Section 36 failing to comply with traffic signs
Discussion
My mother has just received a NIP for the above offence and I have a few questions about it. What happened was she was flashed at a railway crossing after going through on a yellow light. Given the road conditions and the fact that she was almost on the crossing she judged it as being unsafe to stop.
My questions are:
- How many points and what size fine could she expect if she excepts this?
- Do crossing cameras have to be certified as to how long the yellow lasts? (as it must have changed quickly to have flashed her, as both her and her passenger didn't see red lights!)
- Does not signing the NIP work for this type of offense?
If any BIB's could help it would be appreciated.
-
My questions are:
- How many points and what size fine could she expect if she excepts this?
- Do crossing cameras have to be certified as to how long the yellow lasts? (as it must have changed quickly to have flashed her, as both her and her passenger didn't see red lights!)
- Does not signing the NIP work for this type of offense?
If any BIB's could help it would be appreciated.
-
stooz said:
I thought the rule on train crossings were ; if ANY light is on , stop. Or was it a normal traffic light and not the traingle light system?
My understanding is yellow means stop if possible, a warning that the reds will start. I could be wrong though (currently to idle/busy to look it up).
As far as the law goes red means stop, amber means stop, green means go if safe to do so - she should have been driving in a manner that ensured she could stop if required to and if that means approaching a crossing at 5mph then that is what is required.
If she went through amber then she's go no chance as if she tries to argue that she didn't have time to stop she could be threatened with driving without due care and attention.
It's probably a 3 pointer and £60 fine - if there had been a BIB there she might have gotten away with a bollocking!
The Highway Code says something like "only cross on an amber light if you are already past the solid white line when the amber light comes on" and if there are no barriers then stop when ANY light comes on!
See www.highwaycode.gov.uk/26.shtml#265
>> Edited by m-five on Wednesday 3rd December 15:41
If she went through amber then she's go no chance as if she tries to argue that she didn't have time to stop she could be threatened with driving without due care and attention.
It's probably a 3 pointer and £60 fine - if there had been a BIB there she might have gotten away with a bollocking!
The Highway Code says something like "only cross on an amber light if you are already past the solid white line when the amber light comes on" and if there are no barriers then stop when ANY light comes on!
See www.highwaycode.gov.uk/26.shtml#265
>> Edited by m-five on Wednesday 3rd December 15:41
mondeoman said:
I always understood that our light sequence was designed as red, red/amber, green, amber, red. The reason being that on amber alone there was a warning to stop, "if safe to do so" and to give traffic an opportunity to clear the danger zone. I'd argue it meself.
On traffic lights it would be, but there is no green at a level crossing.
At traffic lights you can always assess whether it is safe to cross on amber as you can usually expect the other traffic to wait until amber as well. However on a level crossing the train driver assumes he can blast through the crossing at 80mph!
I will risk a 20/30mph bump between two cars at traffic lights, but a 4000 tonne train is something else!
If both the amber light and red light means stop, why have both of them? Surely just a red would be sufficient. I do find it remarkable that there shouldn't be a warning that you should be stopping. It means that you almost have to stop before you get to the white line, and then if still no lights do a racing launch across the lines.
Seems mad to me.
Seems mad to me.
cij100 said:
If both the amber light and red light means stop, why have both of them? Surely just a red would be sufficient. I do find it remarkable that there shouldn't be a warning that you should be stopping. It means that you almost have to stop before you get to the white line, and then if still no lights do a racing launch across the lines.
Seems mad to me.
I've never said the law makes sense - especially when you can get a huge fine and enough points to ruin your life for driving safely at 90mph, and a caution for aggrevated burglary!
cij100 said:
If both the amber light and red light means stop, why have both of them? Surely just a red would be sufficient. I do find it remarkable that there shouldn't be a warning that you should be stopping. It means that you almost have to stop before you get to the white line, and then if still no lights do a racing launch across the lines.
Seems mad to me.
rail lights are flashing orange left to right to left.. initially to grab the attention. then they go to red once the barriers if there are any and the traffic has presumed to have stopped.
These were of course invented 50 years ago, when traffic lights were rare and the average car driver needed something obvious to suggest stopping would be good.
Its still a working method, so no need to spend loads to update them to other lighting methods, as they still help distinguish between roads and a railway line.
Since you have to know the method of the lights in order to pass a driving test, and always has been so, then its safe to assume that everyone should know orange flashing is stop, not the following red.
Of course not everyone knows that, but its in the highway code, and should be revised for the theory test should it come up.
. I understand that if the lights are flashing then you should stop, but surely there must be a bit of lee-way between the lights going on and expecting someone to stop?cij100 said:
surely there must be a bit of lee-way between the lights going on and expecting someone to stop?
yes when it goes red and you carry on youve probably taken the piss.
the orange is VERY long if memory serves me, some 20 seconds. How much time would you require as sufficient stopping time?
"The sequence of railway signals should be
amber light - approx 3 seconds
the red lights should start immediatly the amber is extinguished
the barriers should start to descend 4-6 seconds later and sould take 6-10 seconds to lower"
Courtesy of the HSE and HM railway inspectorate
The highway code states that you MUST not go through flashing red lights on a railway crossing.
if the single amber was showing, then its not against the law to go through, if the reds were showing, it is
amber light - approx 3 seconds
the red lights should start immediatly the amber is extinguished
the barriers should start to descend 4-6 seconds later and sould take 6-10 seconds to lower"
Courtesy of the HSE and HM railway inspectorate
The highway code states that you MUST not go through flashing red lights on a railway crossing.
if the single amber was showing, then its not against the law to go through, if the reds were showing, it is
stooz said:
for that we need ali_d to confirm if they use traffic lights or railway lights at the crossing..
in fact under research, they flash red not orange..
Those are the ones. They are on a road with a 60 limit so your approach to them is quite fast (even if you intend to slow for the crossing anyway).
As it seems that going through on the orange is in fact an offense as well (see m-five highway code link) it would appear that my mum's definately in the wrong, so has anyone got a suggestion where I can find out what points and fine she's likely to get?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff