Bad manners on the roads

[90019]

but the answer was that you should always check if the way is clear before moving off - i.e. don't just take someone's signal as a signal that all is safe.

That's the nub of it. The onus is on the person being let out to check that nothing is coming the other way.
Flashing your lights is used as an indication of giving way, not saying the way is clear.

 

[350232]

Half the trouble of bad manners come from inexperienced drivers, who 99.9% of the time cause crashes on the roads. flashing your headlights is an example of people not knowing the rules of the road. nine times out of ten if a car moves because someone flashed at it and that car crashes, the fault lies squarely with the driver who flashed their headlights. flashing headlights means that you let others know you're there, not to give way. if you think it does, it'll be your fault when an accident happens as a result.

 

[90019]

Half the trouble of bad manners come from inexperienced drivers, who 99.9% of the time cause crashes on the roads.

I agree, but I wouldn't put the figure that high. I'd say a bigger issue than inxperience is overconfidence and underconfidence, though obviously a lack of experience can often play a part in those as well.

flashing your headlights is an example of people not knowing the rules of the road. nine times out of ten if a car moves because someone flashed at it and that car crashes, the fault lies squarely with the driver who flashed their headlights. flashing headlights means that you let others know you're there, not to give way. if you think it does, it'll be your fault when an accident happens as a result.

If you flash you lights and the car subsequently crashes because they didn't check to see if anything was coming the other way, then the fault lies with the driver who crashed for not checking, not with the one who flashed their lights. This goes for letting people out in general though, regardless of what method you use.

Flashing your lights is used as a way of indicating giving way, not giving right of way.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

]nine times out of ten if a car moves because someone flashed at it and that car crashes, the fault lies squarely with the driver who flashed their headlights.

Not true at all. The fault will lie with the person who did not check it was safe to pull out before they did so.

Do you think that the driver should use a handsignal instead?

 

[350232]

Not true at all. The fault will lie with the person who did not check it was safe to pull out before they did so.

Do you think that the driver should use a handsignal instead?

no it was the person who decided to flash the driver who decided that it was safe. because the other driver is relying on the road being safe from the other driver, if he/she has an accident, then the fault belongs to the driver who foolishly thought it was safe when it wasn't.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

no it was the person who decided to flash the driver who decided that it was safe. because the other driver is relying on the road being safe from the other driver, if he/she has an accident, then the fault belongs to the driver who foolishly thought it was safe when it wasn't.

That isn't true. Whatever signal that was given, the liability will still rest with the driver who did not check the road was safe before pulling out. You should never rely on someone's signal that it is safe to pull out, you should always check for yourself.

 

[table38]

You should never rely on someone's signal that it is safe to pull out, you should always check for yourself.

I'd agree. Say you are waiting at a side road to pull out onto a main road and turn left; a car to your right on the main road is indicating left.

I was always taught that you should not pull out until the car indicating has actually started to turn.

 

[90019]

no it was the person who decided to flash the driver who decided that it was safe.

No they haven't, they have given way to the other driver. There is a difference.

because the other driver is relying on the road being safe from the other driver, if he/she has an accident, then the fault belongs to the driver who foolishly thought it was safe when it wasn't.

Which in this case is the one who pulled out without checking.

If someone flashes or gestures to let you out, you must always check there is nothing else coming. If you fail to do so and crash, it is your fault for not checking that it is safe to do so, not theirs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'd agree. Say you are waiting at a side road to pull out onto a main road and turn left; a car to your right on the main road is indicating left.

I was always taught that you should not pull out until the car indicating has actually started to turn.

Yes, you should never assume that the person is going to make the maneouvre until they actually begin to make it.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Isn't 350232 the person who thought democracy allowed people to riot, and supported the London riots? I'm not sure I would trust his interpretation of the law then!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If someone flashes or gestures to let you out, you must always check there is nothing else coming. If you fail to do so and crash, it is your fault for not checking that it is safe to do so, not theirs.

Driving without due care and attention I would imagine.

 

[350232]

Isn't 350232 the person who thought democracy allowed people to riot, and supported the London riots? I'm not sure I would trust his interpretation of the law then!

what has 'bad manners on the roads' got to do with the interpretation of the law?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

what has 'bad manners on the roads' got to do with the interpretation of the law?

You are saying that if someone gives way to another driver, and signals them that they have done so, then they are criminally responsible should the driver pull out without checking have cause an RTC. That is wrong.

 

[Yew]

I generally dont let people out unlesss there is lots of traffic. as if its just me, by the time they realise im letting them out. I could have gone past and they would have left anyway. Also if you flash someone, they might think its clear and not check, then crash.

However in situations where it is hard to determine who has right of way (say three cars reach a roundabout at the same time, or a narrow street with cars parked either side, Ill always flash the other person.

That is poor because it takes no recognition of traffic coming the other way. Many is the time that I have had a gap on the opposite only for someone dawdling to come along and when they have gone the gap is no more. I really do not see what the problem is with flashing some one out if they are turning right and that side is clear.

It costs absolutely no time to flash someone out but can mean an awful lot of time saved to them.

.

Because I mainly drive in the evening 9/10 pm. There is usually no traffic the other way to take account of . I'm guessing your view of not busy is busier than what I would say. I probably should have been more precise in my wording there.

 

[350232]

You are saying that if someone gives way to another driver, and signals them that they have done so, then they are criminally responsible should the driver pull out without checking have cause an RTC. That is wrong.

in your opinion.

i was very wrong with my interpretation of the law about the riots but all you're doing is stating an opinion of the situation.

 

[jon0844]

no it was the person who decided to flash the driver who decided that it was safe. because the other driver is relying on the road being safe from the other driver, if he/she has an accident, then the fault belongs to the driver who foolishly thought it was safe when it wasn't.

If someone in the car says 'you're okay to go now', I ignore it until I've looked and can confirm MYSELF that it is safe to go. If someone flashes, I've already established that it's clear and it's merely that person that is potentially a danger to me - and even then you proceed with caution in case they accidentally flashed, the light caught the lights, there was a malfunction etc.

Clearly there are other signs of being allowed to go, like the car having stopped - or being far enough away that you could safely go anyway (like turning right and a car far ahead approaching flashes).

 

[90019]

in your opinion.

i was very wrong with my interpretation of the law about the riots but all you're doing is stating an opinion of the situation.

I feel I should point out that I know someone who was involved in a crash caused by someone not checking for other traffic having been flashed at, so I do know what I'm talking about on this subject.

As for that crash, the driver who didn't check for other traffic was found to be at fault. His insurance paid out and no further action was taken.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

in your opinion.

i was very wrong with my interpretation of the law about the riots but all you're doing is stating an opinion of the situation.

And yours is based on fact? I think not.

Thanks to 90019 who posted a good example of exactly what we're talking about.

 

[350232]

I feel I should point out that I know someone who was involved in a crash caused by someone not checking for other traffic having been flashed at, so I do know what I'm talking about on this subject.

As for that crash, the driver who didn't check for other traffic was found to be at fault. His insurance paid out and no further action was taken.

so the guy deliberately misled that person into crashing into your friend's car by flashing at them. the guy who flashed misread the entire situation and therefore should be held to account.

it's hardly the fault of the driver who didn't check for other traffic as he relied on the clearly misleading signal of the other driver.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

so the guy deliberately misled that person into crashing into your friend's car by flashing at them. the guy who flashed misread the entire situation and therefore should be held to account.

it's hardly the fault of the driver who didn't check for other traffic as he relied on the clearly misleading signal of the other driver.

Any driver who relies on someone flashing at them that it is entirely safe to pull out without looking should not be on the road. It could be prosecuted under driving without due care and attention.

 

[350232]

Any driver who relies on someone flashing at them that it is entirely safe to pull out without looking should not be on the road. It could be prosecuted under driving without due care and attention.

then why give them a signal in the first place? i think you'll find that the driver who flashed shouldn't be on the road just as the person who didn't make one final check that it was safe.

fact: only flash headlights to let other's know of your presence, not to give signals which, in 90019's case, led to a crash.

 

[Zoe]

fact: only flash headlights to let other's know of your presence, not to give signals which, in 90019's case, led to a crash.

Indeed, you can't argue with the Highway Code.

 

[90019]

so the guy deliberately misled that person into crashing into your friend's car by flashing at them. the guy who flashed misread the entire situation and therefore should be held to account.

No, the guy assumed being flashed at meant it's clear, and pulled out without looking, causing a crash in the process, meaning that he was the one at fault and was the cause of the crash. That's why his insurance paid out.

it's hardly the fault of the driver who didn't check for other traffic as he relied on the clearly misleading signal of the other driver.

It is the fault of the driver who didn't check for traffic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

then why give them a signal in the first place? i think you'll find that the driver who flashed shouldn't be on the road just as the person who didn't make one final check that it was safe.

To signal your intention of giving way to the person at the junction.
Not to tell them the road is clear. If you believe that's what they're doing, you shouldn't be on the roads.

 

[Zoe]

To signal your intention of giving way to the person at the junction.

But flashing headlights should not be used for this, only to let other road users know you are there.

 

[90019]

But flashing headlights should not be used for this, only to let other road users know you are there.

So, how do you propose signalling intention to give way?

 

[350232]

But flashing headlights should not be used for this, only to let other road users know you are there.

exactly. can you really take that chance and say that in every scenario, the fault lies squarely with the person who didn't check it was safe?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So, how do you propose signalling intention to give way?

it depends. at a standard junction, you give way to the right. at a roundabout, unless there are traffic signals which are in operation, you give way to the right. there shouldn't be a need to give any signal to other drivers whatsoever.

it really isn't rocket science.

 

[Zoe]

So, how do you propose signalling intention to give way?

Where does it say you have to signal to another road user that you intend to give way? It clearly says that flashing headlights should not be used for this.

 

[90019]

exactly. can you really take that chance and say that in every scenario, the fault lies squarely with the person who didn't check it was safe?

Yes, it's called driving without due care and attention.

it depends. at a standard junction, you give way to the right. at a roundabout, unless there are traffic signals which are in operation, you give way to the right.

No, at a normal junction, you give way to whichever road has priority, unless you're on the road with priority and intend to give way to someone from another road.
It's only roudabouts where you always give way to the right.

it really isn't rocket science.

Clearly, it is.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Where does it say you have to signal to another road user that you intend to give way? It clearly says that flashing headlights should not be used for this.

The real world road system relies on people giving way to keep the flow of traffic moving at junctions during busy times.
As I mentioned previously, the Highway Code is all very well, but not all sitations correspond to those in the book, and as such will require different action to be taken.

 

[350232]

at a normal junction, you give way according to the line markings on the road. almost invariably this means giving way to the right.

why, therefore, would anyone need to flash their headlights to tell drivers who were waiting until the road is safe they're giving way?

keeping the traffic flowing does not mean you can tell other road users what to do, even if it is good-mannered. it should be, but you cannot take the chance the guy you're flashing at will check it's safe before moving off.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

keeping the traffic flowing does not mean you can tell other road users what to do, even if it is good-mannered. it should be, but you cannot take the chance the guy you're flashing at will check it's safe before moving off.

Then it's their problem, and they are driving without due care and attention. What's so hard to grasp about that?

 

[90019]

at a normal junction, you give way according to the line markings on the road. almost invariably this means giving way to the right.

why, therefore, would anyone need to flash their headlights to tell drivers who were waiting until the road is safe they're giving way?

Common courtesy.
When someone's been sitting at a junction waiting, it's just courteous to let them out.
It's one of the nice things about the roads in the UK that most drivers are generally courteous and will give way to others.

keeping the traffic flowing does not mean you can tell other road users what to do, even if it is good-mannered. it should be, but you cannot take the chance the guy you're flashing at will check it's safe before moving off.

Who said anything about telling them what to do?
Allowing them to go is not the same as telling them what to do, if they choose not to go, that's their choice. If they assume it's safe and just go without checking, it's driving without due care and attention regardless of whether someone else flashed their lights or not.

What about traffic calming then?
What about narrow sections of road where there is no signs about priority?
What about letting parked cars out into the flow of traffic?
What about letting buses out from stops?

I assume you don't do any of these either?
Or do you just stop and hold up traffic until the person you're letting out realises and pulls out?

 

[350232]

Common courtesy.
When someone's been sitting at a junction waiting, it's just courteous to let them out.
It's one of the nice things about the roads in the UK that most drivers are generally courteous and will give way to others.



Who said anything about telling them what to do?
Allowing them to go is not the same as telling them what to do, if they choose not to go, that's their choice. If they assume it's safe and just go without checking, it's driving without due care and attention regardless of whether someone else flashed their lights or not.

What about traffic calming then?
What about narrow sections of road where there is no signs about priority?
What about letting parked cars out into the flow of traffic?
What about letting buses out from stops?

I assume you don't do any of these either?
Or do you just stop and hold up traffic until the person you're letting out realises and pulls out?

Traffic calming is used for speed reduction. Why would I need to flash a driver there?
Narrow sections of road where there are no signs of priority. What about the most basic of Highway Code rules that states viz: give way to oncoming traffic? Why would I need to flash there and then? What about using the horn?
Parked cars should judge themselves when it's safe to pull out and not disrupt the flow of traffic expecting a courteous driver to give way to them.
Buses should MSM just as I should and there shouldn't be a need to flash them to let them know you're giving way as they always have priority at bus stops.