What's the verdict here then?
Discussion
https://goo.gl/maps/d44RibUMXsJ2
I was walking here yesterday and a taxi nearly hit me from behind/to the side. My path was from where the seated woman on the phone is, across the shaded tree in the middle to the glass doors by the bloke in the orange shirt.
I think this is pavement with pedestrian right of way and told him so. To me the yellow line signifies the edge of the highway.
Taxi 01663 shouted that it was a turning circle and that he had right of way.
What does the PH massive think here?
I was walking here yesterday and a taxi nearly hit me from behind/to the side. My path was from where the seated woman on the phone is, across the shaded tree in the middle to the glass doors by the bloke in the orange shirt.
I think this is pavement with pedestrian right of way and told him so. To me the yellow line signifies the edge of the highway.
Taxi 01663 shouted that it was a turning circle and that he had right of way.
What does the PH massive think here?
TooMany2cvs said:
contractor said:
What does the PH massive think here?
I think you should both have been looking where you were going.I wouldn't have expected a taxi to come close to hitting me if I was walking there.
I'm sure you were not in the wrong mate, so don't take this as an attack at you please!
However I find that if they are going to have vehicle access within pedestrian ares, whether restricted to buses and taxis or not, pedestrians should not automatically ignore their duty to themselves and stop looking in front of them, and making sure they take care to ensure they aren't knocked down. Just because it's pedestrianised, doesn't mean accidents can't happen, and people have to be responsible for their own safety, it's not just down to everyone else to stay out their way. Looks at shop car parks, how many times are you reversing from a space, and a numbskull rather than waiting or taking evasive, walks straight across the back of your car without taking into account that (a) cars damage humans, not the other way around (b) you have rights to continue your manoeuvre in safety as you are moving (c) drivers can't necessarily see people through obstructions like other cars and vans, so he may only have a fleeting view in his mirror prior to an impact
However I find that if they are going to have vehicle access within pedestrian ares, whether restricted to buses and taxis or not, pedestrians should not automatically ignore their duty to themselves and stop looking in front of them, and making sure they take care to ensure they aren't knocked down. Just because it's pedestrianised, doesn't mean accidents can't happen, and people have to be responsible for their own safety, it's not just down to everyone else to stay out their way. Looks at shop car parks, how many times are you reversing from a space, and a numbskull rather than waiting or taking evasive, walks straight across the back of your car without taking into account that (a) cars damage humans, not the other way around (b) you have rights to continue your manoeuvre in safety as you are moving (c) drivers can't necessarily see people through obstructions like other cars and vans, so he may only have a fleeting view in his mirror prior to an impact
Looking at again, maybe it is meant for taxis to turn. The pattern has an extra band around the circumference compared to the other - meant for additional separation for the bench-sitters?
The whole idea of these 'shared spaces' seems to be that no-one is quite sure who has right of way. Pedestrians/cyclists/drivers are then meant to slow down and take more care around each other. I think the jury's out on that one...
The whole idea of these 'shared spaces' seems to be that no-one is quite sure who has right of way. Pedestrians/cyclists/drivers are then meant to slow down and take more care around each other. I think the jury's out on that one...
It is a drop off area for taxis, see https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/parking-transport-and-stre...
However I would still say that pedestrians have right of way. In fact pedestrians generally have a right of way, but in that location in particular many people would not be expecting cars to be there at all. So whilst pedestrians owe themselves a duty of care and can't leap out in front of taxis, I'd say it is down to a taxi to give way to those walking across the circle.
However I would still say that pedestrians have right of way. In fact pedestrians generally have a right of way, but in that location in particular many people would not be expecting cars to be there at all. So whilst pedestrians owe themselves a duty of care and can't leap out in front of taxis, I'd say it is down to a taxi to give way to those walking across the circle.
contractor said:
https://goo.gl/maps/d44RibUMXsJ2
I was walking here yesterday and a taxi nearly hit me from behind/to the side. My path was from where the seated woman on the phone is, across the shaded tree in the middle to the glass doors by the bloke in the orange shirt.
I think this is pavement with pedestrian right of way and told him so. To me the yellow line signifies the edge of the highway.
Taxi 01663 shouted that it was a turning circle and that he had right of way.
What does the PH massive think here?
You are in the right. The vast majority of people arguing with a cabbie about most things especially driving and vehicle related topics will be right cabbies are retards. Sorry for lack of comas I am trying to give them up.I was walking here yesterday and a taxi nearly hit me from behind/to the side. My path was from where the seated woman on the phone is, across the shaded tree in the middle to the glass doors by the bloke in the orange shirt.
I think this is pavement with pedestrian right of way and told him so. To me the yellow line signifies the edge of the highway.
Taxi 01663 shouted that it was a turning circle and that he had right of way.
What does the PH massive think here?
footnote said:
I understood that pedestrians always have right of way - everywhere
There's no right of way that allows any driver of any vehicle to hit a pedestrian - anywhere - ever - no matter what.
So if somebody runs out from behind a motorway bridge support into the middle of the carriageway, they had right of way and it's always the driver's fault...?There's no right of way that allows any driver of any vehicle to hit a pedestrian - anywhere - ever - no matter what.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff