after ploughing into her as she crossed a street in east London was today sentenced to 18 months in a young offenders institution. (Old street, cyclist was riding a non road-worthy bike)

A cyclist has been jailed for causing fatal injuries to a pedestrian in a hit-and-run crash.
Ermir Loka, 23, struck Peter McCombie on Bow Road, Tower Hamlets, as he was walking home from work on 3 July 2020.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
What should happen at crossings is pedestrians should be given priority over road traffic but equally a lot of drivers need to read the highway code as they tend to see a yellow aspect or a red aspect and just continue though even though as far as I'm aware if you're driving and the signal has gone from green to yellow you must be prepared to stop as it turns red as that's what I was taught.

I've lost count the number of times I've started crossing a road and some idiot speeds though a red light, one such driver a few years ago clipped my young nephew which resulted in a broken leg.

So it's about time, the emphasis was put on road traffic to be more considerate.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
...I didn't know the pedestrian crossing a side road was already law, I thought it was courtesy but not actually law. Best read up myself.


Yes, rule 170 says:
Take extra care at junctions. You should watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way.
That's a necessary rule otherwise pedestrians who started crossing a road when it was safe would be stranded by vehicles entering the road cutting off their safe path to the pavement. It gets even worse if it is a long or articulated vehicle as pedestrians may have to step back to avoid the inswing of the rear wheels.
 
Last edited:

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
As most cyclists are mostly riding well below the lowest one you get (20mph) this would be fairly pointless.
I must admit, it is not often I have gone above 25mph. Normally down a steep straight hill or with a strong wind behind me. Non cyclists may not realize that it is a little scary when you get above 30mph and self preservation hits. You know that if you hit a pothole at that speed it will not end well. I know some that bomb down hills, I am much more cautious even if the road was closed as sliding off on gravel for example really hurts.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
Apparently there is no maximum speed limit for cyclists. Perhaps there should be.

How would it be enforced? How should a cyclists know how fast they are going? How often is excessive bike speed actually a problem, when excessive car speed is a far, far, far bigger killer?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
How would it be enforced? How should a cyclists know how fast they are going? How often is excessive bike speed actually a problem, when excessive car speed is a far, far, far bigger killer?

I can honestly say I have never encountered a situation where excessive cyclist speed posed an actual problem. Other aspects, such as running red lights or riding aggressively, yes, but not simple speed, simply because it's a heck of an effort to ride a bike fast, and generally not practical in urban areas where it could pose any sort of issue.
 

Bikeman78

Established Member
Joined
26 Apr 2018
Messages
4,495
Great News !

Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)
How often do bicycles go 40 mph? I belt down Rumney Hill on the way to work, fastest speed reached so far is 34 mph. In my youth I made it into the 40s going down Rusper Hill in Sussex. That was on a mountain bike. I ran out of gears. No doubt I could have gone faster on a road bike.

I once crashed into car at nearly 40mph on my bike. Damage to the car: nill Bike written off. Cyclist damage: considerable.
When I was 10 my granny had a head on crash with a mini whilst on her bicycle. Amazingly she made a full recovery and lived another 30 years. I can still picture the remains of her bike to this day; the image will stay with me for life. The frame was snapped in half. The front wheel was a tangled mashed up mess, virtually unrecognisable. The driver didn't stop at the scene but handed himself in the next day. We strongly suspect that he was drunk but that was never proved.
 
Last edited:

LSWR Cavalier

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2020
Messages
1,565
Location
Leafy Suburbia
How would it be enforced? How should a cyclists know how fast they are going? How often is excessive bike speed actually a problem, when excessive car speed is a far, far, far bigger killer?
Of course dealing with speeding motorists is much more important.

But there are many places where cyclists share with walkers (adults and children), cyclists and walkers have been pushed out of the way of motorists and made to share paths. Where there is little space, say the path is 2m wide total, cyclists often go too fast where they should slow down, wait, stop. Large groups of cyclists, racers, €bikes riding two or more abreast are troublesome too.
 

option

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2017
Messages
636
Great News !

Anything that encourages cyclists to read the Highway Code has to be a good thing !

... and has it been changed so that there is recognition of the damage that a cyclist travelling at 40 mph can do to other road users ? (i.e. speed limits imposed at the same level as for motor vehicles)

That's a good 10mph faster than a pro cyclist

Even on flat land, a Tour de France pro’s average speed needs to be way up there in order to stay in the race. In fact, it’s usually about double that of an average rider.

Average Rider: 17 to 18 mph

Tour Pro: 25 to 28 mph
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Of course dealing with speeding motorists is much more important.

But there are many places where cyclists share with walkers (adults and children), cyclists and walkers have been pushed out of the way of motorists and made to share paths. Where there is little space, say the path is 2m wide total, cyclists often go too fast where they should slow down, wait, stop. Large groups of cyclists, racers, €bikes riding two or more abreast are troublesome too.
I absolutely agree, the Alban Way in Hertfordshire (Hatfield - St Albans) is such a route, which I avoid myself for that very reason - it isn't fair on the walkers. It is hard to enforce a speed limit as let say it was 10mph, most cyclists are going on gut feeling, so it is just consideration.

It does make us feel like us cyclists are not welcome anyway. Go on the road the motorist think you should be on the cycle path, go on the cycle path the walkers don't like it (A problem with the shared use in the UK)

But these shared use paths seem to cause the cyclist and walkers to always be in conflict. Ring the bell and some jump out the way, in front of you. Hard problem to solve, it is really down to curtsey
 

Factotum

Member
Joined
10 Jun 2021
Messages
172
Location
Stockport
Apparently there is no maximum speed limit for cyclists. Perhaps there should be.
That, of course, would require all cycles to be fitted with a calibrated speedometer.

Also there is no speed limit for runners

What should happen at crossings is pedestrians should be given priority over road traffic but equally a lot of drivers need to read the highway code as they tend to see a yellow aspect or a red aspect and just continue though even though as far as I'm aware if you're driving and the signal has gone from green to yellow you must be prepared to stop as it turns red as that's what I was taught.

I've lost count the number of times I've started crossing a road and some idiot speeds though a red light, one such driver a few years ago clipped my young nephew which resulted in a broken leg.

So it's about time, the emphasis was put on road traffic to be more considerate.
Pelican crossings in areas with lots of pedestrian traffic should default to red to road traffic, green to pedestrians. When a car is detected the lights could change with the appropriate interval for pedestrians to get clear.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
That already applies when turning into a side road - there may be an obstruction just around the corner which you can’t see as you turn in ( only really applies when turning left)
That may be true, but I'd rather not be that obstruction thanks very much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top