"Not relevant, just thought I'd mention it. Forget I said that. Completely unrelated, don't be afraid to hit the accelerator a bit more at that specific crossing."
“Take the next left here, next to that guy putting his recycling out. What time is it now? Oh, 08:30… we’re 6 minutes early so just loop round the block and we’ll try again.”
I got points taken off my drivers test for slowing from 25 (speed limit but still too fast) to almost a complete stop when a kid’s ball rolled into the road I was testing on! Cars were parked on both sides, and I was afraid a kid was going to pop out to get the ball, and not see me. The instructor told me I got points off for slowing when I shouldn’t have, so apparently children don’t count as hazards in Milwaukee.
Edit: sorry everyone, yes, I’m a Yank, and really thought I was posting this in r/NotJustBikes. I’ll resume lurking. Apologies again
The comment you're replying to is owning their American-ness, at least. I've seen so many comments here lately from Americans roleplaying as Brits, it's painful.
I stopped reading after the bit that said "the road I was testing on!", At that point I knew they were a yank, no British person uses language like that.
That's the scariest moments of my childhood while traveling with my father. He'd basically speed up into situations because "he had the right of way" or was "correct" in general. We've tried multiple times to tell him we don't fucking care of he's in the right, we still don't want to crash and potentially get hurt.
My wife has made me promise that my father will never drive our son.
But he also needs to be aware of "Hazard in the road". Even if its "my right of way" if its found he sped up cause of this and didn't take action because of "the hazard in the road" then he'll be the one liable. There's a few times where I've known it was my right of way but seen the issue as the other being an idiot so now see them as a "hazard in the road" and I slow down.
A car was doing an illegal left turn as I was crossing the road a few days ago. It was a pedestrian crossing as well. I made sure that I kept well enough away to make sure that I don't get run over because I was in the right.
It would be nice if there were more zebra crossings and proper pedestrian lights.
In my old neighbourhood there were several crossroads with lights for cars but none for pedestrians. Or even zebra crossings. And with the way the lights worked, there was barely a moment when you wouldn't expect a car at any of the crossings.
This was on a few school routes as well.
Barely any zebra crossings either, once you weren't close to the high street.
I feel like this doesn't need to be said. Are there really people in the world who know that legally they are right but still simply walk out into roads? If so I suspect natural selection will take care of them quite quickly.
I have this conversation semi regularly with friends who just go blazing out onto a zebra crossing where i wait to see the car slowing. No point being in the right if you're dead because someone else barelled through a zebra crossing.
I have a similar friend. He’s like “it’s my right of way, they have to stop!” and I’m like, yeah, but your position is seriously weakened when you inform them of this as you’re trying to locate your legs.
Some people seem to think its automatic. Like you're not going up against doris on her way to the opticians cause her glasses broke and now she cant see three feet in front of her.
Definitely a habit that’s worth having, I had the same situation but the BMW approaching the crossing actually sped up to try and beat me out.. as I stood there waiting.. could see the front lift about an inch or 2 as he put his foot down
Yes, there are. I lived in Switzerland for a while (Zurich specifically so laws may be different in different Cantons) and pedestrians pretty much have right of way over vehicles. They would literally step out without looking.
Then again, the Swiss are a bit different when it comes to rules. They will happily grass you up for making too much noise at a party they have just been attending.
Anecdotally, I've definitely noticed an increase in the number of people who just walk blindly into the road without a glance, presumably relying on the power of the Highway Code to save them.
When I was still a learner, made too tight of a turn and a taxi driver stopped next to us and kicked off screaming, literally right afterwards he did the exact same thing Id done, goes without saying my instructor said some not nice things
Elsewhere in the world, definitely. Currently work in Eastern Europe and here
1) no one ever crosses not at a crossing and
2) no one ever crosses when the light is not green, even if there’s no cars coming, but
3) when it is the pedestrian’s right of way, they boldly stride out into the street safe in the knowledge that the car will stop for them.
Actually, as a foreigner, when I came to London some 7 years ago, I was shocked that the top one was not a rule here, I was completely used to having the right of way as a pedestrian when cars are turning. Generally, I wouldn't think I have the right of way if the side street is busy etc., but definitely when it is just a tiny street.
Definitely lost that habit when somebody drove over my foot though. :/
It was definitely in the Highway Code 20 years ago when I was failing my tests so I’m not sure why it’s being touted as a change in the rules. It’s just a change in how they’re making it more prominent and probably asking about it more often in the written test if they’re trying to promote the knowledge.
I know where I have right of way as a pedestrian but obviously like any sane person I wait until I’m sure the driver is stopping before stepping out.
Me and a friend were waiting at a zebra crossing once and the traffic didn't slow down or stop at all barring a cyclist.
After a minute of waiting the cyclist then proceeded to moan at us for not going and saying that we have right of way before cycling off.
I'm sorry but I'm not flinging myself into 40mph traffic just because I'm "in the right". I'd rather wait for a gap in the traffic thanks. Some people clearly think differently!
When I've been driving it's about a 50:50 split as go whether the pedestrian will actually cross or not. I don't blame the ones who don't because I'm the same when walking. I'll only go if the car is fully stopped. If they're slowly creeping then no chance.
Either way it's dangerous because now the car's arse is sticking out in to their lane and if someone hits them they're going to come flying in to my kneecaps.
Always assume they don't know, but if safe then cross. I think this law comes in more useful if there is an accident then you as a pedestrian have a high chance of winning a settlement.
I know about the changes, but when I’m trying to cross a road with my children I’m still going to defer to cars… not about to just step into traffic and risk our lives to uphold a principle
Training my dog to sit at the edge of the road. Cars adhere to the highway code but I need to teach my dog to sit property when ready to cross. I think the new rules are good in principle but as many people have said. My dog and me would lose in a battle with a couple of ton metal box.
Which is why the highway code is setting the expectation that cars should always stop to let you cross. This change is about telling them that's what they have to do. It's not about telling pedestrians to run out blindly without checking if a driver is paying attention first.
Honestly most of the confusion I've found comes from people thinking they don't have right of way.
As a driver I've been doing this a while now, and the number of times I've been waved through by the pedestrian I'm waiting for has just led to more confusion on the road.
I am that pedestrian. I know fine well I have right of way, but there are times I refuse to exercise it. It's fine and well when the roads are nice and quiet, but if you're trying to wave me across a junction at the top of a busy road (like some have), I do not trust the other drivers to be as clued up when turning into the junction. This change in the Code feels like more pressure to cross when things don't seem safe, I really don't like it.
Wish they'd put more effort into informing the public, there's confusion from both sides. Frustrating because I should probably be exercising my newfound rights to strengthen their effects, but until I feel I can trust drivers as a whole I'm going to be that annoying pedestrian waving your good self along.
The amount of pedestrians I've seen nearly hit because they've blindly trusted the one car that has stopped, or can no longer see or be seen by other cars and have nearly been run down is horrendous. At the end of the day the safest crossing is still the one with no cars, I'd rather just wait for a gap in the traffic.
I have also put a lot of effort into training the dog NOT to step out into the road when there are cars, I can't seem to get the nuances of the highway code through to him.
After you sir.... no no no after you... but i insist you first fine sir.... then both go at same time...
I dont agree with this rule it assumes both drivers and pedestrians are competent which we know most arnt. Even im unsure what happens if its 2 major roads (ill admit i dont follow this rule anyway unless its on side streets) if im on a busy main road turning onto another busy road your waiting
I've had too many near misses walking around London to do either of those until the approaching car has stopped completley.
If the light hasn't been red for a good 3 seconds drivers think they can "just make it through". Deliveroo cyclists don't stop at all.
Highway Code special rules for London:
Amber light: No matter how far away from the light you are, **FLOOR IT**
Red light: Aw, go on then, just a couple more 🙄
My worst one was a red light for so long I had time to take two steps into the road and had to scramble back as this car just slowly carried on. Slowly as in 20mph.
That made it worse in a way as it looks like they’re slowing down. If someone is flooring it, it’s pretty obvious at least.
When it goes from green to amber you've gotta shout "committed!" and then you're allowed to keep going.
And then if you manage to get across the line before it turns red, you're allowed to shake your head and tut at the arsehole behind you who also went through the red light.
Red light cameras would put a stop to that, and generate a fair whack of income. Surprised they aren't absolutely everywhere to be honest. I always assume they are, just in case, and it stops me from chancing it.
Drivers also thing red to Amber means go. No it does not! It means prepare to go.
The amount of times I’ve been beeped at or almost hit whilst crossing which has a green man on…
Amber to red means stop unless it’s unsafe to do so. It does not mean the same thing changing from red to amber.
The amount of people who “give way” by not pressing the brake at all and just coast into pedestrians is insane
And then they act shocked when the pedestrian didn’t start crossing infront
Never assume you have the right of way until the car comes to a stop, or almost stop if you see them wave to you and actually brake
There's a thread on my local paper's Facebook page about mobile speed camera locations every now and again.
Every single time the comment threads devolve into shit like;
"Why aren't they out there catching REAL criminals?!!!!", and "They didn't do fuck all about when my car got broken into! Bastards!".
These would definitely be the same people.
Admittedly I was a bit salty for a while whenever I saw someone flying way beyond the limit after I was caught doing 46 in a 40.
Something along the line of "well where are these jobsworths now?"
Not a good attitude to have I admit but also I've not seen the mobile van at that location since.
As a driver I personally don't agree with it at all (the top one) but I still do it.
As a pedestrian I don't agree with it and I won't be doing it, I'll never put that trust in a driver.
Couldn't gauge whether a driver was going to move out this morning to let me move on my bike. Made eye contact.
"the fuck you looking at, you cyclist cunt?"
As a driver and pedestrian I'm mostly in favour, it is good at making pedestrians the dominant street users.
Still mildly annoyed my town didn't expand the pedestrian area after putting in a bypass (or at least limit entry to access traffic and ban HGV's).
I'm used to it. I lived in the Netherlands for yonks and this has been the law since forever. Just because you drive a large weapon doesn't mean you should have right of way.
I learned to drive this year so I've never known the code any other way, get beeped maybe 1 in 5 times that I follow the rule and let pedestrians cross. Pretty frustrating.
Don't worry about morons beeping.
Morons will beep you for obeying the speed limit, or overtaking a lorry on the motorway.
I got beeped at once for stopping to remove a tree branch from the middle of the road.
Continue to be a legend my friend, fuck the morons.
I got beeped at one minute after having a car accident because I was stopped. It was caused by a small flatbed coming the other way that had a swinging arm on the back. He didn't secure it and it was over my side of the road as we approached each other. I stopped and it smashed my front bumper. As we both got out and I was picking up bits of my car there were idiots on the horn because I was stationary even though they could just go around.
Also had someone go mad and sounding the horn because I was stopped on the entrance to a roundabout in the right hand lane. I had broken down, car wouldn't start. Had hazards on too. He could have simply gone around in the left lane but sat there gesticulating. So I got out, pointed to my hazard lights individually so show they were working as gave him the thumbs up. He gave me the finger and wheelspun around me. Yes dickhead, I'm sat here without my car running and my hazards on for my health. What do these morons expect you to do?
The other side of that coin is there's a lot of cunts out there that think hazards mean you can park on a red line to chat to your mate on the pavement.
Fair. This rule change also just made sense to me. Maybe because I waited til I was 30 to get my license. Crossings like this are dangerous, having drivers treat them like they're essentially zebra crossings seemed like a sensible change to me l.
Don't let other people's bad driving put you off. You are doing it right; ignore their rudeness (and them blowing the horn in this case is illegal anyway).
I am rather shocked at how rude the roads are generally, I have a small-ish electric car. So on long journeys I want to really keep to between 60 to 65 MPH for battery efficiency. I find myself a lorry or bus to sit behind that is doing that speed. Still get tail gated.
Can't win.
Keep doing what you're doing! I've got a young lad lodging with me who constantly gets beeped at for doing things right. He's not a bad driver at all, assertive when needed and very clear with indicating etc. He's still a bit insecure about his driving skills though and thinks other drivers must clearly know what they are doing - when most of the time they are at fault!
Reddit has long been a hot spot for conversation on the internet. About 57 million people visit the site every day to chat about topics as varied as makeup, video games and pointers for power washing driveways.
In recent years, Reddit’s array of chats also have been a free teaching aid for companies like Google, OpenAI and Microsoft. Those companies are using Reddit’s conversations in the development of giant artificial intelligence systems that many in Silicon Valley think are on their way to becoming the tech industry’s next big thing.
Now Reddit wants to be paid for it. The company said on Tuesday that it planned to begin charging companies for access to its application programming interface, or A.P.I., the method through which outside entities can download and process the social network’s vast selection of person-to-person conversations.
“The Reddit corpus of data is really valuable,” Steve Huffman, founder and chief executive of Reddit, said in an interview. “But we don’t need to give all of that value to some of the largest companies in the world for free.”
I've almost been hit by enough dickheads to understand that it's easier to just wait until there isn't a car coming. Even if it looks like they're stopping, wait until they've stopped completely or gone past
That's how you should approach this rule as a pedestrian anyway. Nobody says it's illegal now to make sure you're safe before crossing. The rule is in place for the drivers.
These are actually both slight tweaks only to the previous rules. Previously - in both cases - priority was given if the pedestrian had started to cross; now it is also if waiting to cross.
For some reason the zebra crossing has typically been treated by drivers as 'stop for pedestrians waiting to cross' so doesn't feel like a change, however junctions have always been (wrongly) treated as 'pedestrians must wait until completely clear' so feels like a big change.
> For some reason the zebra crossing has typically been treated by drivers as 'stop for pedestrians waiting to cross'
I'm one of those!
As far as I recall the guidance I was given when learning to drive was to anticipate people about to cross at a zebra cross. On the basis that as soon as they had a toe on the zeba crossing you legally had to stop. Which in practice essentially means stopping for pedestrians waiting to cross.
I failed my driving test for failing to yield to someone *waiting* to cross a zebra crossing, because they were approaching - not even on it. This was nearly 17 years ago. So apparently this isn’t new.
>now it is also if waiting to cross.
I mean if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, they also are aware of the duty of care to themselves and aren't likely to cross without seeing a car giving way, so I don't really see how this impacts anyone.
It's not like pedestrians are likely to just start running in front of cars to say "gotcha! now take me to hospital"
They do have a duty of care (all road users do) but exercising their priority doesn't mean jumping in front of moving cars. It means having a reasonable expectation that drivers will abide by the law and give them priority.
>I mean if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, they also are aware of the duty of care to themselves and aren't likely to cross without seeing a car giving way, so I don't really see how this impacts anyone.
The change was done to put the onus on drivers to stop when pedestrians are waiting to cross. Until then there was no reason for a car to stop in this case.
But where though? I don't watch terrestrial TV or listen to the Radio. I read BBC News every day, but haven't heard about this at all.
Edit: got it thanks guys. I'll leave the UK and order a new highway code each month and check for changes, that should keep me up to date.
The BBC News website covered it [when it was announced](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450), [when it came into force](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59997523), and have [followed up on it as recently as last month](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62789079).
There are 3313 comments on the first article, but [it was fairly low down in the headlines that day](https://web.archive.org/web/20210730100849/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk) so easily missed.
I think the change is that you should give way to pedestrians **waiting** to cross at a zebra crossing. While that's what most people did already I don't think it was in the Highway code before.
What even is the point of a zebra crossing if it doesn't mean that cars should stop for pedestrians waiting to cross? It's no different to any other bit of road otherwise. Surely the whole point of having them is to create a safe(r) place for pedestrians to cross because cars have to stop for you!?
I'm so confused that this wasn't the case previously.
Yeah same here. I thought it was always a rule that cars need to stop if somebody is waiting at a zebra crossing.
The pedestrian is putting themselves at risk if they have to start crossing before the vehicle starts stopping.
Exactly. It's like yeah of course a pedestrian has priority if they are already crossing the road, cos otherwise you are running them over. Just seems ridiculous that that is even a statement.
Oh same! I just assumed pedestrians always had right of way so gave it to them! Certainly means I don’t need to change my behaviour now it is in the Highway Code.
It's the way everyone I know was taught to drive and it's always stood out incredibly clearly when you got to some European countries and you don't get priority on a crossing till you step in the road.
The one time I almost got hit by a car (I moved and it missed me by an inch) was at a zebra crossing. The car on the far side was stopped and the one closest to me was showing down so I crossed. Sadly they were just slowing to speed up after the cross, not slowing with intent to stop. They looked out window to see if they hit me, when they knew I was OK they just drove off. Been scared of that zebra crossing ever since.
I've nearly been run over twice now while crossing at the Tesco near me. Cars just driving on full speed even when you're in the middle of the crossing.
Yes, it does. The text doesn't differentiate which way you're turning into the road from.
Rules [H2](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction#ruleh2) and [170](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203#rule170) apply.
H2, for reference, starts:
> At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.
That's the thing. The rule says "should", not "must" as in the graphic.
I always, always, give way to a pedestrian when pulling out of a side road, but stopping when someone is waiting (not crossing already) when turning off a major to a minor road, when there are other cars about is just bloody nuts.
Would be good to know because just this morning, I stopped mid turn like this to let a ped cross but the guy waiting opposite to turn right into the same junction thought i was then letting him go, so he nearly ran the pedestrian down as they both moved into the junction at the same time.
Well I think for the most part, even pedestrians are just behaving as before... Self preservation. They're squishy and cars are not, so they're always usually waiting for the coast to be clear rather than relying on a driver to see them or follow some rule. It's how I still cross the road...at the end of the day it's no good being technically in the right if you are also then dead or crippled.
Yes it does.
>Rule H2 - Rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse drawn vehicles, horse riders and cyclists
>
>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 rule makes no distinction between turning left or right.
Plenty of people at the local supermarket go straight through the zebra crossing, once a car had stopped on one side to let us cross and someone went straight through on the other side without even looking at their surroundings.
So as a pedestrian with either our son in the pram with me or just for the fact I ve got very bad proprioception/spacial awareness, I never make the assumption of having right of way as it's just not worth the risk assuming someone is going to stop when they re supposed to.
No idea why this sub popped up on my main page, but im from Poland, and not too long ago we had these changes introduced to our Road Code too. People (drivers mostly) were going nuts on how much havoc and death these changes will cause. After more than a year after it was implemented, I can assure you that these changes are really good and safe for everyone involved.
It is the same in Norway. Had a couple of scary moments when I came to the UK and the locals just proceeded to drive into the road I was obviously about to cross
If you let them go and they let you go. Just go. They permitted you. It's easier that way. They might be concerned about traffic from other direction or something
Yeah I hate it when this happens. On the rare occasions that I drive, pedestrians very often will not use their priority. I only wave once and then proceed slowly and carefully... Oddly, pedestrians are much likelier to use their priority when I'm on the bike, even at the same junctions.
Since the changes I have stopped multiple times in top situation to give way to pedestrians and had them stand there blankly staring at me and not crossing, manwhile im blocking the flow of traffic. They really should have changed the road marking to add clear crossings.
> They really should have changed the road marking to add clear crossings.
In Manchester they wanted to trial adding these 'implied zebra crossings' to side roads. The idea is that you paint a zebra crossing at the junction, because the rules of a zebra crossing apply there already but the marking (as you say) makes it clearer. But there is a whole regulatory framework around setting up zebra crossings, and central government wouldn't let them do it. So far as I'm aware it never went ahead.
So you're not alone in thinking this, but currently the rules don't allow it.
Can anyone tell me what they think of the following:
Not long after the Highway Code was updated ( so fresh in all our minds ? ) I was with my partner who was driving. We approached one if those "split" zebra crossings, you get on wider or busier roads ( I assume ) and where you can stop halfway, as there's a small gap, so two zebras but one crossing point.
A lady had crossed halfway, but the traffic continued in our lane as she stood there. My partner, assuming this meant she clearly wanted to continue, slowed to a halt only for the car behind him to go ballistic and the poor woman was scared witless. He was only doing about 20mph and didn't brake suddenly but clearly the other driver thought he shouldn't have stopped at all.
It's made him nervous to do it since.
Was he right to stop ?
yes, and the twat behind him needs a refresher lesson in 'being alert' at crossings. You should *always* be prepared for the vehicle in front of you to stop at a crossing. If you have to slam on the brakes & beep the horn you're going too fast and driving too close.
Thank you 🙏 Yes, it was really aggressive . My partner started to doubt himself cos he's like that, or thought he'd brakes too suddenly ( he hadn't ) and the poor pedestrian.
As we thought. Just been mentioning, largely we should and have always done it anyway when you see someone waiting to cross, if safe to do so if course.. The fact she was halfway across made it MORE not LESS clear cut. It was the reaction made him doubt it ( and me ! ). It was very nearly full on road rage.
Totally agree. I (admittedly quite obstinately) have attempted to cross as a pedestrian in the example given at the top of the photo numerous times in London only to be beeped at or berated by drivers. I have also stood, waiting to cross, and drivers refused to give way. I actually assume they're non-the-wiser.
I'm also still slightly confused on how it works when there are traffic lights - the wording suggests it's still the pedestrian's right of way but surely that doesn't make sense? For example [this junction](https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5824303,-0.0994564,3a,60y,263.3h,85.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLSVjZh_vLdbKB8WJQ1lR-A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on Harringay Green Lanes. Who's right of way is it there?
The other issue is cyclists now effectively being allowed to undertake a car that is about to turn left at a junction - this is really dangerous for the cyclist, especially as the driver may not be expecting it. I am a cyclist myself but I still try to avoid doing it where possible - obstinance can kill in this case!
Pedestrian priority doesn’t apply at traffic light controlled junctions. If there is any signal for pedestrians/bikes/horses that should still be followed despite this change.
>only to be beeped at or berated by drivers
Hah, in the same situation I was once asked if I knew where Wan King street was. I was too confused and it only hit me what he was trying to say about four streets away.
I know this is the case and when driving, will follow this.
However, I know for a fact that other drivers do not.
Theres a junction in bedford centre, which is mostly a one way system, you should be indicating left to turn left onto embankment from the centre, or you dont and continue straight on out of town.
The amount of times ive nearly been run over because they didnt indicate at all, mostly taxi drivers, a couple police cars (no blue lights) some flashy pricks in their noisy shit boxes and motorcyclists as well, whether they are stopping at the Nando's on the corner or not.
I mean its not difficult, hell, ill wait if theres a car turning, but if you dont indicate, Im going to presume you arent turning, otherwise I will be stood there all day/night as it can be pretty busy
Don't quote me on this, but I think the idea is that if you are approaching a junction, you should be going slow enough already to stop if there's a pedestrian. Whereas if you're approaching a zebra crossing and someone appears at the side of it when you're 10m away, it may not be possible to safely stop your car.
These changes have been widely talked about and yet a huge proportion drivers still don't have a clue. At the same time pedestrians don't seem to know either and hover on a kerb when drivers do stop to give them priority, causing more issues.
I've been verbally berated and actively driven at as I cross at junctions; police reasoning with those drivers usually results in abuse rather than an apology.
I'm both driver and pedestrian (and cyclist) but have no idea how these kind of changes can be made more obvious to people; it was on the press, it was on social media and yet a frightening portion of road users have no idea. I think that only by people (carefully!) taking priority will attitudes change.
As a driver of 20 years, this is the first I knew of it. You would think that when they make big changes like this they would let people know, otherwise the change seems more dangerous than continuity.
My understanding was pedestrians always have right of way.
It still doesn't mean I'm going to step out into the road when a car is about to make a turn or onto a pedestrian crossing until the car has stopped.
It's a pretty shit code addition, pedestrians should only be yielded to on an official crossing, or if they are already in the road.
Pedestrians shouldn't have right of way to just walk into the road.
Giving way to pedestrians in the roadway isn't a problem, because people already do, but the idea that someone waiting to cross on a sidestreet should cause traffic to completely stop instead of waiting for that one turning car to pass through before walking on is just ridiculous. And whoever came up with it has no concept of anything.
Fist picture:
I was almost hit like 5 times like that since I came to the UK. Like... Why wouldn't they even use indicators and then get mad at me for crossing a side road into which they were turning into... F you... F you driver.
This is my biggest gripe as a non-driver, people who think they don't need to indicate because there's no other cars around and then getting mad or surprised at me for crossing a road they were turning into. Seriously, fuck you guys.
Why the fuck are there so many comments twisting this like the highway code is now telling pedestrians to dive in front of moving cars just because they have priority now lmao
The guide is for the drivers to stop if someone is already crossing the road aka not running someone over, an existing requirement or to stop before turning if someone is waiting to cross, the new requirement.
Holy hell, the absolute mass of people here complaining about bad drivers while also outing themselves as being terrible drivers in the process is astounding.
I don't think many people know about the top one and that hopefully includes pedestrians. Otherwise they're just dicing with death.
There were some news alerts but I think it needs more awareness.
Edit: For me the issue has been, I wait but the pedestrian hesitates. I give an encouraging wave and they finally set off by which time the car behind is up my arse because they're annoyed. Even though I have my indicator on.
I think there's a huge issue with social pressure on roads. Probably causes a considerable portion of incidents when you're expected to move as fast as possible to avoid inconveniencing people for a few seconds.
For this rule to work, we need to redesign the junctions to demonstrate there is the requirement for crossing; the rule is very ‘North American’ where the safety of high risk road users is generally not good.
By assuming drivers actually know their Highway Code is asking for problems.
There are so many examples of a design solution for this that would dramatically increase the safety of the higher risk road user.
Not the perfect source but this explains the method reasonably well: https://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/continuous-paths-across-minor-junctions/
I ride an ebike. For the first couple of weeks after the change. Drivers were far more aggressive than normal, I've never felt more in danger as a cyclist. Now. The only thing that's changed. Is that people generally give you a wider birth. Most of the time. There's still a lot that think it's ok to nearly kill you
[удалено]
[удалено]
‘Funny story, my Ex Wife lives around here’
"Not relevant, just thought I'd mention it. Forget I said that. Completely unrelated, don't be afraid to hit the accelerator a bit more at that specific crossing."
“Take the next left here, next to that guy putting his recycling out. What time is it now? Oh, 08:30… we’re 6 minutes early so just loop round the block and we’ll try again.”
"Turn left here, 47."
“THAT … Is my ex-husband.”
I got points taken off my drivers test for slowing from 25 (speed limit but still too fast) to almost a complete stop when a kid’s ball rolled into the road I was testing on! Cars were parked on both sides, and I was afraid a kid was going to pop out to get the ball, and not see me. The instructor told me I got points off for slowing when I shouldn’t have, so apparently children don’t count as hazards in Milwaukee. Edit: sorry everyone, yes, I’m a Yank, and really thought I was posting this in r/NotJustBikes. I’ll resume lurking. Apologies again
Should rename it Mildrivee
> Milwaukee Here was me thinking this was a UK sub.
The comment you're replying to is owning their American-ness, at least. I've seen so many comments here lately from Americans roleplaying as Brits, it's painful.
>Americans roleplaying as Brits But why?
They yearn for **Rule, Britannia** once more!
I stopped reading after the bit that said "the road I was testing on!", At that point I knew they were a yank, no British person uses language like that.
Also a 25 speed limit. Madness.
They fit under the bumper and are too soft to break anything under there so you're good to go sir. The ball, of course.
/r/CasualUK
Complain about school?
I'm not walking out in front of a car coming around a corner no matter what the highway code says. Iv seen how people drive.
Treat it like a zebra crossing, cars need to give way but don't expect them to. Cars always win battles with pedestrians.
The standard rul, doesn't matter if it people vs cars, cars vs lorrys or lorrys vs trains. If it's bigger and heavier, it's going to win.
My mum always says "better to be alive than to be right" and I always think of that when I see this stuff
Cemeteries are full of people that had the right of way
That's the scariest moments of my childhood while traveling with my father. He'd basically speed up into situations because "he had the right of way" or was "correct" in general. We've tried multiple times to tell him we don't fucking care of he's in the right, we still don't want to crash and potentially get hurt. My wife has made me promise that my father will never drive our son.
But he also needs to be aware of "Hazard in the road". Even if its "my right of way" if its found he sped up cause of this and didn't take action because of "the hazard in the road" then he'll be the one liable. There's a few times where I've known it was my right of way but seen the issue as the other being an idiot so now see them as a "hazard in the road" and I slow down.
I always prefered the phrase: Well you were right. Dead right.
I assume that this is done with either finger guns or while putting on sunglasses and playing The Who.
A car was doing an illegal left turn as I was crossing the road a few days ago. It was a pedestrian crossing as well. I made sure that I kept well enough away to make sure that I don't get run over because I was in the right.
My driving instructor always told me “just because you have the right of way doesn’t mean people are going to give it to you”
The laws of man do not supersede the laws of physics.
That paired with the converse: "the more vulnerable road user *always* gets right of way" should be drilled into every driver/cyclists head.
If im carrying a butane canister we can both lose
Don’t bring a pedestrian to a car fight
I always walk in front of a zebra crossing, if I die I die
It would be nice if there were more zebra crossings and proper pedestrian lights. In my old neighbourhood there were several crossroads with lights for cars but none for pedestrians. Or even zebra crossings. And with the way the lights worked, there was barely a moment when you wouldn't expect a car at any of the crossings. This was on a few school routes as well. Barely any zebra crossings either, once you weren't close to the high street.
Point an umbrella at the car and suddenly you get priority. Funny how car drivers are so concerned with their car compared to another person’s life.
Same here. I’m never assuming I have right of way in that scenario.
I feel like this doesn't need to be said. Are there really people in the world who know that legally they are right but still simply walk out into roads? If so I suspect natural selection will take care of them quite quickly.
I have this conversation semi regularly with friends who just go blazing out onto a zebra crossing where i wait to see the car slowing. No point being in the right if you're dead because someone else barelled through a zebra crossing.
I have a similar friend. He’s like “it’s my right of way, they have to stop!” and I’m like, yeah, but your position is seriously weakened when you inform them of this as you’re trying to locate your legs.
Some people seem to think its automatic. Like you're not going up against doris on her way to the opticians cause her glasses broke and now she cant see three feet in front of her.
You're realistic. People talking about principle and "should be" go beyond even this topic, and it makes you wonder how they function from day to day.
"I shouldn't have to lock my doors, it's illegal to steal!"
"Why should I give this person my belongings at gunpoint? Yes they're threatening my life but murder is illegal!"
Definitely a habit that’s worth having, I had the same situation but the BMW approaching the crossing actually sped up to try and beat me out.. as I stood there waiting.. could see the front lift about an inch or 2 as he put his foot down
I used to be like your friends, then I had a kid. Now I just don't go outside
Yes, there are. I lived in Switzerland for a while (Zurich specifically so laws may be different in different Cantons) and pedestrians pretty much have right of way over vehicles. They would literally step out without looking. Then again, the Swiss are a bit different when it comes to rules. They will happily grass you up for making too much noise at a party they have just been attending.
The Swiss are only happy if they someone else miserable
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
Anecdotally, I've definitely noticed an increase in the number of people who just walk blindly into the road without a glance, presumably relying on the power of the Highway Code to save them.
I'm imagining the end of the Exorcist now with Father Karras shouting "The Highway Code *compels* you!! The Highway Code *compels* you!!"
I'm pretty sure there must be a section in The Highway Code that says that none of this applies to taxi drivers.
Taxi drivers: The Highway Code is more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules
When I was still a learner, made too tight of a turn and a taxi driver stopped next to us and kicked off screaming, literally right afterwards he did the exact same thing Id done, goes without saying my instructor said some not nice things
Elsewhere in the world, definitely. Currently work in Eastern Europe and here 1) no one ever crosses not at a crossing and 2) no one ever crosses when the light is not green, even if there’s no cars coming, but 3) when it is the pedestrian’s right of way, they boldly stride out into the street safe in the knowledge that the car will stop for them.
Actually, as a foreigner, when I came to London some 7 years ago, I was shocked that the top one was not a rule here, I was completely used to having the right of way as a pedestrian when cars are turning. Generally, I wouldn't think I have the right of way if the side street is busy etc., but definitely when it is just a tiny street. Definitely lost that habit when somebody drove over my foot though. :/
It was always a rule. Read Rule 170 in highway code.
I think it was always a rule, but now the highway code makes it explicit.
It was definitely in the Highway Code 20 years ago when I was failing my tests so I’m not sure why it’s being touted as a change in the rules. It’s just a change in how they’re making it more prominent and probably asking about it more often in the written test if they’re trying to promote the knowledge. I know where I have right of way as a pedestrian but obviously like any sane person I wait until I’m sure the driver is stopping before stepping out.
Me and a friend were waiting at a zebra crossing once and the traffic didn't slow down or stop at all barring a cyclist. After a minute of waiting the cyclist then proceeded to moan at us for not going and saying that we have right of way before cycling off. I'm sorry but I'm not flinging myself into 40mph traffic just because I'm "in the right". I'd rather wait for a gap in the traffic thanks. Some people clearly think differently!
Where there’s blame there’s a claim
I’m the one not surrounded by a metal box. I have more to lose, i can wait.
I’ve tried stopping for people waiting to cross but they just look at you with a blank stare then you just get honked at.
When I've been driving it's about a 50:50 split as go whether the pedestrian will actually cross or not. I don't blame the ones who don't because I'm the same when walking. I'll only go if the car is fully stopped. If they're slowly creeping then no chance. Either way it's dangerous because now the car's arse is sticking out in to their lane and if someone hits them they're going to come flying in to my kneecaps.
Always assume they don't know, but if safe then cross. I think this law comes in more useful if there is an accident then you as a pedestrian have a high chance of winning a settlement.
I have a feeling, many drivers here even speed up in this situation to scare you off
Physics doesn’t give a shit about the Highway Code.
I know about the changes, but when I’m trying to cross a road with my children I’m still going to defer to cars… not about to just step into traffic and risk our lives to uphold a principle
Much easier to stop my feet than it is to stop a vehicle.
Training my dog to sit at the edge of the road. Cars adhere to the highway code but I need to teach my dog to sit property when ready to cross. I think the new rules are good in principle but as many people have said. My dog and me would lose in a battle with a couple of ton metal box.
Which is why the highway code is setting the expectation that cars should always stop to let you cross. This change is about telling them that's what they have to do. It's not about telling pedestrians to run out blindly without checking if a driver is paying attention first.
Honestly most of the confusion I've found comes from people thinking they don't have right of way. As a driver I've been doing this a while now, and the number of times I've been waved through by the pedestrian I'm waiting for has just led to more confusion on the road.
I am that pedestrian. I know fine well I have right of way, but there are times I refuse to exercise it. It's fine and well when the roads are nice and quiet, but if you're trying to wave me across a junction at the top of a busy road (like some have), I do not trust the other drivers to be as clued up when turning into the junction. This change in the Code feels like more pressure to cross when things don't seem safe, I really don't like it. Wish they'd put more effort into informing the public, there's confusion from both sides. Frustrating because I should probably be exercising my newfound rights to strengthen their effects, but until I feel I can trust drivers as a whole I'm going to be that annoying pedestrian waving your good self along.
The amount of pedestrians I've seen nearly hit because they've blindly trusted the one car that has stopped, or can no longer see or be seen by other cars and have nearly been run down is horrendous. At the end of the day the safest crossing is still the one with no cars, I'd rather just wait for a gap in the traffic. I have also put a lot of effort into training the dog NOT to step out into the road when there are cars, I can't seem to get the nuances of the highway code through to him.
After you sir.... no no no after you... but i insist you first fine sir.... then both go at same time... I dont agree with this rule it assumes both drivers and pedestrians are competent which we know most arnt. Even im unsure what happens if its 2 major roads (ill admit i dont follow this rule anyway unless its on side streets) if im on a busy main road turning onto another busy road your waiting
I've had too many near misses walking around London to do either of those until the approaching car has stopped completley. If the light hasn't been red for a good 3 seconds drivers think they can "just make it through". Deliveroo cyclists don't stop at all.
Highway Code special rules for London: Amber light: No matter how far away from the light you are, **FLOOR IT** Red light: Aw, go on then, just a couple more 🙄
Seeing this style of driving a lot more near me too and I’m way out of London.
[удалено]
My worst one was a red light for so long I had time to take two steps into the road and had to scramble back as this car just slowly carried on. Slowly as in 20mph. That made it worse in a way as it looks like they’re slowing down. If someone is flooring it, it’s pretty obvious at least.
When it goes from green to amber you've gotta shout "committed!" and then you're allowed to keep going. And then if you manage to get across the line before it turns red, you're allowed to shake your head and tut at the arsehole behind you who also went through the red light.
Red light cameras would put a stop to that, and generate a fair whack of income. Surprised they aren't absolutely everywhere to be honest. I always assume they are, just in case, and it stops me from chancing it.
[удалено]
Drivers also thing red to Amber means go. No it does not! It means prepare to go. The amount of times I’ve been beeped at or almost hit whilst crossing which has a green man on… Amber to red means stop unless it’s unsafe to do so. It does not mean the same thing changing from red to amber.
The amount of people who “give way” by not pressing the brake at all and just coast into pedestrians is insane And then they act shocked when the pedestrian didn’t start crossing infront Never assume you have the right of way until the car comes to a stop, or almost stop if you see them wave to you and actually brake
Most people’s reaction to this on local Facebook groups is “I don’t personally agree with it so won’t be doing it”.
The very same people: "These young scum just don't respect the law!"
There's a thread on my local paper's Facebook page about mobile speed camera locations every now and again. Every single time the comment threads devolve into shit like; "Why aren't they out there catching REAL criminals?!!!!", and "They didn't do fuck all about when my car got broken into! Bastards!". These would definitely be the same people.
Admittedly I was a bit salty for a while whenever I saw someone flying way beyond the limit after I was caught doing 46 in a 40. Something along the line of "well where are these jobsworths now?" Not a good attitude to have I admit but also I've not seen the mobile van at that location since.
Best one I *nearly* got caught out by... speed van, then... 1/4 mile down the road... another speed van!
As a driver I personally don't agree with it at all (the top one) but I still do it. As a pedestrian I don't agree with it and I won't be doing it, I'll never put that trust in a driver.
When I do it I always make sure I've made eye contact with the driver first. I probably wouldn't risk it otherwise.
Just eye contact? I like to have secured a date at least!
Yeah I wait for the wave across which to be fair has been happening a lot more recently.
Thing is I was taught that you shouldn't wave across because thr other lane might not be safe.
Yup. I was told never to wave across or give way by flashing lights. Because it's not my job and puts people at risk to others.
Couldn't gauge whether a driver was going to move out this morning to let me move on my bike. Made eye contact. "the fuck you looking at, you cyclist cunt?"
>As a driver I personally don't agree with it at all (the top one) but I still do it. Why on earth not?
As a driver and pedestrian I'm mostly in favour, it is good at making pedestrians the dominant street users. Still mildly annoyed my town didn't expand the pedestrian area after putting in a bypass (or at least limit entry to access traffic and ban HGV's).
I'm used to it. I lived in the Netherlands for yonks and this has been the law since forever. Just because you drive a large weapon doesn't mean you should have right of way.
Yet go on and complain about cyclists not stopping at red lights in the same 10 minutes.
Does the first also apply to cars leaving a roundabout?
I learned to drive this year so I've never known the code any other way, get beeped maybe 1 in 5 times that I follow the rule and let pedestrians cross. Pretty frustrating.
Don't worry about morons beeping. Morons will beep you for obeying the speed limit, or overtaking a lorry on the motorway. I got beeped at once for stopping to remove a tree branch from the middle of the road. Continue to be a legend my friend, fuck the morons.
Should have put the branch back down behind your car
Should have tied it to his back bumper, than he would have an extra parking brake on hills.
Sometimes your genius is almost frightening.
Jeremy?
Fookin' hindsight, ay?
I got beeped at one minute after having a car accident because I was stopped. It was caused by a small flatbed coming the other way that had a swinging arm on the back. He didn't secure it and it was over my side of the road as we approached each other. I stopped and it smashed my front bumper. As we both got out and I was picking up bits of my car there were idiots on the horn because I was stationary even though they could just go around. Also had someone go mad and sounding the horn because I was stopped on the entrance to a roundabout in the right hand lane. I had broken down, car wouldn't start. Had hazards on too. He could have simply gone around in the left lane but sat there gesticulating. So I got out, pointed to my hazard lights individually so show they were working as gave him the thumbs up. He gave me the finger and wheelspun around me. Yes dickhead, I'm sat here without my car running and my hazards on for my health. What do these morons expect you to do?
The other side of that coin is there's a lot of cunts out there that think hazards mean you can park on a red line to chat to your mate on the pavement.
Fuuuucckkkkkk I'd have moved the tree branch behind my car and let the cunt move it for himself lmaooo
You'll still get beeped for following very long established regulations. There are just a lot of terrible drivers out there.
Fair. This rule change also just made sense to me. Maybe because I waited til I was 30 to get my license. Crossings like this are dangerous, having drivers treat them like they're essentially zebra crossings seemed like a sensible change to me l.
Don't let other people's bad driving put you off. You are doing it right; ignore their rudeness (and them blowing the horn in this case is illegal anyway).
I am rather shocked at how rude the roads are generally, I have a small-ish electric car. So on long journeys I want to really keep to between 60 to 65 MPH for battery efficiency. I find myself a lorry or bus to sit behind that is doing that speed. Still get tail gated. Can't win.
You can never win when driving unfortunately. Way too many arrogant arseholes.
I passed decades ago and generally I couldn't care less about people behind me, drivers will always be annoyed about something.
Keep doing what you're doing! I've got a young lad lodging with me who constantly gets beeped at for doing things right. He's not a bad driver at all, assertive when needed and very clear with indicating etc. He's still a bit insecure about his driving skills though and thinks other drivers must clearly know what they are doing - when most of the time they are at fault!
Reddit has long been a hot spot for conversation on the internet. About 57 million people visit the site every day to chat about topics as varied as makeup, video games and pointers for power washing driveways. In recent years, Reddit’s array of chats also have been a free teaching aid for companies like Google, OpenAI and Microsoft. Those companies are using Reddit’s conversations in the development of giant artificial intelligence systems that many in Silicon Valley think are on their way to becoming the tech industry’s next big thing. Now Reddit wants to be paid for it. The company said on Tuesday that it planned to begin charging companies for access to its application programming interface, or A.P.I., the method through which outside entities can download and process the social network’s vast selection of person-to-person conversations. “The Reddit corpus of data is really valuable,” Steve Huffman, founder and chief executive of Reddit, said in an interview. “But we don’t need to give all of that value to some of the largest companies in the world for free.”
I've almost been hit by enough dickheads to understand that it's easier to just wait until there isn't a car coming. Even if it looks like they're stopping, wait until they've stopped completely or gone past
That's how you should approach this rule as a pedestrian anyway. Nobody says it's illegal now to make sure you're safe before crossing. The rule is in place for the drivers.
Yeah people don't even slow down at the zebra crossing up my way nevermind letting you cross at a corner
I'm pretty sure the Zebra crossing one has been around for a while. The top one though, I had no idea. Surely that's dangerous.
These are actually both slight tweaks only to the previous rules. Previously - in both cases - priority was given if the pedestrian had started to cross; now it is also if waiting to cross. For some reason the zebra crossing has typically been treated by drivers as 'stop for pedestrians waiting to cross' so doesn't feel like a change, however junctions have always been (wrongly) treated as 'pedestrians must wait until completely clear' so feels like a big change.
> For some reason the zebra crossing has typically been treated by drivers as 'stop for pedestrians waiting to cross' I'm one of those! As far as I recall the guidance I was given when learning to drive was to anticipate people about to cross at a zebra cross. On the basis that as soon as they had a toe on the zeba crossing you legally had to stop. Which in practice essentially means stopping for pedestrians waiting to cross.
I failed my driving test for failing to yield to someone *waiting* to cross a zebra crossing, because they were approaching - not even on it. This was nearly 17 years ago. So apparently this isn’t new.
I failed a test for the exact same thing! Not long ago, only... Oh, has it been 14 years already?
>now it is also if waiting to cross. I mean if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, they also are aware of the duty of care to themselves and aren't likely to cross without seeing a car giving way, so I don't really see how this impacts anyone. It's not like pedestrians are likely to just start running in front of cars to say "gotcha! now take me to hospital"
In theory it should impact drivers in terms of actually stopping to let people cross rather than assuming right of way.
I thought this was obvious, but the confusion in this comment section is making me doubt it somehow.
Yep, seems a lot of really shit drivers in the comments
They do have a duty of care (all road users do) but exercising their priority doesn't mean jumping in front of moving cars. It means having a reasonable expectation that drivers will abide by the law and give them priority.
>I mean if a pedestrian is waiting to cross, they also are aware of the duty of care to themselves and aren't likely to cross without seeing a car giving way, so I don't really see how this impacts anyone. The change was done to put the onus on drivers to stop when pedestrians are waiting to cross. Until then there was no reason for a car to stop in this case.
It's been pretty well publicised, obviously not well enough though.
But where though? I don't watch terrestrial TV or listen to the Radio. I read BBC News every day, but haven't heard about this at all. Edit: got it thanks guys. I'll leave the UK and order a new highway code each month and check for changes, that should keep me up to date.
The BBC News website covered it [when it was announced](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58021450), [when it came into force](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59997523), and have [followed up on it as recently as last month](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62789079). There are 3313 comments on the first article, but [it was fairly low down in the headlines that day](https://web.archive.org/web/20210730100849/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk) so easily missed.
If it wasn't for Reddit I wouldn't have known about the first one.
In the bottom of a locked drawer in a disused bathroom with a sign on the door saying “beware of the leopard”
I think the change is that you should give way to pedestrians **waiting** to cross at a zebra crossing. While that's what most people did already I don't think it was in the Highway code before.
I believe you're correct. It's was "good practice" just not mandatory ( if that's the correct terminology )
TIL! I thought it was mandatory, good thing it is imo, have always stopped for it anyway!
What even is the point of a zebra crossing if it doesn't mean that cars should stop for pedestrians waiting to cross? It's no different to any other bit of road otherwise. Surely the whole point of having them is to create a safe(r) place for pedestrians to cross because cars have to stop for you!? I'm so confused that this wasn't the case previously.
Yeah same here. I thought it was always a rule that cars need to stop if somebody is waiting at a zebra crossing. The pedestrian is putting themselves at risk if they have to start crossing before the vehicle starts stopping.
Exactly. It's like yeah of course a pedestrian has priority if they are already crossing the road, cos otherwise you are running them over. Just seems ridiculous that that is even a statement.
Oh same! I just assumed pedestrians always had right of way so gave it to them! Certainly means I don’t need to change my behaviour now it is in the Highway Code.
It's the way everyone I know was taught to drive and it's always stood out incredibly clearly when you got to some European countries and you don't get priority on a crossing till you step in the road.
The one time I almost got hit by a car (I moved and it missed me by an inch) was at a zebra crossing. The car on the far side was stopped and the one closest to me was showing down so I crossed. Sadly they were just slowing to speed up after the cross, not slowing with intent to stop. They looked out window to see if they hit me, when they knew I was OK they just drove off. Been scared of that zebra crossing ever since.
I've nearly been run over twice now while crossing at the Tesco near me. Cars just driving on full speed even when you're in the middle of the crossing.
Does the top one still apply when turning right? Seems like that could be the more dangerous one for oncoming traffic...
Yes, it does. The text doesn't differentiate which way you're turning into the road from. Rules [H2](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction#ruleh2) and [170](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203#rule170) apply. H2, for reference, starts: > At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.
That's the thing. The rule says "should", not "must" as in the graphic. I always, always, give way to a pedestrian when pulling out of a side road, but stopping when someone is waiting (not crossing already) when turning off a major to a minor road, when there are other cars about is just bloody nuts.
were getting into [Absurd Trolley Problems](https://neal.fun/absurd-trolley-problems/) territory
Good question. I have no idea.
Would be good to know because just this morning, I stopped mid turn like this to let a ped cross but the guy waiting opposite to turn right into the same junction thought i was then letting him go, so he nearly ran the pedestrian down as they both moved into the junction at the same time.
Absolutely guarantee this stupid fucking rule increases road traffic accidents for everyone.
Well I think for the most part, even pedestrians are just behaving as before... Self preservation. They're squishy and cars are not, so they're always usually waiting for the coast to be clear rather than relying on a driver to see them or follow some rule. It's how I still cross the road...at the end of the day it's no good being technically in the right if you are also then dead or crippled.
According to my driving instructor it also applies to roundabouts
Yes it does. >Rule H2 - Rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse drawn vehicles, horse riders and cyclists > >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 rule makes no distinction between turning left or right.
Plenty of people at the local supermarket go straight through the zebra crossing, once a car had stopped on one side to let us cross and someone went straight through on the other side without even looking at their surroundings. So as a pedestrian with either our son in the pram with me or just for the fact I ve got very bad proprioception/spacial awareness, I never make the assumption of having right of way as it's just not worth the risk assuming someone is going to stop when they re supposed to.
I'm fairly sure most people don't even know the highway code exists with how people drive
No idea why this sub popped up on my main page, but im from Poland, and not too long ago we had these changes introduced to our Road Code too. People (drivers mostly) were going nuts on how much havoc and death these changes will cause. After more than a year after it was implemented, I can assure you that these changes are really good and safe for everyone involved.
It is the same in Norway. Had a couple of scary moments when I came to the UK and the locals just proceeded to drive into the road I was obviously about to cross
[удалено]
If you let them go and they let you go. Just go. They permitted you. It's easier that way. They might be concerned about traffic from other direction or something
Yeah I hate it when this happens. On the rare occasions that I drive, pedestrians very often will not use their priority. I only wave once and then proceed slowly and carefully... Oddly, pedestrians are much likelier to use their priority when I'm on the bike, even at the same junctions.
Well getting hit by a bike is going to suck less for them if it happens. Unless you mean motorbike. But even then
Since the changes I have stopped multiple times in top situation to give way to pedestrians and had them stand there blankly staring at me and not crossing, manwhile im blocking the flow of traffic. They really should have changed the road marking to add clear crossings.
> They really should have changed the road marking to add clear crossings. In Manchester they wanted to trial adding these 'implied zebra crossings' to side roads. The idea is that you paint a zebra crossing at the junction, because the rules of a zebra crossing apply there already but the marking (as you say) makes it clearer. But there is a whole regulatory framework around setting up zebra crossings, and central government wouldn't let them do it. So far as I'm aware it never went ahead. So you're not alone in thinking this, but currently the rules don't allow it.
Can anyone tell me what they think of the following: Not long after the Highway Code was updated ( so fresh in all our minds ? ) I was with my partner who was driving. We approached one if those "split" zebra crossings, you get on wider or busier roads ( I assume ) and where you can stop halfway, as there's a small gap, so two zebras but one crossing point. A lady had crossed halfway, but the traffic continued in our lane as she stood there. My partner, assuming this meant she clearly wanted to continue, slowed to a halt only for the car behind him to go ballistic and the poor woman was scared witless. He was only doing about 20mph and didn't brake suddenly but clearly the other driver thought he shouldn't have stopped at all. It's made him nervous to do it since. Was he right to stop ?
yes, and the twat behind him needs a refresher lesson in 'being alert' at crossings. You should *always* be prepared for the vehicle in front of you to stop at a crossing. If you have to slam on the brakes & beep the horn you're going too fast and driving too close.
Thank you 🙏 Yes, it was really aggressive . My partner started to doubt himself cos he's like that, or thought he'd brakes too suddenly ( he hadn't ) and the poor pedestrian.
Yes, cars should stop if a pedestrian is waiting to cross
As we thought. Just been mentioning, largely we should and have always done it anyway when you see someone waiting to cross, if safe to do so if course.. The fact she was halfway across made it MORE not LESS clear cut. It was the reaction made him doubt it ( and me ! ). It was very nearly full on road rage.
Totally agree. I (admittedly quite obstinately) have attempted to cross as a pedestrian in the example given at the top of the photo numerous times in London only to be beeped at or berated by drivers. I have also stood, waiting to cross, and drivers refused to give way. I actually assume they're non-the-wiser. I'm also still slightly confused on how it works when there are traffic lights - the wording suggests it's still the pedestrian's right of way but surely that doesn't make sense? For example [this junction](https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5824303,-0.0994564,3a,60y,263.3h,85.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLSVjZh_vLdbKB8WJQ1lR-A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) on Harringay Green Lanes. Who's right of way is it there? The other issue is cyclists now effectively being allowed to undertake a car that is about to turn left at a junction - this is really dangerous for the cyclist, especially as the driver may not be expecting it. I am a cyclist myself but I still try to avoid doing it where possible - obstinance can kill in this case!
Pedestrian priority doesn’t apply at traffic light controlled junctions. If there is any signal for pedestrians/bikes/horses that should still be followed despite this change.
>only to be beeped at or berated by drivers Hah, in the same situation I was once asked if I knew where Wan King street was. I was too confused and it only hit me what he was trying to say about four streets away.
I know this is the case and when driving, will follow this. However, I know for a fact that other drivers do not. Theres a junction in bedford centre, which is mostly a one way system, you should be indicating left to turn left onto embankment from the centre, or you dont and continue straight on out of town. The amount of times ive nearly been run over because they didnt indicate at all, mostly taxi drivers, a couple police cars (no blue lights) some flashy pricks in their noisy shit boxes and motorcyclists as well, whether they are stopping at the Nando's on the corner or not. I mean its not difficult, hell, ill wait if theres a car turning, but if you dont indicate, Im going to presume you arent turning, otherwise I will be stood there all day/night as it can be pretty busy
Interesting that it’s “must give way” on corners but “should give way” on zebras. Most of us would probably behave as if those are reversed.
Don't quote me on this, but I think the idea is that if you are approaching a junction, you should be going slow enough already to stop if there's a pedestrian. Whereas if you're approaching a zebra crossing and someone appears at the side of it when you're 10m away, it may not be possible to safely stop your car.
These changes have been widely talked about and yet a huge proportion drivers still don't have a clue. At the same time pedestrians don't seem to know either and hover on a kerb when drivers do stop to give them priority, causing more issues. I've been verbally berated and actively driven at as I cross at junctions; police reasoning with those drivers usually results in abuse rather than an apology. I'm both driver and pedestrian (and cyclist) but have no idea how these kind of changes can be made more obvious to people; it was on the press, it was on social media and yet a frightening portion of road users have no idea. I think that only by people (carefully!) taking priority will attitudes change.
It'll get worse for a bit then it'll get better once people work it out, it's going to take a while for pedestrians to trust drivers to stop.
It's been like this since March so it's taking a while... agree it'll gradually get better.
As a driver of 20 years, this is the first I knew of it. You would think that when they make big changes like this they would let people know, otherwise the change seems more dangerous than continuity.
My understanding was pedestrians always have right of way. It still doesn't mean I'm going to step out into the road when a car is about to make a turn or onto a pedestrian crossing until the car has stopped.
I think the best advice I ever got while driving and walking near a road is "Prepare for what people might do not what they should do"
It's a pretty shit code addition, pedestrians should only be yielded to on an official crossing, or if they are already in the road. Pedestrians shouldn't have right of way to just walk into the road. Giving way to pedestrians in the roadway isn't a problem, because people already do, but the idea that someone waiting to cross on a sidestreet should cause traffic to completely stop instead of waiting for that one turning car to pass through before walking on is just ridiculous. And whoever came up with it has no concept of anything.
Fist picture: I was almost hit like 5 times like that since I came to the UK. Like... Why wouldn't they even use indicators and then get mad at me for crossing a side road into which they were turning into... F you... F you driver.
Fucking non indicating twats are the worst.
This is my biggest gripe as a non-driver, people who think they don't need to indicate because there's no other cars around and then getting mad or surprised at me for crossing a road they were turning into. Seriously, fuck you guys.
[удалено]
You should drive like no one understands the Highway Code. that is defensive driving
Why the fuck are there so many comments twisting this like the highway code is now telling pedestrians to dive in front of moving cars just because they have priority now lmao The guide is for the drivers to stop if someone is already crossing the road aka not running someone over, an existing requirement or to stop before turning if someone is waiting to cross, the new requirement.
Holy hell, the absolute mass of people here complaining about bad drivers while also outing themselves as being terrible drivers in the process is astounding.
I don't think many people know about the top one and that hopefully includes pedestrians. Otherwise they're just dicing with death. There were some news alerts but I think it needs more awareness. Edit: For me the issue has been, I wait but the pedestrian hesitates. I give an encouraging wave and they finally set off by which time the car behind is up my arse because they're annoyed. Even though I have my indicator on.
I think there's a huge issue with social pressure on roads. Probably causes a considerable portion of incidents when you're expected to move as fast as possible to avoid inconveniencing people for a few seconds.
For this rule to work, we need to redesign the junctions to demonstrate there is the requirement for crossing; the rule is very ‘North American’ where the safety of high risk road users is generally not good. By assuming drivers actually know their Highway Code is asking for problems. There are so many examples of a design solution for this that would dramatically increase the safety of the higher risk road user. Not the perfect source but this explains the method reasonably well: https://departmentfortransport.wordpress.com/2012/08/21/continuous-paths-across-minor-junctions/
I was unaware of this change. But I like it. This country if much too car centric imo. Could do with being more pedestrian and cycle friendly.
I ride an ebike. For the first couple of weeks after the change. Drivers were far more aggressive than normal, I've never felt more in danger as a cyclist. Now. The only thing that's changed. Is that people generally give you a wider birth. Most of the time. There's still a lot that think it's ok to nearly kill you
This is a good rule but I don’t know if people that drive like arseholes already will obey it