To post this for road users unaware of upcoming highway code changes

[FluffyBooBoo]

That's loads of info available online, but the AA have done a study that shows that two thirds of people are unaware of the charges.

Photo attached with basic info.

Who in their right mind would step out in front of a car turning into a junction?! It doesn't really matter if you had a legal right of way if you end up in hospital with a life-changing injury as a result of being hit by a car. Surely you cross in a safe place when there are no cars coming - as was drilled into us all as children, and crossing at a busy junction doesn't seem very safe to me.

Christ, it’s going to be carnage.

@SirChenjins

Who in their right mind would step out in front of a car turning into a junction?! It doesn't really matter if you had a legal right of way if you end up in hospital with a life-changing injury as a result of being hit by a car. Surely you cross in a safe place when there are no cars coming - as was drilled into us all as children, and crossing at a busy junction doesn't seem very safe to me.

Especially if it's a blind corner or there's a tree/bin/parked car on the pedestrians left hand side so they are invisible to the driver.

I like the idea of giving way to the most vulnerable road users, but I’d also argue that a pedestrian isn’t really a road user

I think it’s nuts to suggest that motorists would give way to pedestrians crossing. Busy town centres will just be start stop with pedestrians darting out all over. I’d feel quite nervous about a pedestrian stepping out on a dark evening, in dark clothing, and being at fault if there was an accident

Did they did any consultation on this? I think this is going to be dangerous! People will just step out in front of cars turning who may or may not have seen them. I haven't heard about this at all.

Oops right hand side not left

Stupid advice. So now cars can't overtake cyclists and have to stop for every pedestrian? They're just trying to make it impractical to drive.

Nothing has really changed though unless you’re a psychopath who shouldn’t have a licence. You’ve never been allowed to run pedestrians or cyclists over and existing jay walkers aside I doubt we’re about to become a nation who simply step out in front of a car (because of said psychopaths who shouldn’t have a licence).

I completely agree with @SirChenjins, these changes are not well thought out.

There are many places where it is difficult to see around junctions, especial in the dark, rain or sun glare. So now they are saying pedestrians have a right of way to walk in front of vehicles turning. Its asking for multiple accidents, I can only guess how many people will do this just to prove a point to drivers, and walk in front of turning vehicles.

I think the pedestrians near me have been piloting these rules for quite some time

I don’t really see an issue with this.

Pedestrians will act as they have always done.
Cyclists are always advised to ride defensively anyway.

Drive safely. Cross the road safely. Cycle safely.

Pedestrians have always had right of way if they have already stepped into the road, I can't see this one changing, no pedestrian is going to assert right of way and step in front of a car turning.

Watching what happens near a local secondary school, it seems most teenagers walk out without checking traffic anyway.

I can see many accidents ahead where pedestrians are injured because a car is rear ended and hits them though (yes I know everyone should have the correct stopping distance but I think this will make it harder to judge on A roads).

I can only guess how many people will do this just to prove a point to drivers, and walk in front of turning vehicles.

Do you really think most pedestrians are waiting for the opportunity to make drivers lives more difficult, at their own risk?

Some people are oblivious (schoolchildren on phones near me as we’re close to a secondary school l) and some people are natural risk takers but most aren’t maliciously bearing a grudge against drivers. A big majority of pedestrians will also be drivers themselves.

Definitely welcome the cycling one. I completed some cycling training last year and the guy told me to not cycle too near to the kerb as you're not seen.

Personally I'm yet to cycle regularly as I don't think it's safe enough. The more we can do to support cycling and cyclists being on our roads the better.

@NoSquirrels

I can only guess how many people will do this just to prove a point to drivers, and walk in front of turning vehicles.

Do you really think most pedestrians are waiting for the opportunity to make drivers lives more difficult, at their own risk?

Some people are oblivious (schoolchildren on phones near me as we’re close to a secondary school l) and some people are natural risk takers but most aren’t maliciously bearing a grudge against drivers. A big majority of pedestrians will also be drivers themselves.

Actually yes i do and it has already happened to me in the past with Teenagers messing around, trying to be clever. I have dashcam footage if you would like!

This will only embolden idiots like this and its drivers who will be held accountable.

This is really interesting - in Scandinavia this has always been the law, and I was very confused when I started moving around here to notice that no cars seemed to stop for pedestrians. Have had many an 'argument' with my partner who finally managed to convince ;-) me that yes, it is actually the law that cars don't have to slow down around corners for example to take care if there are people who want to cross. Cars should take additional responsibility for, statistically speaking, more vulnerable pedestrians.

I'm really pleased to see that the UK is now also doing more to protect the more vulnerable groups moving about :-)

And no, there are no more accidents in Scandinavia than here - probably less, since drivers have a definite responsibility to adjust their speed to the road and conditions. If there are trees, bins, parked cars you reduce your speed. If it is dark, you reduce your speed.

And pedestrians do not dart out all over. Most people are sensible and take care. But I think it's absolutely right that a more dangerous road user takes more responsibilty.

Wow! Thank you. I had absolutely no idea

@christmaspombear

Pedestrians have always had right of way if they have already stepped into the road, I can't see this one changing, no pedestrian is going to assert right of way and step in front of a car turning.

Yes, and currently not all drivers realise they must give way to a pedestrian who is already crossing. So this change will hopefully make them more aware they need to watch out for pedestrians when they're turning. Of course pedestrians are 'road users' when they have to cross roads, to whoever upthread thought they weren't.

Our local town had the pavements down the sides of the road through the middle of it widened, and brick 'crossings' - not actually zebras - at intervals and across side roads. Pedestrians and motorists all seem to have naturally adopted a 'Dutch' style of cars giving way to pedestrians. It seems to work pretty well. (Most cars go round the ring road, it's not a through route).

Slightly concerned at potentially turning off a free flowing busy road onto a side road and having to come to a complete halt or even worse getting a shunt, because a pedestrian on the pavement about to cross has more right of way than the car does. This sounds so dangerous.

I am an avid pedestrian but wouldn't blindly step out into any traffic. I have nearly been run over on numerous occasions by cars going too fast though! I literally heard the screech of one car and then was subjected to abuse. It's like 'hey random woman', I looked left and right (it was a turning but was clear when I stepped out) and listened out for knob heads but you went under my radar. But no, I would never step out unless I thought it was clear. I purposefully seek out crossings for this very purpose.

Does this mean that the old rule for zebra crossings will also change?
I can see insurance rising to accommodate the extra claims that will arise from these new rules.

@mugandspoon

This is really interesting - in Scandinavia this has always been the law, and I was very confused when I started moving around here to notice that no cars seemed to stop for pedestrians. Have had many an 'argument' with my partner who finally managed to convince ;-) me that yes, it is actually the law that cars don't have to slow down around corners for example to take care if there are people who want to cross. Cars should take additional responsibility for, statistically speaking, more vulnerable pedestrians.

I'm really pleased to see that the UK is now also doing more to protect the more vulnerable groups moving about :-)

And no, there are no more accidents in Scandinavia than here - probably less, since drivers have a definite responsibility to adjust their speed to the road and conditions. If there are trees, bins, parked cars you reduce your speed. If it is dark, you reduce your speed.

And pedestrians do not dart out all over. Most people are sensible and take care. But I think it's absolutely right that a more dangerous road user takes more responsibilty.

It's a miracle there aren't more accidents, especially now we're into the dark months. I'm a perpetual nervous wreck driving in Sweden in winter, All the pedestrians seem to have a death wish, walking straight across the junction without looking, while dressed head to foot in black.

@CasparBloomberg

Slightly concerned at potentially turning off a free flowing busy road onto a side road and having to come to a complete halt or even worse getting a shunt, because a pedestrian on the pavement about to cross has more right of way than the car does. This sounds so dangerous.

but a pedestrian always had right of way in that situation. Problem is other road users like cars don't realise that they do have to give way all this is doing is making it clear.

I try and let pedestrians cross where safe anyway.

The bike one is gonna cause havoc, people are gonna get pissed off and I predict accidents and rage.