Not signaling in designated turning lane - without due care
Discussion
surveyor_101 said:
PF62 said:
Were you trying to wind them up, or was it a lucky accident?
Ok I appreciate he is doing his job but tailgating for a mile and then telling me off for not signaling left in a designated turn lane like it's ever going to go anywhere is just taking the pee.
Gavia said:
surveyor_101 said:
Ok so caught the eye of a local beat sergeant by pulling onto a steep hill in residential area and accelerating briskly to above 30 briefly. Then I get to the top of hill and there is a mini roundabout that has left and right only turn lanes. You can't go straight on there is a wall. I stopped and stayed in left lane and went left without signaling.
The hill is steep and people often speed down it so I don't hang about getting out of the junction.
Officer was in a non emgerency focus with no blue lights but I noticed him behind he at the roundabout as he was following me way to close. He followed me past the police station so I decided to stop.i have driven like an angel since turning left. He pulled in behind and asked me what the speed limit on the road I had been on and I said 30. He was single crewed and not happy. I give him my argument for getting out of the junction fast. He then says if he writes me up for not signaling in the left hand turn lane at the roundabout where I went left its without due care and he is positive it will go to court.
Ok so he tells me the car is insured with no drivers listed? So what it's insured. He says he can now sieze the car under section 12 PACE. Not sure why. He says he will sieze dash cam and is stated not much use if I wiped the card before we stopped. He then says that preventing the course of justice, which since I don't know I am being stopped by police why would it be.
Did you get done or not?The hill is steep and people often speed down it so I don't hang about getting out of the junction.
Officer was in a non emgerency focus with no blue lights but I noticed him behind he at the roundabout as he was following me way to close. He followed me past the police station so I decided to stop.i have driven like an angel since turning left. He pulled in behind and asked me what the speed limit on the road I had been on and I said 30. He was single crewed and not happy. I give him my argument for getting out of the junction fast. He then says if he writes me up for not signaling in the left hand turn lane at the roundabout where I went left its without due care and he is positive it will go to court.
Ok so he tells me the car is insured with no drivers listed? So what it's insured. He says he can now sieze the car under section 12 PACE. Not sure why. He says he will sieze dash cam and is stated not much use if I wiped the card before we stopped. He then says that preventing the course of justice, which since I don't know I am being stopped by police why would it be.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Saturday 22 July 17:53
Sounds like the officer was just trying to s
t you up. Also, how can it be insured, but with no drivers listed?WaferThinHam said:
Also, how can it be insured, but with no drivers listed?
When checking insurance details on a vehicle through the police national computer, on rare occasions it will not name any specific driver but will have words along the lines of 'refer to policy issuer to confirm insured parties'. More common on trade policies and the like.vonhosen said:
Willy Nilly said:
vonhosen said:
A speedo doesn't have to be calibrated where the margin over the limit measured by it is not small.
The signal is for the benefit of others not you. Why assume they know it's a left turn only lane because you do, particularly if they are arriving at the roundabout from a different direction to you?
Was it a mandatory left turn arrow or not (Was there wording 'TURN LEFT' under the arrow)?
The OP was in the left lane where he couldn't go straight on due to a wall, the positioning and body language of vehicles is generally a better indication of what they are going to do than the flashing (or not) amber lights on the extremities of them. If he was indicating left and turned right, then fair cop, but he was in the left lane and turned left, where it sounds like it would be a fair assumption he was going left. The signal is for the benefit of others not you. Why assume they know it's a left turn only lane because you do, particularly if they are arriving at the roundabout from a different direction to you?
Was it a mandatory left turn arrow or not (Was there wording 'TURN LEFT' under the arrow)?
Only today I've had 2 cars pull out in front of me on roundabout when I was on my bike, neither of them were indicating or in the correct lane for the manoeuvrer (which is quite hard to spell) they pulled, but it was quite clear for me as a moderately competent rider that they were about to do something odd.
The whole point of signals is to give others information about your intent to assist them in their decisions, it's considerate.
Willy Nilly said:
vonhosen said:
Willy Nilly said:
vonhosen said:
A speedo doesn't have to be calibrated where the margin over the limit measured by it is not small.
The signal is for the benefit of others not you. Why assume they know it's a left turn only lane because you do, particularly if they are arriving at the roundabout from a different direction to you?
Was it a mandatory left turn arrow or not (Was there wording 'TURN LEFT' under the arrow)?
The OP was in the left lane where he couldn't go straight on due to a wall, the positioning and body language of vehicles is generally a better indication of what they are going to do than the flashing (or not) amber lights on the extremities of them. If he was indicating left and turned right, then fair cop, but he was in the left lane and turned left, where it sounds like it would be a fair assumption he was going left. The signal is for the benefit of others not you. Why assume they know it's a left turn only lane because you do, particularly if they are arriving at the roundabout from a different direction to you?
Was it a mandatory left turn arrow or not (Was there wording 'TURN LEFT' under the arrow)?
Only today I've had 2 cars pull out in front of me on roundabout when I was on my bike, neither of them were indicating or in the correct lane for the manoeuvrer (which is quite hard to spell) they pulled, but it was quite clear for me as a moderately competent rider that they were about to do something odd.
The whole point of signals is to give others information about your intent to assist them in their decisions, it's considerate.
vonhosen said:
But he could have physically turned right, that's why the signal should be given to make clear to others his intent (the whole purpose of signals being fitted to the vehicle in the first place). If it was obvious to others he could have only physically have gone left then there wouldn't have been a need, but because he could there was a need.
If he was to turn right from the left side, left turn marked lane, then a right turn signal would be the signal to give. Turning left from a left turn lane is not exactly a surprise to anyone. fido said:
HTP99 said:
My daughter recently passed her driving test, she was taught that if you are in a dedicated lane then there is no requirement to use your indicators.
Ditto - in my Advanced Driving test - many moons ago.Failing the Police attitude test is A pretty dumb thing to do, as it risks a lot if you have actually done something, but on the other hand costs nothing to pass it and walk away free and clear.
It seems a no-brainier to most of us.
JM said:
vonhosen said:
But he could have physically turned right, that's why the signal should be given to make clear to others his intent (the whole purpose of signals being fitted to the vehicle in the first place). If it was obvious to others he could have only physically have gone left then there wouldn't have been a need, but because he could there was a need.
If he was to turn right from the left side, left turn marked lane, then a right turn signal would be the signal to give. Turning left from a left turn lane is not exactly a surprise to anyone. James P said:
Agreed, there are a lot of things he 'could' have done. He turned left from a turn left lane - officer stopping someone for that is likelyto have a full day talking to people
Exactly. I suspect the OP's account of what happened is open to some degree of interpretation and rather a lot of poetic licence. Mandalore said:
But, if you cross the line to position yourself fully into it, you would still have to.
Failing the Police attitude test is A pretty dumb thing to do, as it risks a lot if you have actually done something, but on the other hand costs nothing to pass it and walk away free and clear.
It seems a no-brainier to most of us.
I have witnessed a couple of occasions when the police have failed any reasonable persons attitude test. Failing the Police attitude test is A pretty dumb thing to do, as it risks a lot if you have actually done something, but on the other hand costs nothing to pass it and walk away free and clear.
It seems a no-brainier to most of us.
fido said:
HTP99 said:
My daughter recently passed her driving test, she was taught that if you are in a dedicated lane then there is no requirement to use your indicators.
Ditto - in my Advanced Driving test - many moons ago.pedestrians who do not tend to notice road markings
other road users who cannot see the markings on their approach
Davie_GLA said:
Where did the Q7 come from? Thought he was in a focus? Have i missed the important bits?
Not sure there are any important bits.......
To be honest, one should be indicating well before getting to the area where the lane splits and the arrows are so I think the OP was in error. That's if it actually ever happened.
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 24th July 10:22
WolvesWill said:
When checking insurance details on a vehicle through the police national computer, on rare occasions it will not name any specific driver but will have words along the lines of 'refer to policy issuer to confirm insured parties'. More common on trade policies and the like.
Its a company car and a company policy.I am on it as I had to do annual online assessments and risk management modules.
REALIST123 said:
Not sure there are any important bits.......
To be honest, one should be indicating well before getting to the area where the lane splits and the arrows are so I think the OP was in error. That's if it actually ever happened.
Edited by REALIST123 on Monday 24th July 10:22
He stopped me in a unmarked Q7 almost 3 years ago near Yeovil. I am 95% sure its the same guy.
I think he was on an operation and just drives like a idiot. Then sees any member of the public driving above the limit and feels duty bound to stop them and read the riot act/script from the Stallone Judge Dread "I am the law, "I find you guilty". I mean with more coppers like this guy we could do away with courts and judges, instead have road side (Sergents) who decide then and there what, Guilt and punishment.
He was doing his job, (Albeit he must be on non emergency duties in a non blue like focus) but I don't appreciate this I say its wrong and it is and you are guilty attitude.
Back in july 14 on A303.
He was tailgating the hell out of me and I accelerated to above 70 to get away from him. He then stopped me in plain clothes in an umarked Q7 and had a moan, he got out in civvies and then put on a police high viz from the boot. He has been promoted since then to Sergent.
I also only twigged this after but also know him as he has a son in my daughters class at the same school. I don't think he is Taunton based having made enquiries with my police friends.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 24th July 11:11
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 24th July 11:19
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 24th July 11:22
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff