Overtake when indicating right?
Discussion
aclivity said:
Carriage, as in carriageway? Sorry if that makes you laugh, was trying to talk about cars, buses, lorries, vans, bikes, motorbikes, electric cars and anything else that uses the road!
Is it legal or illegal?
I would have thought you could be pulled for driving without due care and attention. If there was an accident then it's likely to be dangerous driving. Is it legal or illegal?
It could be argued that the indication is a minor issue as they are not a guarantee of intention; it could have been flipped on by mistake.
The acid test therefore is, was the manoeuvre safe and appropriate for the conditions. I’m not sure there’s a specific law for that scenario, it’s more likely as others have said, careless or dangerous if there’s an incident as a result of the manoeuvre, including speeding by the perpetrator to carry out the manoeuvre.
Is it a hypothetical question or did you witness such an event, or were you the overtaker?
The acid test therefore is, was the manoeuvre safe and appropriate for the conditions. I’m not sure there’s a specific law for that scenario, it’s more likely as others have said, careless or dangerous if there’s an incident as a result of the manoeuvre, including speeding by the perpetrator to carry out the manoeuvre.
Is it a hypothetical question or did you witness such an event, or were you the overtaker?
Overtaking any vehicle that is indicating right is just plain stupid. Even if you have been following said vehicle for the last 5 miles while their right hand indicator has been happily flashing away, an old friend was badly hurt doing exactly that. He'd been stuck behind a tractor & trailer for ages, it was indicating right, after several miles & having passed several right turns, he decided that the driver must just be unobservant & not cancelled the signal so when a suitable bit of clear road appeared he pulled out to overtake, it was at that point the tractor turned right into a field. My friends car was written off, he suffered bad injuries, the tractor driver was prosecuted as fortunately there were witnesses.
Instead of establishing a clear priority, I'm guessing this is one of the numerous cases in the highway code and law that infers that both parties have a duty to account for each other's actions.
Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
aclivity said:
I was overtaken - going into the station this morning. I spoke to the driver of the taxi and suggested he was a bit of a pillock!
It seems to be in their job description.aclivity said:
Wondering if it is worth mentioning to the law?
Nope. Minor infraction in the grand scheme of things. If you wanted to annoy him you should have reported him to the Licensing Council.Atomic12C said:
Instead of establishing a clear priority, I'm guessing this is one of the numerous cases in the highway code and law that infers that both parties have a duty to account for each other's actions.
Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
I was turning right from a road to a smaller road - no triangle shown? Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
Atomic12C said:
Instead of establishing a clear priority, I'm guessing this is one of the numerous cases in the highway code and law that infers that both parties have a duty to account for each other's actions.
Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
I'm not sure if it's anywhere near a 50:50 division of responsibilities.Car turning right must check mirrors before manoeuvre.
Car overtaking must check that it is safe to over take.
Both parties will encounter a triangular warning sign of a junction ahead, therefore both parties have been informed of the need to perform the above checks.
aclivity said:
I was turning right from a road to a smaller road - no triangle shown?
Ah, it was an access rather than a junction.There would therefore have likely been roadmarkings to convey the warning of the potential hazard. (6m line, 3m gap - on the 'open road' , or 4m line and 2m gap on urban road).
From my understanding the law would only coming to play once an accident had occurred, and if there was an injury. Then, there would be an investigation in to who was (more) at fault.
It falls under the same category as the idiots that overtake cyclists and then turn left into a junction right across the front of them. No specific legislation but would fall under careless, and inconsiderate, driving:
"If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence."
"If a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place, he is guilty of an offence."
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff