Login | Register
SearchMy Stuff
My ProfileMy PreferencesMy Mates RSS Feed
2
Reply to Topic
Author Discussion

CB125T

Original Poster:

934 posts

22 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
I managed to accidentally headbutt my rear view mirror off recently :hehe;

Legally speaking, do I need one?

ikarl

1,702 posts

87 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
I believe the law states you need to have two mirrors, so as long as you have one on each door etc you should be fine

wait for someone else to confirmt though..

LocoCoco

964 posts

64 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
ikarl said:
I believe the law states you need to have two mirrors, so as long as you have one on each door etc you should be fine

wait for someone else to confirmt though..
I did some googling and this seems right with respect to passing an MOT, I'm guessing that means it's legal.

carinaman

8,590 posts

60 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
With a PH user name like that I'd have thought you'd have picked up a shed load of road sense and know how useful mirrors can be.

Regardless of whether it's legal please get a mirror.

If someone drives into your rear end while you're stationary at a Give Way line, it'll look better for you if you have a mirror. Trust me.

mrmr96

13,736 posts

92 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
Vans and lorries won't have them as the rear of their vehicle is opaque.
Some vans are 'car based' so they have the same wing mirror setup.
So I don't believe it would be a requirement to have a windscreen mounted rear view mirror if you have the two normal wingmirrors.
Advertisement

carinaman

8,590 posts

60 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
The OP may get used to driving without referring to that mirror, and develop a habit of not using it in future when they're then in vehicles that have a windscreen mirror.

jesta1865

2,780 posts

97 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
If someone drives into your rear end while you're stationary at a Give Way line, it'll look better for you if you have a mirror. Trust me.
why if they hit him from behind whilst he is stationary it's their fault not his?

h0b0

2,183 posts

84 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
With a PH user name like that I'd have thought you'd have picked up a shed load of road sense and know how useful mirrors can be.

Regardless of whether it's legal please get a mirror.

If someone drives into your rear end while you're stationary at a Give Way line, it'll look better for you if you have a mirror. Trust me.
Eh? I have driven many thousands of miles with out a rear view mirror. Not because I knocked it off with my head but because the vehicle didn't come with one.

andygo

4,621 posts

143 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
The OP may get used to driving without referring to that mirror, and develop a habit of not using it in future when they're then in vehicles that have a windscreen mirror.
That explains the top driving you get from truck drivers then when they pull ou to engage in a bit of elephant racing.

Dr Mike Oxgreen

1,765 posts

53 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
I believe the vehicle must have a driver's side door mirror, and EITHER a rear-view mirror or a near-side door mirror.

carinaman

8,590 posts

60 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
jesta1865 said:
why if they hit him from behind whilst he is stationary it's their fault not his?
Look at the BMW driver in Court yesterday. And all the bickering here about apportioning blame. Is it worth giving the party that hits him, or their insurer any wriggle room for them to say 'But he didn't look in his mirror and his car didn't even have one'? Is it worth it? That wouldn't arise if he fitted a mirror. Excuse culture? Make it about the other party?

Mirror Signal Manoeuvre?


andycaca

137 posts

16 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
Dr Mike Oxgreen said:
I believe the vehicle must have a driver's side door mirror, and EITHER a rear-view mirror or a near-side door mirror.
this 100%. my sprint car has wing mirrors but no rear view. MOT passed last weekend smile

Nos Es Spurius

25 posts

15 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
Hi OP , I'm afraid that this is another case of just because it passes an MOT doesn't make it legal. If your vehicle has a window in the rear that you can see out of then you require by law to have a rear view mirror and an offside door mirror fitted. I know it's stupid but if for example you were to paint your rear window then you wouldn't need an interior one at all, only a nearside.

This comes under C+U regs Reg 33

6 A wheeled motor vehicle not in items 1 to 5, which is first used on or after 1st June 1978 (or, in the case of a Ford Transit motor car, 10th July 1978)
(i) At least one mirror fitted externally on the offside of the vehicle; and

(ii) at least one mirror fitted internally, unless a mirror so fitted would give the driver no view to the rear of the vehicle; and

(iii) at least one mirror fitted externally on the nearside of the vehicle unless a mirror which gives the driver an adequate view to the rear is fitted internally

So if you have a view to the rear you need an interior mirror.

The MOT requirement is worded differently.

It's not worth the price of a ticket not to get it fixed as I know of some of my colleagues (with standards far lower than mine) that have had cases go to court and the driver been convicted.

jesta1865

2,780 posts

97 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
jesta1865 said:
why if they hit him from behind whilst he is stationary it's their fault not his?
Look at the BMW driver in Court yesterday. And all the bickering here about apportioning blame. Is it worth giving the party that hits him, or their insurer any wriggle room for them to say 'But he didn't look in his mirror and his car didn't even have one'? Is it worth it? That wouldn't arise if he fitted a mirror. Excuse culture? Make it about the other party?

Mirror Signal Manoeuvre?
not sure what case you mention, do you have a link?

i am still at a loss at how not looking in a mirror there or not apportions any blame to the driver sitting in a stationary car hit from the rear.

how would they argue the point if it was a panel van or luton with no rear mirror.

they don't have a leg to stand on.

jbsportstech

1,159 posts

67 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
unless you have vehicle were you cant see out the back get a replacement.


Shnozz

16,696 posts

159 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
I cannot see out of the rear and ditched my rear view mirror a long time ago as all it did was encroach upon the view out of the front screen. No problems at MOT time.

gazza285

1,520 posts

96 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
The OP may get used to driving without referring to that mirror, and develop a habit of not using it in future when they're then in vehicles that have a windscreen mirror.
Just like I haven't after driving vans without for 20 years...

R I C H

62 posts

33 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
carinaman said:
If someone drives into your rear end while you're stationary at a Give Way line, it'll look better for you if you have a mirror. Trust me.
I got rear ended at a set of traffic lights years ago. Watched the whole event play out in my rear view mirror. It didn't prevent any of the damage or injuries that ensued. I think I'd rather have not had the opportunity to look in the mirror and contemplate what was going to happen for several seconds as a vehicle bore down on me that had forgotten to brake for a red light.

Dr Jekyll

8,015 posts

149 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
Nos Es Spurius said:
Hi OP , I'm afraid that this is another case of just because it passes an MOT doesn't make it legal. If your vehicle has a window in the rear that you can see out of then you require by law to have a rear view mirror and an offside door mirror fitted. I know it's stupid but if for example you were to paint your rear window then you wouldn't need an interior one at all, only a nearside.

This comes under C+U regs Reg 33

6 A wheeled motor vehicle not in items 1 to 5, which is first used on or after 1st June 1978 (or, in the case of a Ford Transit motor car, 10th July 1978)
(i) At least one mirror fitted externally on the offside of the vehicle; and

(ii) at least one mirror fitted internally, unless a mirror so fitted would give the driver no view to the rear of the vehicle; and

(iii) at least one mirror fitted externally on the nearside of the vehicle unless a mirror which gives the driver an adequate view to the rear is fitted internally

So if you have a view to the rear you need an interior mirror.

The MOT requirement is worded differently.

It's not worth the price of a ticket not to get it fixed as I know of some of my colleagues (with standards far lower than mine) that have had cases go to court and the driver been convicted.
So if the OP blocked the view out of his rear window he'd be OK without a rear view mirror?

jbsportstech

1,159 posts

67 months

[news] 
Tuesday 11th March quote quote all
Shnozz said:
I cannot see out of the rear and ditched my rear view mirror a long time ago as all it did was encroach upon the view out of the front screen. No problems at MOT time.
Really what car are you driving?
2
Reply to Topic