Advised to drive dangerously (in writing) by the Police.
Discussion
Marcellus said:
Do we actually know where this incident is alleged to have taken place yet?
OP post up a google link to the junction and your version of what happened!
My guess from what you've cryptically said is;
- you were in right hand lane on approach and went straight ahead.
- another car was in the left hand lane and also went straight ahead.
- 2 into 1 doesn't go
- other car was possibly policeman.
- words were exchanged.
- other driver said that from left hand lane they could turn left, go straight ahead or turn right.
- you're say you have this in writing
- you said there's a left turn painted on road so no you can't and if you did it's dangerous driving.
If the above is a correct guess then I suspect the correct answer is that technically/legally from the left hand land of a roundabout you can use any exit, however in practice drivers use left lane for any exit before/including straight over, the right hand lane for those from straight over to back on yourself and that the left arrow does not mean "you can only take 1st exit".
Well put - my reading of it adds another element which may be relevant.OP post up a google link to the junction and your version of what happened!
My guess from what you've cryptically said is;
- you were in right hand lane on approach and went straight ahead.
- another car was in the left hand lane and also went straight ahead.
- 2 into 1 doesn't go
- other car was possibly policeman.
- words were exchanged.
- other driver said that from left hand lane they could turn left, go straight ahead or turn right.
- you're say you have this in writing
- you said there's a left turn painted on road so no you can't and if you did it's dangerous driving.
If the above is a correct guess then I suspect the correct answer is that technically/legally from the left hand land of a roundabout you can use any exit, however in practice drivers use left lane for any exit before/including straight over, the right hand lane for those from straight over to back on yourself and that the left arrow does not mean "you can only take 1st exit".
OP says he went straight on down a dead end to a cafe
So I think he was in right hand lane in order to go straight on. The other 2 exits (left and right) go on to normal roads (not dead end).
I suspect that people who use the junction frequently will use both left and right hand lanes to go right (especially if the right hand turn goes into a road with 2 lanes or filter lane) as its not common for people to go straight on unless they are going to the cafe.
Those that go to the cafe frequently would use the left hand lane to go straight on.
Make sense?
OP, regardless of what happened here, which is about as clear as mud (or at least explained as such), the Police can and will advise you something potentially unorthodox for certain scenarios. I'm not 100% clued up on the Law but i'm pretty sure that's the case. Either way, i'm not really sure what you're after doing with this information or where you're looking to take this next.
davek_964 said:
Yes, but that doesn't really answer the question does it? Apparently, you were innocently driving in the correct lane around a roundabout when another car "dangerously" crossed chevrons because they were in the wrong lane for the exit they needed.
And yet - despite the fault apparently being with the other car - the occupiers felt the need to follow you and have a go at you for "cutting them up". I think it's rather likely you've left a few details out of why they felt the need to do that.
Hi davek, I was pulling onto a roundabout from a lane with a pretty big arrow pointing me onto it and apparently I cut up couple of police officers (causing them to nearly have an accident - their own words) attempting to turn right from the lane with the 10ft left arrow in it. I was the then followed down the dead end to the cafe to be accused of cutting them up, asked what I would do had I caused an accident (to which i responded I would fill in the accident form showing them in the wrong lane) and then been told I was lucky they would let me off as they were late to training.And yet - despite the fault apparently being with the other car - the occupiers felt the need to follow you and have a go at you for "cutting them up". I think it's rather likely you've left a few details out of why they felt the need to do that.
I have a letter advising me that the lane with the left arrow is for turning left, going straightish and entering the road to the cafe down a dead end or (the route the officers were taking) the third exit off the roundabout.
What details do you fee lI've left out?
JNW1 said:
I think part of the problem here is it's not entirely clear what's passed between you and the police. However, from your comment above one thing that is pretty clear is they haven't advised you to drive dangerously in writing, that's just an interpretation you've placed on whatever they said. Now I daresay in your mind that interpretation is entirely justified but in my book it's not the same thing as actually being advised to drive dangerously; the police would just never do that!
Is advising me to ignore road markings and drive in a manner that has no consideration to other road users and is likely to cause an accident not suggesting I should drive dangerously?
(sorry if I appear dim,until last night i thought the highway code was a law that should be followed, I thought following arrows was mandatory and enhanced the chance of completing a journey intact).
Seriously though, why would you deliberately ignore road markings? I would never have thought about turning right from a lane with a left arrow until some on here suggest it's ok!
ks.Google [bot] said:
A disguised picture of the letter would help but I sort of understand the reluctance to post that. I don’t understand the reluctance to post a streetview/map. The only reason for that is wanting to hear the response he’s looking for based on insufficient info.
OP you must have seen enough threads to know that feeding drips of information is not going to get you good responses? It makes folk think you’re hiding something, which you are.
Oooh, what am I hiding? OP you must have seen enough threads to know that feeding drips of information is not going to get you good responses? It makes folk think you’re hiding something, which you are.
Marcellus said:
Do we actually know where this incident is alleged to have taken place yet?
OP post up a google link to the junction and your version of what happened!
My guess from what you've cryptically said is;
- you were in right hand lane on approach and went straight ahead.
- another car was in the left hand lane and also went straight ahead.
- 2 into 1 doesn't go
- other car was possibly policeman.
- words were exchanged.
- other driver said that from left hand lane they could turn left, go straight ahead or turn right.
- you're say you have this in writing
- you said there's a left turn painted on road so no you can't and if you did it's dangerous driving.
If the above is a correct guess then I suspect the correct answer is that technically/legally from the left hand land of a roundabout you can use any exit, however in practice drivers use left lane for any exit before/including straight over, the right hand lane for those from straight over to back on yourself and that the left arrow does not mean "you can only take 1st exit".
So the left lane with the big left arrow doesn't mean turn left? I'm pleased I posted this thread as it's a learning curve. I used to think the highway code was pretty much the rules for the road.OP post up a google link to the junction and your version of what happened!
My guess from what you've cryptically said is;
- you were in right hand lane on approach and went straight ahead.
- another car was in the left hand lane and also went straight ahead.
- 2 into 1 doesn't go
- other car was possibly policeman.
- words were exchanged.
- other driver said that from left hand lane they could turn left, go straight ahead or turn right.
- you're say you have this in writing
- you said there's a left turn painted on road so no you can't and if you did it's dangerous driving.
If the above is a correct guess then I suspect the correct answer is that technically/legally from the left hand land of a roundabout you can use any exit, however in practice drivers use left lane for any exit before/including straight over, the right hand lane for those from straight over to back on yourself and that the left arrow does not mean "you can only take 1st exit".
LivingTheDream said:
Well put - my reading of it adds another element which may be relevant.
OP says he went straight on down a dead end to a cafe
So I think he was in right hand lane in order to go straight on. The other 2 exits (left and right) go on to normal roads (not dead end).
I suspect that people who use the junction frequently will use both left and right hand lanes to go right (especially if the right hand turn goes into a road with 2 lanes or filter lane) as its not common for people to go straight on unless they are going to the cafe.
Those that go to the cafe frequently would use the left hand lane to go straight on.
Make sense?
The people that use the junction frequently (including the local traffic cops) use the right hand lane to enter the roundabout, the left hand lane is used by peeps for generally turning...left!OP says he went straight on down a dead end to a cafe
So I think he was in right hand lane in order to go straight on. The other 2 exits (left and right) go on to normal roads (not dead end).
I suspect that people who use the junction frequently will use both left and right hand lanes to go right (especially if the right hand turn goes into a road with 2 lanes or filter lane) as its not common for people to go straight on unless they are going to the cafe.
Those that go to the cafe frequently would use the left hand lane to go straight on.
Make sense?
culpz said:
OP, regardless of what happened here, which is about as clear as mud (or at least explained as such), the Police can and will advise you something potentially unorthodox for certain scenarios. I'm not 100% clued up on the Law but i'm pretty sure that's the case. Either way, i'm not really sure what you're after doing with this information or where you're looking to take this next.
Ideally I would like to know why I have been advised to drive in a manner that is likely to cause an accident. (I took out the dangerous driving bit there as it appears i used the wrong terminology - should I use driving with scant reagard for road markings and other drivers?) Did you cut up someone using the supposed "left only" lane to go straight on? And said person was immediately revealed to be;
1) unimpressed
2) a copper
3) pretty sure you knew damn well they were there, as well as where they were going, and did it out of a petulant sense of "well, it's their fault, they shouldn't be there"
1) unimpressed
2) a copper
3) pretty sure you knew damn well they were there, as well as where they were going, and did it out of a petulant sense of "well, it's their fault, they shouldn't be there"
InitialDave said:
Did you cut up someone using the supposed "left only" lane to go straight on? And said person was immediately revealed to be;
1) unimpressed
2) a copper
3) pretty sure you knew damn well they were there, as well as where they were going, and did it out of a petulant sense of "well, it's their fault, they shouldn't be there"
Wow, that's the best response yet! 1) unimpressed
2) a copper
3) pretty sure you knew damn well they were there, as well as where they were going, and did it out of a petulant sense of "well, it's their fault, they shouldn't be there"
Yes, I knew they were two officers in an umarked car that I decide to cut up for the fxxx of it... sussed!
Wow again!
No, I don't think you knew they were coppers.
I think you did something that, while doing it you were technically in the right, was either a bit silly or a bit knobbish, and you have been told something along the lines of "irrespective of road markings, drive to fit in with what other traffic is doing".
Feel free to post the letter and show I'm mistaken.
I think you did something that, while doing it you were technically in the right, was either a bit silly or a bit knobbish, and you have been told something along the lines of "irrespective of road markings, drive to fit in with what other traffic is doing".
Feel free to post the letter and show I'm mistaken.
Jediworrier said:
Google [bot] said:
A disguised picture of the letter would help but I sort of understand the reluctance to post that. I don’t understand the reluctance to post a streetview/map. The only reason for that is wanting to hear the response he’s looking for based on insufficient info.
OP you must have seen enough threads to know that feeding drips of information is not going to get you good responses? It makes folk think you’re hiding something, which you are.
Oooh, what am I hiding? OP you must have seen enough threads to know that feeding drips of information is not going to get you good responses? It makes folk think you’re hiding something, which you are.
I’ve just received a letter from the police regarding this incident. They have also included a photo still from their on onboard camera.
It clearly states and shows the op was in fact in the left lane but going right at the third exit. The police were in the correct right hand lane and going straight over. He apparently nearly hit them so they stopped him to explain the Highway Code.
It clearly states and shows the op was in fact in the left lane but going right at the third exit. The police were in the correct right hand lane and going straight over. He apparently nearly hit them so they stopped him to explain the Highway Code.
If you won’t disclose the location of the roundabout then at least answer how many exits are there on the roundabout and at which exit the problem happened.
If you won’t post a picture of the letter then just type out exactly the relevant paragraph(s) giving the advice.
No one can tell you if you’re right or wrong without the basic information that you won’t provide.
It sounds, from the drips and drabs of info that you’ve provided, that you assumed a car on the outside of you was going to take an exit that it didn’t and you moved into it’s path.
Regardless of lane markings that’s not good and the correct thing to do would be to continue round the roundabout.
Was the other car also in the wrong? Is the advice you’ve been given wrong?
Entirely possible - but because you won’t give any useful information it’s impossible to say.
If you won’t post a picture of the letter then just type out exactly the relevant paragraph(s) giving the advice.
No one can tell you if you’re right or wrong without the basic information that you won’t provide.
It sounds, from the drips and drabs of info that you’ve provided, that you assumed a car on the outside of you was going to take an exit that it didn’t and you moved into it’s path.
Regardless of lane markings that’s not good and the correct thing to do would be to continue round the roundabout.
Was the other car also in the wrong? Is the advice you’ve been given wrong?
Entirely possible - but because you won’t give any useful information it’s impossible to say.
Flumpo said:
I’ve just received a letter from the police regarding this incident. They have also included a photo still from their on onboard camera.
It clearly states and shows the op was in fact in the left lane but going right at the third exit. The police were in the correct right hand lane and going straight over. He apparently nearly hit them so they stopped him to explain the Highway Code.
I’ve just received one of those letters too. I’m not posting it up though, you’d be able to judge how much I’ve misunderstood it if I did that. It clearly states and shows the op was in fact in the left lane but going right at the third exit. The police were in the correct right hand lane and going straight over. He apparently nearly hit them so they stopped him to explain the Highway Code.
My hunch is he’s turned left into a dead end, copper follows him, copper says “back there the road goes straight on or right”. (the left filter lane being to the cafe which was closed at the time.)
OP decides to embellish with stories of cut ups, letters, and in fear if their life etc to add weight to their wrong opinion. They’ve decided that because the road was straight or right, the left hand lane for the cafe must also be straight on or right.
Could easily be wrong but it’s as plausible, if not more so, than the story we’ve been told.
OP decides to embellish with stories of cut ups, letters, and in fear if their life etc to add weight to their wrong opinion. They’ve decided that because the road was straight or right, the left hand lane for the cafe must also be straight on or right.
Could easily be wrong but it’s as plausible, if not more so, than the story we’ve been told.
Jediworrier said:
JNW1 said:
I think part of the problem here is it's not entirely clear what's passed between you and the police. However, from your comment above one thing that is pretty clear is they haven't advised you to drive dangerously in writing, that's just an interpretation you've placed on whatever they said. Now I daresay in your mind that interpretation is entirely justified but in my book it's not the same thing as actually being advised to drive dangerously; the police would just never do that!
Is advising me to ignore road markings and drive in a manner that has no consideration to other road users and is likely to cause an accident not suggesting I should drive dangerously?(sorry if I appear dim,until last night i thought the highway code was a law that should be followed, I thought following arrows was mandatory and enhanced the chance of completing a journey intact).
Seriously though, why would you deliberately ignore road markings? I would never have thought about turning right from a lane with a left arrow until some on here suggest it's ok!
If so I can understand your annoyance and confusion as you appear to have followed the road markings correctly and they haven't. Still not sure I'd interpret their comments as advice to drive dangerously but I would be interested in what they think the road marking means; if it's not telling people to use the left lane to turn left what is it doing and what's the purpose of it being there?
Put another way, if I didn't know the area I would take the right lane to go straight on at that roundabout because I'd interpret the road marking as meaning the left lane is for turning left; am I in the wrong and in need of a refresher on the Highway Code?!
slight change to my guess after the more elusive/vagueness of the OP;
At entry to roundabout
- OP was in right lane.
- Police were in Left lane.
OP wanted exit #2 which if looked at as a clock was somewhere between 20:00 and 01:00 and leads to a MaccyDs
Police wanted exit #3 or 4 which was somewhere between 01:00 and 05:00.
OP cut nose off police in getting his burger, fries and shake.
Therefore, and the point of this whole topic...... OP is saying the left turn arrow on the road refers to exit #1 and exit #1 only.
If this revised guess is correct I think it would be reasonable to assume that all cars entering the roundabout in the right hand lane not taking exit #1 would be going to exit #3 or #4 and therefore if in the left hand lane and not taking exit #1 it woudl be safe to go around to exit #3 or #4.
What isn't safe would be for a car to change lanes on a roundabout to exit a roundabout when there is a car in the lane that they need to cross to get there.
As I say this is all guess work, why not post a link to the actual junction.
Still confused as to where you've got it in writing so please explain!
At entry to roundabout
- OP was in right lane.
- Police were in Left lane.
OP wanted exit #2 which if looked at as a clock was somewhere between 20:00 and 01:00 and leads to a MaccyDs
Police wanted exit #3 or 4 which was somewhere between 01:00 and 05:00.
OP cut nose off police in getting his burger, fries and shake.
Therefore, and the point of this whole topic...... OP is saying the left turn arrow on the road refers to exit #1 and exit #1 only.
If this revised guess is correct I think it would be reasonable to assume that all cars entering the roundabout in the right hand lane not taking exit #1 would be going to exit #3 or #4 and therefore if in the left hand lane and not taking exit #1 it woudl be safe to go around to exit #3 or #4.
What isn't safe would be for a car to change lanes on a roundabout to exit a roundabout when there is a car in the lane that they need to cross to get there.
As I say this is all guess work, why not post a link to the actual junction.
Still confused as to where you've got it in writing so please explain!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff