To think a driver (or cyclist) having to give way to a pedestrian waiting to cross is a crazy new rule?

[flashbac]

To clarify, if a pedestrian is waiting to cross on a road a driver is turning into, new rules from January state the driver has to let them cross.
Also applies to cyclists as pedestrians have priority.
All very well and good until you consider how chaotic this could be at junctions. Fine on unbusy roads.
I'm thinking:
What if you are turning into a 30 mph road from a 40?
What if you are turning right at a busy junction?

It sounds crazy to me.
And before anyone jumps at me and says they do it in Europe and its fine. I'd like to know how congested and busy the roads in these countries are and what the public transport is like.

@lljkk

I thought let-side-road-crossers-finish-crossing was the rule in Highway Code for last 30 years. I wait for crossers when driving. OOps.

It was. Now you have to wait for potential crossers.

As people have pointed out, often pedestrians are chatting, on their phones or marshalling children ( or even actually not wanting to cross).

Not long ago I was turning and a bike jumped into the path of my car. I was going slow enough to stop but really it's going to cause accidents

@ChardonnaysPetDragon

As if cyclists are going to stop for pedestrians, new rules or not.

This too - they can’t even manage to not cycle on the pavement/ not mow down pedestrians in narrow streets

I don’t believe more people will be hit by cars. Too many road users have an entitled mentality so this should address the balance.

Hopefully more people will be encouraged to walk and cycle. So many drive unnecessarily.
It’s not good for them or the environment.

I’m shocked by how lazy most people are.

@snapsieplopp

i hope there will be new sentencing guidelines so that the 1800 people killed by drivers (each year) start getting some justice, instead of 3 points and £200 fine.

Unlikely, the sentences in most cases are appalling

It’s always assumed to be the driver’s fault as pedestrians are ‘vulnerable’ but is this true? Happy to correct my presumptions in the face of data

Around here there’s a long road with crossing lights at the end and the majority of accidents are caused by pedestrians running out in the middle instead of walking to the lights.

Anything that redresses the balance on our roads is a great thing. Cars have dominated for far too long, it's a crazy way to live

@Mofomo

Anything that redresses the balance on our roads is a great thing. Cars have dominated for far too long, it's a crazy way to live

YES ^ this

@Politics4me

Comments "they already do it in Europe" Yes and they do have a higher casualty rate. In France It is not coming down much either.

There's a higher rate of road accidents in "Europe", but from my German pov, I would think it is more likely to be due to the higher speeds allowed and the higher number of cyclists due to all the bike lanes.

@loudbatperson

I think if more drivers and cyclist obeyed the old rule (pedestrians already crossing the new road had priority over those turning in), and drove accordingly and cautiously when turning into a junction, the new rule wouldn't have been needed.

This is exactly what I was thinking.

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

I was the driver in this scenario and turned into a road letting a woman cross, the guy turning behind me whacked straight into me!

This is the exact danger I would anticipate.

This rule is utterly bonkers. I say that as someone who walked a lot and didn't drive until recently.

Also, all those saying they won’t be telling their children they can just cross. Surely you always ask them to check anyway?! Even at pedestrian crossings. Everyone should be checking regardless, green light or not

Of course, I tell them to check there are no cars or the green man is showing & to check the cars are stopped. That's not the same as expecting cars to stop is it?

@Mofomo

Anything that redresses the balance on our roads is a great thing. Cars have dominated for far too long, it's a crazy way to live

lol where’s ‘our roads’? Certainly not London

@RedHot22

I don’t believe more people will be hit by cars. Too many road users have an entitled mentality so this should address the balance.

Hopefully more people will be encouraged to walk and cycle. So many drive unnecessarily.
It’s not good for them or the environment.

I’m shocked by how lazy most people are.

Of course there'll be more accidents. Because people make mistakes, and someone travelling at 10-15 (or even 5) mph who is having to concentrate on gears, brakes, stopping distance from the car in front etc while checking for a pedestrian who might want to cross is more likely to fail to spot the potential crosser than the potential crosser is likely to fail to spot the car. Particularly at this time of year, when people dressed in dark colours are hard to spot in low light, while a car is lit up with several massive bulbs. Change the mindset of the pedestrian, make checking for cars no longer their responsibility, and you'll get more accidents.

The guy turning behind needs to learn how to drive

@Mofomo

Anything that redresses the balance on our roads is a great thing. Cars have dominated for far too long, it's a crazy way to live

Look at the recent petrol crisis. The queues starting at 4am, the concerns about getting to work.

No way are cars going anywhere soon. They work too well.

People just don’t like change 🤷‍♀️

Lightisnotwell, not for everyone. Tractors, I believe london still has traffic jams and pollution problems, I'd say cars are pretty prominent there

@Babdoc

I don't see how this is workable in city centres. In Edinburgh, especially during the festival, there would be a continual flow of pedestrians across side streets and junctions - cars would be gridlocked and stuck for hours, waiting for a gap.

The Bridges/Royal Mile junction is bad enough at Festival time even though it's got lights.

I once almost ran over Simon Amstel as traffic had paused but pedestrian light was red and he ran out in front of me just as I moved off again!

What I'm struggling to understand is what happens when there's currently a pelican crossing in place at a side road.

E.g. to turn into my village from the main road, there's a traffic light with a filter and the village road goes down to the right/left depending on which direction you're coming from. Pelican crossing directly across the main road and across the side road. But now, will the pedestrians take precedence even when the filter to turn down is green? Or do they still have to obey the red man? It's near a school bus pick up pointr so there's a lot of foot traffic in the mornings!

I think speed limits need to be reduced to 20mph in built up busy areas for this to be safe. I know that we can do 20 in a 30 if we choose to, as it's a limit not a target, but it's the aggressive drivers behind that panic lots of drivers in to not doing this.

I'm just thinking of Oxford Street too and how this would work at some of those junctions - someone is always waiting to cross!

Is there a reason for the change - have more pedestrians been run over at junctions in recent years? It seems to me that a badly advertised change is significantly more dangerous than no change at all. Also, I was under the impression that we had fewer accidents per million inhabitants than any country in Europe except Sweden, so countries that already have this rule are not obviously any safer for it. What are we supposed to be trying to achieve by increasing the number of people who are confused by and out of date on the Highway Code?

Of course there'll be more accidents. Because people make mistakes, and someone travelling at 10-15 (or even 5) mph who is having to concentrate on gears, brakes, stopping distance from the car in front etc while checking for a pedestrian who might want to cross is more likely to fail to spot the potential crosser than the potential crosser is likely to fail to spot the car. Particularly at this time of year, when people dressed in dark colours are hard to spot in low light, while a car is lit up with several massive bulbs. Change the mindset of the pedestrian, make checking for cars no longer their responsibility, and you'll get more accidents.

Exactly this.

Anything that makes driving ‘inconvenient’ is a good thing imo.

Traffic congestion is a nightmare where I live.
There’s alway cries for improved pavements, cycleways, and public transport. Most people then expect other people to walk, cycle or get the bus/train, so the roads are less congested for them.

I’d not heard of this new rule.
In Europe you slow down as you are about to tiem turn and cars behind a turning vehicle take this into consideration that the car might stop. It makes walking much more pleasant as a pedestrian. People usually don’t jump in front of the cars, anyone with a bit of common sense waits to see that the car will stop.

I think the point is, we'd all slow down to make this turn, and watch out for people in the road

This is the sensible thing to do, yes, but far too many don't - which is how I ended up with a week in hospital, orthopaedic surgery and lifelong pain

I'm sorry if the minority of bad drivers feel aggrieved at being forced to pay a bit more attention, but if they'd done it in the first place there'd have been no need for a rule change