Drivers not following Highway code

You're doing better than me. Two drivers didn't give way to me today, when I was already crossing the bloody side street!

Yeah your death by dangerous driving trial starts with:

"did you stop when you should have?"

"No"

And it's a bit of an uphill battle from there

The updated code clarifies that:

• when people are crossing or waiting to cross at a junction, other traffic should give way
• if people have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road, the people crossing have priority and the traffic should give way
• people driving, riding a motorcycle or cycling must give way to people on a zebra crossing and people walking and cycling on a parallel crossing

There is a distinct difference between "should" and "must".

Is the Highway Code the law?
Some Highway Code rules are legally binding. These are highlighted by the use of ‘MUST’ or ‘MUST NOT’ in the text.

For example, rule 106 concerns police stopping procedures. If a police officer wants you to pull over, then you must do this when it’s safe to do so. This is a legal requirement, and you’re breaking the law if you don’t.

Breaking these laws could land you with a fine, penalty points on your licence, or in some cases prison sentences.

The rest of the Highway Code provisions are good practice, but not necessarily legal requirements. That’s not to say you shouldn’t take them seriously, and breaking the Highway Code may still have legal consequences.

For example, rule 148 of the Highway Code notes that driving requires concentration. As such certain distractions should be avoided. Listening to loud music, eating or drinking, and smoking are given among the examples.

This doesn’t mean that it’s illegal to do any of these things while driving. What it does mean is that they could be a contributory factor in an offence. If you crash while eating something, you might be charged with dangerous driving, with the Highway Code violation providing supporting evidence.

Junctions and roundabouts are separate sections of the highway code though, with separate advice. The roundabout bit says "in all cases you must watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians crossing at the approach and exit roads" which is basically saying be aware and don't run them over.

In my opinion much of what's being described here of people unable to safely stop when cornering a junction are people playing a percentage game, it's like how you see some people driving country roads because they've taken that corner 700 times in the last 2 years and there's never been anything there until...

@MikeRafone
'And for everyone else as the rule is for side roads busy roundabout etc aren't mentioned'
Rule H2
At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.

The wording doesn't say side road, nor does it exclude roundabouts and what about a junction controlled by traffic lights?

The accompanying picture suggest a nice simple side road but that's not what it says. And if it is just for 'side roads' how are they to be legally defined and will they be marked so we all know which are which?

That's why I still contend it is at the very least ill-worded and impractical.

@MikeRafone
You can’t compare a charge of speeding with guidance in the Highway Code. Breaking the speed limit is a specific charge and an absolute one at that. You are either over the limit or you aren’t. And it’s one of those laws with no victim, and if there is one then the charge will be due care and attention or dangerous driving.

The Highway Code is guidance woven around certain rules and laws, And these changes very specifically say ‘should’ give way, not must or any other such wording. So proving who is at fault in the event of an RTC would be difficult, proving I or you should have given way and didn’t even more so.

And with hundreds of thousands of road junctions how is this to be policed? Most police forces have already made it clear the many recent 20mph limits are practically unenforceable. How could policing all these myriad junctions be any different?

For me giving way to pedestrians on quieter side streets I have no issue with. But within a few hundred yards of here are a busy junction and roundabout where the idea falls apart due to weight of traffic and sight lines.

Perhaps people should read the actual rules rather than the complaining about the rules

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35

I think it's a dangerous rule, we should be teaching our kids to wait until traffic is clear before crossing any road, not to just step out and expect cars to give way. I'm old enough to remember the tufty club and green cross code adverts and think thay they were invaluable in improving accident rates.
I witnessed a car stopping for pedestrians on a dual carriageway approaching a roundabout last weekend. The driver was waving them over, unfortunately the cars in the outside lane couldn't see the pedestrians due to the curve of the road and the stationary car. It was stupid of the first driver to wave them over into potential danger. Luckily they didn't go. There was also a light controlled pedestrian crossing about twenty yards before that which is where it was much safer to cross.

I like when pedestrians do this as it shows me they know the law and I can clearly see their intention to cross. Usually though I get a confused look as they stand firmly on the pavement and I have to stay where I am until they decide to finally cross, shaking their heads at me.
When do pedestrians read the Highway code? This new rule should have been publicised far more.

If we accept what has been said in the last few posts. That there was enough publicity that no one can claim they were unaware. And that the new rules can be safely acted upon by all concerned at every road junction and every roundabout. Then why are we seeing so little compliance? Is it simply that drivers know and don’t care? Or something else? If so what is to be done? How would you ensure better compliance?

It was the best publicised change to the highway code since I got my license. Loads of exposure mostly because of the utter conniptions it caused amongst impatient Jeremy Clarkson type arseholes.

Regardless of this the contract you effectively sign up for when you get your license, that you as a driver will keep up to date with changes, is very clearly ignored by many of the aforementioned types. It's not anyone's responsibility other than yours

Laughingravy · Yesterday 09:04

The changes were ill-publicised to drivers and not at all to pedestrians. It's a virtue signalling style one size fits all 'solution'.

How can you say that the change was ill-publicised and then that you don't read, or watch the news, nor go on social media? What do you want? Someone to knock on your door and to explain it to you?

As for it being virtue-signalling; what rubbish! Clarifying the law to give the most vulnerable road users encoded priority over more dangerous ones couldn't be more sensible.

Negligent drivers, who make turns without bothering to consider people crossing shouldn't be on the road, especially ones who would blame said pedestrians for being there. The same applies to idiots not paying attention, who run into the backs of cars.

@Tomikka
Drivers who crash into the back of other drivers are at a minimum not driving with due care and attention
What I clearly meant was saying 'So what' was fatuous, regardless of who is at fault - which could just as easily be the pedestrian as either driver.

“Don’t run over pedestrians” is not virtue signalling, just as “don’t knock over cyclists” is not virtue signalling
The change to the rules is virtue signalling. It's an ill thought out change that can't possibly work safely in every situation at every junction or roundabout but hey not only are the powers that be 'doing something' but any nay sayers clearly don't care about others safety. It's not like I'm alone in thinking this and the rule doesn't say 'don't run over, knock over'.

For something “ill publicised” to drivers and “not at all” to pedestrians, there’s been a lot of publicity on advertising, the news, the papers, social media etc
I don't agree at all. I saw very little publicity, I don't get a newspaper and do little social media. I had it brought to my attention by my DP, who is on a driving forum - and that was because someone had put up an image of a newspaper article which managed to explain the new rules incorrectly.
The DoT could and should have sent every driver in the country a leaflet. And it really isn't difficult to imagine the majority of pedestrians not having a clue this had happened - especially if they don't drive.

Drivers who crash into the back of other drivers are at a minimum not driving with due care and attention

“Don’t run over pedestrians” is not virtue signalling, just as “don’t knock over cyclists” is not virtue signalling

For something “ill publicised”
to drivers and “not at all” to pedestrians, there’s been a lot of publicity on advertising, the news, the papers, social media etc

@KajsaKavat
I’m confused how many people talking about getting rear ended when they stop for someone crossing. So what?
What a fatuous thing to say.
The changes were ill-publicised to drivers and not at all to pedestrians. It's a virtue signalling style one size fits all 'solution'.

Hmm, just heard a public-service radio ad which seems to conflate the waiting/already crossing, and ignoring any should/must distinction - something about Sue picking up a Jalfrezi takeaway, hope I've quoted this right: "Remember, pedestrians who are crossing, or waiting to cross, have priority."

@MikeRafone Obviously you have not read or understood the highway code either.

The driver in the video has not broken the highway code or broken any laws by not stopping for the pedestrian waiting at the road side.

The Highway code states

"Rule H2 (Pedestrians Crossing): Highlighting that at junctions, drivers should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross on a road into which they are turning.
The 2022 Highway Code says that if pedestrians have started crossing the road and drivers want to turn into the road, pedestrians crossing have priority, and the traffic should give way to them. And lastly, when it comes to pedestrians on a zebra and parallel crossing, drivers, motorcyclists, and cyclists, must give way to pedestrians waiting to cross."

So two words it would be worth you learning should and must.

Should means something that is recommended but not mandatory.
Must means something that is mandatory.

Drivers do not have to give way to people waiting to cross on the kerb as it is not a mandatory action, It is suggested that they should but do not have too.

Where as it does say it is mandatory for vehicles to give way on crossings.

As a pedestrian if you are going to walk in front of vehicles turning because they should stop is both irresponsible and dicing with injury and death. Sure you can say at least I was not at fault but a lot of good that will do if the driver has not noticed you and your are dead or injured.

I just hope this is not how you are going to teach your kids to cross the road.

For me I will judge if I feel if it is safe to wait for a pedestrian waiting to cross, and I will abide by the Highway code and If I consider it not safe for myself or other drivers I will not wait, as it is not mandatory.

It’s not my experience (either as a pedestrian or a driver) that it is rare for a pedestrian to be in the middle of crossing a road when a car is looking to turn into that road. It takes maybe 5 seconds on average to cross a road on foot - that’s plenty of time for vehicles to appear that weren’t there (or were there but not yet indicating to turn).

And whether it’s rare or not, as a driver you have to anticipate that possibility - if you have a clear line of sight you can see what’s happening and adjust ahead of time. If you don’t have a line of sight you have to assume you don’t have a clear road ahead - whether that’s because of a pedestrian on the road, a bin truck, fallen branch or whatever - and be prepared to have to stop.

So then it just comes down to frequency then - a slight inconvenience for drivers having to give way to pedestrians more often. Frankly drivers just have to suck that up.

I find this quite interesting as I'm currently training for a pilot's license and you literally have to memorise the pilot's version of the highway code, and pass 10 exams, of which 9 are theory.
In order to keep your license valid you have to go up with an instructor once every two years to check you still know what you're doing and also as a member of my flying club I have to sign a form saying I've read their air rules booklet on a regular basis.

Obviously crashing a plane is far more catastrophic than crashing a car, but considering the number of car accidents that happen because of people's complacency, I'm surprised it isn't alot stricter.
I feel safer flying than I do driving as I know how knowledgeable and aware you have to be to fly a plane safely and the sky is a quiet place.

I come across a lot of terrible drivers on the road, daily, and they're everywhere.

The difference with regard to crossing is an upgrade of ‘should’ to ‘must’ with it being covered by legislation that a vehicle must not run into a pedestrian that is already crossing

At a junction vehicles must give way to pedestrians that are already crossing. This has always been the rule of the road and junctions have dashed line markings on both sides to indicate this. The Highway Code now more explicitly stresses the rule

At a crossing vehicles are to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross - which ought to have happened anyway, but again the Highway Code is reinforcing the rule

The difference with regard to priority is a formal list of the hierarchy which should already have been common sense (and was the rule of the sea - steam gives way to sail)
People are upset about cars being told to be aware of pedestrians and cyclists, but fail to notice that vans are to be aware of cars and lorries are also to be aware of vans

These are how people should have been using the road already