As a pedestrian, i hate it when vehicles stop and wait for me, just carry on, i'll wait until there's a gap in the traffic, it only takes a few seconds and i'll go when i _know_ its safe, rather than having to jog across the road to get out of peoples way, which as we saw in your example at 1:39, could result in another vehicle being missed. To take it even further, i don't even like using light controlled crossings, lights mean nothing to some people, wether the lights show i can go or not, i'm still going to look at make sure that its clear before i cross, so why interrupt traffic flow at all, i'll just wait a few seconds until there's a gap i _know_ is safe.
There were examples of pedestrians shown waiting near bollards, trying to cross a single lane to reach the opposite pavement. So often these are with a small child, effectively standing in the middle of the road. To leave them there is potentially dangerous. All pedestrians I allow across seem to understand they're not being 'hurried' (why else would I stop completely!?) and usually show some gratitude. If you don't continue to cross it causes even more confusion and frustration. Fortunately you appear to be in the minority. On busy (but still fairly slow) roads they are waiting minutes not seconds.When crossing 2 lanes, the driver stopping is closing that lane to help, but has no control over drivers in the other lane. Pedestrians also have a responsibility to themselves to look out for this.
Absolute madness they have not thought this through. As with 20 mph speed limits the world has gone mad. We where bought up with the green cross code don't cross in front of cars they hurt. And this applies to both of these
To me, the most important question to ask oneself regarding giving priority to pedestrians is "are they safe now, and will my giving priority to them make them less safe?". A pedestrian who is stood on the pavement or a large traffic island is reasonably safe. It becomes less safe once they step into the road. However, as usual, individual circumstances can differ depending on a myriad of factors, so no blanket rule can apply to all situations.
You don't "give priority" to pedestrians, they already have it. You should wait for them to give it to you. The reason the rule was introduced was that previously the only for a pedestrian to get motorists to give way so that they could continue on their journey was to step out onto the carriageway which puts them at risk. The new rule requiring motorists to stop to let pedestrian to cross before they step out removes that risk, making junctions safer for all. But only if motorists actually follow the rule and show due consideration.
I think that's the wrong question to ask. The pedestrian may well be safe on the pavement at that moment, but they need to cross the road somehow. The question is, would it be safer for the pedestrian overall if I stop and let them cross, or if I continue and they find a gap? It depends. I remember a situation where I was trying to cross a side road junction with poor visibility up the main road, and a driver turning left off the main road stopped. This instantly made it much safer for me because it physically prevented cars that I couldn't see well from flying up to the junction and turning in with little warning. It also made crossing quick and convenient. At most side roads in urban areas, it is normally safe to let a pedestrian cross. Most roundabouts are multi-lane and too fast, so it's rarely safer to stop for a pedestrian.
@@ado543 I was mainly writing about the situation at roundabouts rather than other junctions. As I say, individual and specific circumstances (such as those you describe) may well change my decision.
It’s absolutely ridiculous I always wait for vehicles to get out of my way before crossing the road has I was taught from a child and in my opinion it’s the best thing to do don’t rely on other people to make your decisions.
Thanks for this. I had been stopping for some pedestrians at roundabouts and confused others behind me. Won't do it again unless they've already started crossing.
I don’t have any problem giving way on the entrance of a roundabout. However as far as the exit is concerned. Not a good idea. As a pedestrian I really don’t care. I don’t need drivers to give way to me because I’ll pick my own time to cross. No problem
2:31 i learned long before these rules but that's is something I was taught when doing a right turn to keep the wheels straight in case of being shunted into moving traffic. So the same principles apply if turning left and giving way to pedestrians
One problem is that really experienced and professional drivers find this rule tricky, so why would you expect inexperienced drivers and pedestrians to understand this safely.
That's the essence of why the new rules aren't fit for purpose. It should have been obvious at first examination of them that the majority of drivers, even if they were conscientious and law-abiding, would have trouble knowing what to do or even if they work it out, would struggle to have the skill and mental ability to assess the many variables involved. The next thought should have been "these rules need to protect people against the average inattentive idiot driver too. Let's think again". Let alone "if everyone does as they should, the traffic in city centres will grind to a halt"... The new rules encourage pedestrians (and cyclists that have similarly nutty priority rules) to behave in a way that trusts their lives the the moral judgements and mental acuity of 'the average driver' instead of practices that are simply safe. A junction is one of the most dangerous and complex situations on the road. To go from complete safety: "wait until there is no traffic coming" to "you have priority, so go ahead - the car should stop - oh but, be careful in case they don't!" is insane and should have been laughed out of the first meeting that suggested it.
@@James-cheese If you have an accident in the circumstances described, and have not kept up to date with HC and law changes (as required by your licence) you have breached your licence so should have it revoked.
Nothing tricky about it at all. Only difficult bit is getting pedestrians up to speed but if all drivers get up to date and follow the rules then pedestrians will start to understand. As for roundabouts many have pedestrian crossings on entry and exits so why would it be any more difficult at those without a pedestrian crossing.
If you're at or approaching a give way line and there 's a single lane, stopping for people waiting to cross feels natural, especially if your speed is low. Other situations feel less natural and less safe to me. I don't think it's unreasonable for pedestrians to wait for a gap in traffic or use a crossing. I very rarely find it hard to cross the road. We're all pedestrians, many of us are cyclists, many of us are drivers or bus or taxi passengers. It's about what's a reasonable compromise.
I am often surprised how close zebra crossings (as well as just a traffic island) are placed on the exit to a roundabout. This can cause a sudden halt for a driver who has been looking right for a clearance to move out and then fiinding himself almost on top of the crossing, and the pedestrian. The following traffic is similarly brought to a sudden stop affecting the the circulation to general annoyance all round. Giving way in these circumstances calls for a lot of "judgement" which of course is very personal.
The problem is pedestrians will try to cross there anyway. If they came from one road into the roundabout and want to continue along another that is not the first exit the shortest route for them is to cross where the first exit joins the roundabout. Many of them will cross there rather than walk down to a pedestrian crossing further away.
A rule designed to make things safer has actually, in many cases, made things more dangerous. It's also ridiculous to bring multiple vehicles (each weighing 1.5-3 tonnes) to a complete stop when the pedestrian could have (and in many cases would have rather) waited for a couple of seconds.
It's not working in my experience. For me a lot of pedestrians do not cross when I stop to allow them to at junctions of 'major to minor roads' specifically. I even get waved on by pedestrians. The roundabout information was a fantastic learning point though. Good video 👍🏻😄
@@Richard_Barnes yes it is a bit of a pain sometimes. My learner and I stopped to allow a lady across a road we were turning into. And as you say she just stared awkwardly at us…… an unbreakable stare! So we carried on. Some pedestrians don’t like being allowed to cross so it can be a pain
@@JamesSimpkinsADI Try it on a motorcycle (or a bicycle, since the rules still apply. Probably. Maybe). Every time you do this, you risk an accident (being shunted from behind by a driver that hasn't seen you) and it is often a 'wasted' effort as the pedestrians are (often sensibly) not willing to step out and trust you have actually seen them and aren't pausing for some other reason. Also a car or motorcycle stopping often obscures the pedestrian's view of the dangers at the junction, so they stop. The rules basically expect riders to raise their risk of being hurt in order for pedestrians to not have to pause a few seconds and then put themselves in potential danger anyway.
If they don’t cross then you go. This situation happens all the time - quite often other road users with priority give way, think of approaching a line of parked cars on your side and preparing to give way only for the car coming in the other direction to stop for you. It isn’t really a problem. The benefit of the new rule (which only really clarifies what was there before) is that it should encourage drivers to broaden their understanding of lane discipline and crossing the paths of other road users, whether they be pedestrians established in their lane (the path) or cyclists in a cycle lane or filtering.
In my view, it's poorly worded and consequently ofttimes misunderstood, taken far too literally and badly executed by a lot of road users. As you say, it's frequently a judgement call and there is more than enough evidence to suggest that on the roads, the judgement of the vast majority is sketchy at best, whether they are pedestrians, cyclists or motorists. From what I've been seeing in more recent times, it has encouraged an ever increasing abdication of personal responsibility and increasingly witless behaviour on behalf of pedestrians and cyclists and muddied the waters of "rights of way" - perhaps we should all remind ourselves of the following little rhyme on that particular topic:- "Here lies the body of William May, Who died maintaining his right of way- He was right, dead right, as he sped along, But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong". In short, being "right" is little consolation when you end up in the back of an ambulance or, worse, laying prematurely on a mortuary slab - walking, riding, driving - all come with personal responsibility, accountability and consequences. Attitude has always been the biggest barrier to road safety and you can't reliably legislate behaviour that is universal, no matter how some might wish or believe otherwise, because human beings are not all wired the same way. Courtesy and consideration, whilst considered desirable, admirable and strived for by some, is not even on the radar of others. Common sense, duties of care, being well mannered and so much more, like it or not, just don't form part of many people's makeup.
IF I recall correctly there was some publicity around placing more responsibility on the vehicle that can do most harm, Consequently some pedestrians see this as you have to mind me. I have tried to drum your rhyme into my children.
As a pedestrian I actually avoid crossing at a junction. if I have to cross at one and somebody stops for me I'll wave them on. If I'm driving I wiil only stop for peds waiting to cross if I can make sure it is safe. Exiting roundabouts, especially multilane is a definite no as I have no real control over other vehicles. These H rules are badly thought out and can create real danger!
As a Norwegian, it's very interesting to see how this is done in the UK. In the example videos you show from roundabouts, for example, there would always be a zebra crossing, had this been in Norway. Giving way to pedestrians is therefore a matter of course here, and it's been that way for decades. 11:23, for example - that would be a zebra crossing here.
Not always. Plenty near me that have no crossing anywhere near it. Also, plenty of experienced road users who've never even heard of this rule, so it's hasn't been well communicated.
@@richardclarke9966 In Norway, anywhere where there's a pavement that leads pedestrians to cross a road, there is a zebra crossing. You'll be hard pressed to find any exceptions. If there are native road users here who don't know that they should yield to pedestrians, they should hand in their license.
Many thanks for a clear video on this subject which I have been going on about for months now. Until the DVSA change the Highway Code so that the wording on roundabouts reflects H2 or H2 is specifically referenced in Rule 187, as it is in Rule 170, I will not be applying H2 at the exit to roundabouts unless the circumstances are exceptional. There is no downside to this from a legal perspective as any prosecution for not following H2 at a roundabout will fail.
Imagine its a roundabout of three lanes with two leading to a motorway slip road. Cars doing 40mph+ passing each other, expected to stop for someone waiting to cross. Crazy rule.
Such roundabout usually have no pedestrian access or have controlled crossings. Otherwise it is exactly the same as a zebra crossing over a multilane road or do you have trouble with those too?
I agree I use a shared cycle path on a local dual carriageway which ends at the M58 roundabout the path has barriers and give way markings on the ground I would no way in a million year's ride or step out expecting traffic to give way , use common sense and don't put yourself in danger
One thing I do as a pedestrian - if I want you to stop and give me priority, I'm right up to the kerb and looking at you. If I'd rather wait until there's a gap, I'll wait much further from the kerb and looking away from you - often at a gap a few cars behind you that I reckon will be the safest time for me to cross.
Just found your channel and I feel I learnt some really useful things from watching this video. Can you do one on tailgaters and how to deal with them as that's one of my biggest bugbears out on the road.
The biggest anomaly is where you have a cross-roads, traffic turning into and out of the side roads should give way to pedestrians as per the rules. Traffic going straight ahead minor road to minor road is not turning and not covered by the give way rule.
When I'm a pedestrian, I really hate it when a driver takes it upon themselves to stop and let me across a road where I've decided I'm going to wait. They put me in the position where I have to assess whether the car behind might overtake them, or maybe there's a motorbike filtering down the outside that I can't see, or a bike up the inside. Maybe something coming the other way on the other side that the driver hasn't seen or thought about. What's worse is that they do this to my kids, who are old enough to cross the road on their own, but not old enough to drive, and don't have the perspective or experience to deal with these more complex situations, and certainly do not need an adult in a car gesturing at them to cross the round when it's not safe to do so. Recently, while out with my son, someone decided to stop his car at a random point on the road, no junction, and let us cross. I was deliberately looking the other way, which I frequently do to discourage drivers from doing exactly this. My son said "I *think* he's letting us cross, so I had to turn and look, and indeed he appeared to be. Hard to be certain, in the dark especially, what a driver is actually intending. Even for me. Almost impossible for a teenage non-driver. I still would have preferred for him to not have stopped, but since he'd done it, we decided to step out. At the exact some moment, he decided he'd waited long enough and set off again, nearly running us over and having to stop again suddenly. All this happened on an otherwise empty road.
I applaud your efforts to help people navigate these difficult rules. The problem is that they _are_ difficult to follow and that they encourage dangerous behaviour. Drivers that are skilful, careful, considerate and conscientious will be able to follow these rules, but they were never the problem. The danger always was from drivers that aren't concentrating or are just belligerent or selfish. They will not have changed. The difference now is that pedestrians will feel that they are safe to step out and have no idea what kind of driver they are trusting their lives to. I say it again and again watching great vids like this: As a vulnerable road user - a motorcyclist - you are trained to be responsible _for yourself_ if you want to stay alive and to act accordingly, ie. assume drivers have not seen you or even are out to kill you. The new rules encourage the exact opposite. It may be morally correct that less vulnerable road users should act with more responsibility, but it is stupid to set road rules according to some kind of moral sensibility. The rules should be strictly according to what is most sensible and will keep people alive (and keep the traffic moving, to be honest). They should encourage the most vulnerable to be most careful and keep the traffic flowing in a smooth, predictable way. The new rules encourage pedestrians and cyclists to use the roads just as they fancy and expect drivers to be able to see in all directions at all times and read the minds of everyone in a 100m radius.
NB the Department of Transport is not the DVSA ... so they responded correctly, they said they would forward it to the correct agency, but gave you generic boiler-plate advice in the mean time
Hi James my opinion it's dangerous, earlier today I had a truck behind me very close so I decided not to stop, I certainly do this normally but also have been overtaken a few times putting the pedestrian at risk
I completely understand why people don’t want to give way to pedestrians at roundabouts and that is because many drivers see a roundabout as a race track, accelerating hard to get off it as quickly as possible. I have said many times before that H2 was introduced with the best intentions of making everyone more aware of their surroundings and more importantly an attempt to get drivers to make better observations. This is true for a large part but we need to be slower in what we do. We cannot accelerate hard onto a roundabout and expect to give way when we suddenly see a pedestrian waiting to cross. If we enter a roundabout and drive appropriately it is possible to slow sufficiently for pedestrians to cross. I do all the time and rarely have issues. One thing I will say and that is the Highway Code and supporting official guides are poorly worded. A roundabout _is_ a junction and therefore H2 prevails despite the poor to non existent references in the roundabout section. If you are think about it, you are always giving way at the entrance and always turning left at the exit 😉 As always though, if you don’t feel safe or comfortable then do not do it. Just because others can and have few issues doesn’t mean that it is the same in all areas. The overriding commandments are keeping yourself and others safe, and the rules say when you should give priority but you mustn’t cause a collision in taking (or giving) priority
Try doing it on a motorcycle (or a bicycle as I think the rules apply). You will not only endanger yourself with the fair possibility of being bit by a car that didn't notice you or expect you to stop, but you endanger the pedestrian by encouraging them to cross when you have partially obscured their view of the junction and the confused angry or oblivious driver that chooses to go around your stopped motorcycle. Sure, if everyone was a skilled driver and had great mental ability, it would be fine. These rules are supposed to protect people, though and basing rules for safety on unrealistic expectations in the trickiest and most dangerous of situations is crazy. If instructors are struggling with these rules (and they are) then the 'average driver' has no chance and half the drivers are 'below average'.
The bottom line is 'IT'S Dangerous for the pedestrian" I have been overtaken when stopped on a dual exit roundabout when a youth walked out in front of me.
Coming from a country where you will be fined if you don’t stop for a pedestrian round a bought are treated as such. If your exit is not clear. Do not enter. If you get caught out and enter only to discover traffic backed up or a pedestrian waiting to cross have fun. Perhaps it’s a large roundabout with tall decorative features preventing you from being able to see your exit. Your going to be going round and round and round until you can get out.
If memory serves the BlackBelt barrister suggested that the rules apply on entry to and exit from a roundabout. However, I think that it is not cut and dried, being dependent on multiple factors. One thing that I did see a while ago, a person was waiting to cross our road at its junction with a more major road, a learner driver turned left into our road and did not stop for the pedestrian to cross.
The second sentence of the letter you received is ambiguous. One interpretation is "This has been passed to [us at] the Department of Transport to respond [and here is our response]." If that _is_ the sender's intended meaning, then it is reasonable to assume that they consider the matter closed, which would explain the the absence of any subsequent correspondence.
I was riding my bike on a cycle path beside quite a busy, fast moving, ring road recently. I stopped at a crossing point, planning to wait for a gap so I could cross safely. I was at least 2 feet from the kerb, waiting, when a driving instructor approaching from my left must have given his/her pupil the word to stop for me to cross. This lead to traffic coming from the other direction to also stop. To avoid more confusion I took the opportunity to cross. I think they were in the wrong. There could have been drivers following them taken by surprise causing a bump. I'm sure I was right to wait. Yes?
2:07 I was really surprised to hear what you had to say about angling the car when turning left, because doing that is exactly what is needed to stop an oncoming car doing a right turn thinking you are stopping for them. If you don't angle in, you stop for the pedestrian, but a oncoming vehicle thinks you are letting them go, and turns into conflict with the pedestrian. And it looks like exactly that nearly happened in the clip you showed at 1:32 - the clip cuts off but looks like the oncoming car turned in while you waiting. The starting to turn in is a critical part of communicating to other drivers what you are doing.
I'm not in the UK, so I'm possibly looking at this through a clear lens, but while you explain it as it is to protect pedestrians with cars, I see this as protecting pedestrians as they become more self entitled and won't take responsibility for their own actions. Where I live, at light controlled intersections, if you are turning, you do have a responsibility to give way to pedestrians, but this turn is usually made from stationery or slow speeds. Roundabouts are designed to keep traffic flowing, and that is best aided by having vehicles clear the roundabout, not stop on it, blocking access for others, while pedestrians cross. Then you have the matter of cyclists and motorcyclists who are put at higher risk of being rear ended if they stop.
I'm a driver, cyclist and obviously a pedestrian as is everyone at some time or other, TBH I always thought giving way to pedestrians crossing junctions was always a rule before H2, not roundabouts though. As a pedestrian I expect to be given priority from vehicles approaching the entrance to roundabouts and will be assertive to that fact without actually walking in front of them of course, but at the exits to roundabouts I won't push this priority at all as I think it's too dangerous for vehicles. I crossed the entrance to a roundabout while cycling recently and a woman who was approaching beeped at me, the trouble is they just drive away not giving you any opportunity to explain I would ask when was the last time they updated on the Highway code. I was thinking of having a copy handy that I can wave at some motorists who don't seem to know the rules.
This video has finally helped me twig as to why cyclists aren't allowed to turn left at junctions where cars are waiting to turn left, but they are allowed to go straight through, even though that is even more stupidly dangerous for them (as the car clearly might turn across them). It's because pedestrians might be crossing that side road. Of course, the cyclist should be following the same rules that car is re. waiting for pedestrians to cross, but I guess they often don't and the car, by stopping even though their exit is 'clear', is obscuring the cyclist's view of the pedestrians. And of course it's still a stupid rule encouraging cyclists to do one of the most dangerous things on the road they can (passing a vehicle on the side it is signalling to turn), but the point is I only now, after making a few attempts, understand one of the small nuances within that rule. These rules are bonkers. It's like they tried to work out the best ways to encourage all vulnerable road users to endanger themselves, but make it look like they are doing 'the right thing'. Few people have a chance of getting it right, even if skilled and willing. And the rules, even when followed, often won't make it safer (might even make it worse).
It doesn't encourage them to endanger themselves, well not unless they are misreading or misinterpreting it, or not even reading it and just going by what someone on social media is saying! In fact, it explicitly tells them not to endanger themselves. For example: "None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety." And: "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident." So, the Highway Code is telling drivers that they should give way to pedestrians, cyclists, etc. It isn't telling those pedestrians or cyclists to just "go for it" and endanger themselves. They have priority, but should be waiting to see that they have been seen and have been given way to before proceeding. The problem is people taking account of some rules but not others, and therefore misinterpreting what they are reading. There are rules that tell pedestrians how to cross the road safely (I've seen comments elsewhere saying the green cross code doesn't exist any more, but it's still there), ones that tell cyclists to take care when passing slow moving or stationary traffic, etc. For example, some cyclists read H3, telling drivers to give way to cyclists at junctions, and misinterpret that to be telling cyclists that they have a "right of way" and can just go ahead. They don't seem to read the wording that I've quoted above, nor rule 76 for cyclists telling them they have priority, but to take care and check they have been seen and given way to when they are going ahead. "Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road." (There's also another paragraph relating to the hazards of large vehicles). So, a long reply, but the rules are ok, it's how they are being (mis)interpreted by some people and (mis)reported on in the mainstream and social media that I think it's causing some vulnerable road users to take risks that they shouldn't be taking.
On roundabouts (mini) surely if a pedestrian has started to cross , stepped off the pavement, the driver should give way regardless of if they have right of way? Local old T junction (minor rds) now a mini r/a! Twice now I’ve nearly been hit as they turn left as I start to cross, I think the drivers were so intent in checking vehicles coming from the right they just didn’t look!
I often stop at the entrance to roundabouts to let pedestrians cross as I'm in stop-start traffic anyway, but rarely at roundabout exits as I feel there's a significant risk of my stopping being unexpected enough that a vehicle behind me could hit me or I could cause the whole roundabout to come to a stop for these pedestrians. If they make a move to cross then of course I'm slowing or stopping to keep a safe distance from them, but I've had some very late braking from cars behind me on some of those occasions.
I will also stop at the entrance to a roundabout for pedestrians only if it is a single lane entrance, where I block anyone overtaking me. That way the pedestrian is ' safe '. But on exit that is just dangerous to me and any vehicles behind me
thank you James. great to see hear the evidence-based technique you apply. a paragraph in a letter would be unlikely to override the official documents if ever called upon. It's a shame you are too far away, otherwise you would be first pick to teach my children!
Your point about angling the car at 2:11 is interesting. I would personally angle the car, although maybe not that particular angle. The problem with stopping before the junction is that oncoming vehicles may think you're letting them go first, which can then lead to the pedestrian getting hit. By 'angling' a bit, you will potentially shield the pedestrian, but equally, you may block the view of the pedestrian. I think this is one reason why this rule is problematic. Also, I really can't see how angling the car would lead to tooting by other drivers. I would have thought stopping further back would lead to tooting as it's a very strange place to stop. Is the person parking by the junction? Is the learner stopping to perform a manoeuvre? By looking at various youtubers etc., I came to the conclusion that this rule does apply to roundabouts. I honestly don't know whether this is true. One of the problems is that people don't want to cross when you stop. I had one recently (at a normal junction, not a roundabout) who waved me across after I had stopped.
'Is the pedestrian aware of my approach?' is the main question in my mind. And I bear in mind that pedestrians are permitted to use the public highway - my right to the road is no greater than theirs.
On the point about not encouraging pedestrians across the road - should also apply when deciding to let other motorists out of side roads for the same reasons. Very few people understand this.
Those people that are trying to cross at the round-about, just cross earlier 10 metres down the road. Putting crossings at junctions is stupid. Yeah I get the idea that cars can see you (as long as there aren't cars waiting at that junction blocking the view). But its stupid because as a pedestrian, you have no control. Its the definition of putting yourself at risk. Never cross at junctions. I don't care what any book says. Its not safer than when its physically impossible for a car to hit you. You can see cars for a long distance and they can see you. That's the best scenario. Often junctions are at curves where cars can't see you. Even if they come in slowly, its very sudden. Just cross the road even 6 metres down the road and you're much safer. The car has much more time to brake. Go 15 metres down the road and cars can't hit you even if they wanted to. Its just not possible. I've never crossed a road as if I'm walking on a footpath. Even at zebra crossings, I don't cross until I can see the driver has acknowldged me and all looks good. Is the highway code the reason you exist? Cause it will be the reason you don't. Its definitely a priority ticket to what lies after death.
The problem with moving down the road is if you aren't at the junction the cars don't have to stop at all. The rules basically encourage pedestrians to pick the most dangerous place to cross. I agree with you that it would be safer to cross further down, but people prefer to save 10 seconds and endanger themselves and now we have rules to tell them they are right to do so... When the rules effectively said "wait until there is no traffic" it encouraged people to perhaps walk away from the busy junction and down the side road a few meters to a safe spot, because they would have to wait a few seconds anyway. Now, in the name of making the less vulnerable more responsible, the more vulnerable are encouraged to be less responsible and, in doing so, accept more danger.
"Never cross at junctions" - I do not believe that you never cross at junctions. It's a common situation that you are walking down a main road and need to cross a small side road. Surely you don't personally (or expect others to) walk some distance down every side road?
Ive heard that some test centres are failing learners for stopping on a road to let people cross a road they are turning into as they consider them to be causing an obstruction. Have you had any experience like this and is there any way of challenging the decision if it happens to you?
@@andycross3783 I haven’t experienced it. I imagine if they are failing it either isn’t appropriate to stop, or perhaps if the pedestrian shows no sign of actually crossing they might be just sitting there unsure what to do.
The biggest problem with the H rules is that you're expecting those drivers who couldn't observe someone jumping up and down on their bonnet, and react to things 10 feet in front of them to understand when it is safe and when it isn't.
IMO correct that vehicles give way to pedestrians at junctions and on entry & exit of roundabouts. Highway code should be improved to make it crystal clear. If pedestrians are already crossing at junctions surely HWC should state they MUST be given priority.
They've made the roads more dangerous firstly by being so vague and secondly by not advertising the changes enough for the majority to be aware. Some pedestrians know the rules and take their priority when not all drivers are aware of the rules and don't realise they should be giving way and visa versa.
my original thoughts when they brought out the new priority rules for pedestrians at junctions was to give more legal backing to them in the event of a collision. before it was not a thing to think to give priority, now as a driver its something else to consider and if you hit a pedestrian, its a more slam dunk case when working out fault and compensation. there are times i dont give way to pedestrians because i dont think its safe to do so but i do what i can when it is safe. but to me, its my fault if i dont give way to them and then hit them. before it could be argued that the pedestrian was crossing incorrectly and they should have waited and given priority to the vehicle. i find a Should in the highway code gives a bit of play for drivers to read a situation and act in the best safe way they can see.
Hi D I UK, I had been wondering what is the proper behaviour at junctions and roundabouts while we already had advice to wait for pedestrians when exiting a junction trying to turn in was less clear. This new arrangement is much more simple and straightforward. My primary concern for many years has been my reluctance to be the agent of injury when driving, responsibility and fault are not relevant to me!. I have been aware for many years that there are a lot of pedestrians who appear to lack spacial awareness and unschooled in road safety, while this might imply that any collision is probably their fault that is of little comfort to me as the driver. It seems that this situation puts a greater duty of care on drivers and that seems fair enough to me!, the fact that I am in an enormous vehicle taking up so much more public space is a significant factor, also I am expecting to be able to travel more swiftly and in greater comfort, all things considered a bit of extra consideration is not too much to ask!. The points you make about treating each and every traffic situation on its own merits resonates for me! while I do have a general strategic plan for each trip the precise details of each journey have to evolve as I go along. The is one aspect that I actually relish, that is the constant challenge presented by the endless variations in terrain conditions and other traffic, just the other day I was passing some very slow traffic in a queue on my bright some distance from the junction, I found myself watching more carefully as I came close to each car to be sure that none of them were going to swerve across my path!, more care than I would have taken if I had been passing them on my left!, I do this in the light of my own assessment of other's behaviour, we are mostly more familiar with checking the right hand mirror before switching to the right hand lane but not so careful switching left. I enjoy the perpetual challenge to my skill in observation and judgement, much the same applies to my practise of managing appropriate space around me, sometimes by going a bit faster sometimes by slowing a bit, I do like to have pockets of space available for me or for others. In some ways it is just like one of those computer games that were so p[opular in the early days of computers. Cheers, Richard.
Have I got this right, a pedestrian "waiting" to cross or already crossing then I am required to stop. I am not required to stop for pedestrians walking and approaching the edge of the pavement. If they are already crossing then I obviously must stop. Is that right. Of course if they are walking and intending to cross then it is safer for the pedestrian to cross but this is not was said.
@@kevinrayner5812 yeah you’ve got it. All depends for me on what the pedestrian is doing, sometimes it looks like they’re just going to walk straight across so might change how I’m feeling
I think the rule change does cause confusion. I have seen pedestrians take liberties with the rule, expecting to have priority when they're not crossing at a junction, zebra crossing or pedestrian crossing. I'm happy to give pedestrians at junctions but I do think it is a judgement call.
If you read the road and look ahead these rules are easy to follow. Those who cannot see further than the bonnet of thier car they will struggle and really shouldn't be driving.
"H" for "hierarchy" (of vulnerability). Assess the pedestrian's vulnerability, not whether you or they have priority. If they have headphones on and are in their own little world, don't send them to the next one! And quite right, if you are going to give way to a pedestrian crossing the road you are turning into, point your wheels so they are not going to be pointing at that pedestrian!
There needs to be official, unambiguous determination with unambiguous written clarification on this, because everybody is saying different things. Different people in the DVSA are saying different things, different DVSA test centres are saying different things, and different driving instructors are saying different things. You're teaching your students not to stop for predestrians wishing to cross at roundabouts. But I know other driving instructors on RUclips who are teaching their students to always stop for predestrians wishing to cross at roundabouts unless it's not safe to do so. This complete nationwide countermanding confusion is a dangerous mess which the DVSA needs to sort out. Guidance, instructions, and rules must be unambiguous, with a single and clear interpretation.
We humans are hard-wired to wait at crossings. Priority at roundabouts is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Would you just keep walking if there's a 40-tonne truck approaching you? You have priority, don't you?
Round abouts were Created to Remove the Congestion '" Caused by Cross Roads " now if Cars have Stop on The Round About there's going to be a Lot of Rear enders . Perhaps necessitating the Need For Overhead Foot Bridges where there's heavy Foot Traffic ..
This is why there have to be big educational campaigns when rules like these are changed. Yes drivers and cyclists are expected to update themselves but unfortunately most don’t. I genuinely believe The Highway Code needs to be taught in schools
Pedestrians on phones, wearing earphones totaly oblivious to any traffic. Many a time I have stopped and waited while they just stand in a trance state.
Ridiculous rule tbh my road is u shaped off of a three lane highway and entered at the end of a bus stop so the turn is almost invisible until right on it, it’s also a 20 mph speed drop (40-20) and one way with only room for one car once cars are parked on the right hand side, if I stop on the main highway to let a pedestrian cross the road I have been rear ended albeit very lightly, but there has been 4 car pileups from similar, I’m going to keep braking to 20 and turning in unless a pedestrian is actually in my path and F the ridiculous rule
I'm going to get a copy of that DVSA officiel guide to driving, the essential skills. I see on the DVSA Website that there's one for driving and one for motorcycling. Do you know if there's much difference and if it's worth getting both? This video really highlights that it's a great compliment to the Highway code.
they should be crossing at blind kerbs, junction, controlled, or island crossings - not anywhere they damn well please. Whoever wrote this law up needs their head examined.
Actually pedestrians have always been able to cross the road anywhere, jay walking has never been illegal in the U.K. I learnt the old kerb drill when I was five, the first thing it said was find a safe spot to cross. Look right, look left, look right again, if all clear cross.
@@neilp1885 the old kerb drill morphed into the green cross code, which included the keep watching and listening. I was pointing out to the original comment that pedestrians can cross the road anywhere. This puts the onus on the pedestrian to cross safely but it also puts a responsibility on those in/on mechanical vehicles (motorised and pedal) to be aware of what’s happening ahead of them and to some extent expect the unexpected.
To me its a judgement call on what is going on around you do . Personally I don't stop at pedestrian at roundabout but may stop if appropriate. Where junctions i will slow and give the option for the pedestrian which they can take. Or if they don't want i will then carry on. I usually ask the question are they safe . Do I need to do something so they are safe
@@jfryer485 I do see it potentially heading more that way. In Norwich they updated a particularly hazardous roundabout, and it is now single lane with pedestrian and cycle crossings at every entrance and exit. Very good design, the problem…. The attitudes of people driving it! Generally much safer though
That is only true in France for Pedestrian (Zebra) Crossings since 2011. It has been the law in the UK to give priority to pedestrians at Zebra crossings even before I started driving in the 1960s.
@ Yes, road rage. People are happy to wait 30 seconds at traffic lights. But anticipating how not to run over a pedestrian trying to commit suicide and they think they have every right. Exaggeration but having many family and friends knocked over and killed as well as friends killing pedestrians, I do feel rather than trappibg someone at a road block the police should follow up EVERY accident that gets reported. In one of the above deaths, nobody was blamed but theyspent a fortune putting in a roundabout to improve safety. I really do think in towns that not only should you drive safely but slow down and even give a wide berth to pedestrians and cyclists. Basically a driver has a lethal weapon and the only acceptable driving technique is to help the more vulnerable and be courteous rather than getting irate at other more courteous drivers that hold you up probably ten times less than at a traffic light. If you adopt road rage when pulled up by the police you will get KARMA straight away, so you should treat every interaction as with the same type of person and deaths and accidents might come down drastically. My experience is driving should not mean having accidents unless there is nut at the end of the wheel.
I see where you coming from, and as others have said I'd only stop if was safe to do so. Until the everyone gets the message it's doing pedestrians more harm than good. As I said before in a previous video, I wait for the pockets of space in between the cars rather than them stopping for me. Or alternatively if its busy I walk so I'm further away from the mouth of the junction. I feel like some peds take the mick sometimes and abuse the priority rule. In my honest opinion peds should wait for cars not the other way round. Obviously key thing is saftey so if they have started crossing and a car turns then they should let them finish but besides that, peds should wait in mv opinion.
Making a left turn the other day, I stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross. For my sins the driver of a car directly behind me sounded his horn and through abuse at me with language that’s unprintable. It would seem that this AH was unaware of the current rules. Roundabout are another question as there are so many different types going from the mini roundabout that’s was once a cross road or tee styled junction right up to the huge multi lane roundabouts that can be part duel carriage part single lane. There really isn’t a straight forward answer to that, other than useing ones common sense.
You have to use common sense - in my opinion this rule is reasonable, as many pedestrians fail to look properly before crossing, and they shouldn’t have to wait anyway since they’re going straight ahead. However, it says should and not must, so don’t stop if everyone else isn’t going to or if someone’s driving really close behind you.
The Highway code has no legal standing, so can be ignored. Nobody has ever been prosecuted for ignoring the highway code. At best the HC is a training aid. Personally I have never read it. But I have 60+ years on the road in which I have never been involved in an accident where anyone was hurt. Nuff said.
I'd hate to see someone fail their test for not stopping to let someone cross. It feels to me it wasn't originally their intention for roundabouts to be included but now they're afraid to back down from it.
Roundabouts were deffo included from the start in my memory of the endless Facebook posts telling me 'From January 22...' Seems more like they are now backing down to me with these caveats and lack of specificity in the sources.
In the right circumstances I would stop to let pedestrians cross when I am turning into a road. I stop before turning and wait but the pedestrian does not always realise quickly that I am waiting for them to cross, this could cause a problem from other drivers getting impatient and maybe hooting. Quite often, as you say when the pedestrian starts to cross they are often only aware of me and don’t look the other way for other vehicles. Am I wrong in waving to the pedestrian to cross? This, I feel, encourages them not to look the other way, would I be at fault if they walk out in front of a vehicle in these circumstances?
@@boblawrence5011 I would definitely not say you are wrong, as instructors we try not to encourage it. But I’m sure you’ve noticed some pedestrians will not cross unless they are waved across. So I would always say take each situation as it comes, which it certainly sounds like you’re doing
Can you please start your videos with the statement that was included on the DOT Email/letter... "...all road users, cyclists and pedestrians are required to comply with road traffic law in the interests of their own saftey and that of other road users..." Then during any video clips and from the drivers perspective show that other road users also need to improve thier attitudes to other road users. In this particular one the pedestrian who clearly was not interested in their own safety at the road junction, "..pedestrians are required to comply with road traffic law in the interests of their own safety.."
I am a 88 year old driver ii used to hold hgv1 ang public transport class 1 allso now of couujrse i only hold a normal car licence , i oplways give way to pedestrons IF IT IS SAVE to do so,causion is the by word.
5:12 that is not a pedestrian it is a cyclist, they should have dismounted first before crossing. I stop at smaller roundabouts where the speed is low but there are roundabouts were it is not practical or safe. When I travel to work I go around a roundabout that is to big and fast to stop on the exit but I try to stop on the entrance.
Wasn't the rule on turning into a side street in the rules before 2022? Also, H2 requires the driver to cede priority only when safe to do so, and as roundabouts are junctions, it applies here as well. In neither clip, it wasn't safe for your learners to stop as they had traffic close behind.
Exactly, although it is kind of like asking if roundabout roads are roads. Yeah, why wouldn't they be? It is kind of a obvious answer question. Roundabout junctions are... junctions. There are rules for junctions. Every single rule in the book is not repeated for every single section - you would have a book 100 times as big and heavy. Giveway marking at roundabouts follow the giveway markings rules. Stopping distances follow the stopping distances rules. Junctions follow the junction rules. The only leeway is the 'waiting to cross' being subjective, similar to Zebra crossings. If the person doesn't look like they are waiting to cross then it is valid to continue - you better be able to show this if something happens, though.
@@Lanzy4lee yes , in one of his videos he also states one of his instructors learners failed a test for stopping at a roundabout exit. The examiner said ‘it wasn’t a formal crossing, you should not have stopped’ I’ve stopped at about 3 roundabouts , it’s very rarely safe
@@aimerw What matters in this context is whether the Highway Code treats a roundabout as a type of junction, or as something different with separate rules. It clearly treats them as 2 separate things; the phrase "at junctions and roundabouts" is even used in one rule. If they intended H2 to apply at roundabouts, they would have modified the wording of the roundabout rules, but they clearly made the decision not to.
@@aimerw I'm not sure if it's just the way you phrased it, but it seems like you are saying the markings and rules at roundabouts are the same as at "normal" give way junctions. At give way junctions, the give way mark for pulling out of the junction into the more major road is a double dashed line, and the side of the junction that you enter from the major road is marked with a single dashed line. The double dashed line and give way warning triangle at a normal give way junction indicate a requirement that you MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging. At a roundabout, the give way line for entering the roundabout is a single dashed line, and there is no marking across the carriageway for leaving a roundabout. The single dashed line marking for entering a roundabout indicates that you should give priority to traffic approaching from your right. There is no mark for leaving the roundabout, you are effectively continuing on the road. (Yes, you indicate left to leave, but that's because the road/lane often also continues around the roundabout (not always, you may be in a lane that is dedicated to leaving) and because it is useful for traffic trying to enter to know that you aren't continuing in the roundabout, and for traffic near you in the roundabout to know that you are leaving and may be crossing their path.) So, at a normal junction there's usually a major and a minor road, with the major road continuing (no markings across the carriageway), whereas at a roundabout all roads usually have equal priority, they all have a line showing that you should give priority to traffic coming from the right.
so far ive only given way to them when approaching a roundabout, i also dont think ive done it on one that isnt a mini one, yet. i wouldnt dream of doing it when exiting a roundabout, holy fuck is that unsafe for everyone
0:50 I try and teach people facts and not my opinion 2:08 where in any part of the guidance does it talk about where and how you should wait to allow pedestrians to cross? Isn't this simply your opinion?
Social Media was SWAMPED with updates on this rule for the months before it came into being and once it did I immediately started to exercise my priority as a pedestrian. Years later it's slowly taking root but most drivers still don't know/observe it. My first beep was yesterday when someone beeped at the car CORRECTLY giving way to me as I crossed a tiny side street. The social media posts made it clear that this included roundabouts. I see side streets and roundabouts as 'invisible zebra crossings' now. But I think I'll back down on roundabouts now as they have not put those into writing as clearly as with minor roads. I'm sure I'll be ranting about my priority from a hospital bed some day but until then I keep on walking. (I'm also a motorist)
self-righteous, pompous and vindictive. seeking harm for yourself, fine. Seeking harm to others, not fine. Unfortunately the person that will end up hitting you, won't deserve to have the suffering you cause them. But you would.
There is also the issue of traffic light controlled junctions. The Highway code references that pedestrians " should " wait for the green man, but so many have read ' part ' of the Highway code and assume it is everywhere. Even in the middle of a major road.
Are you brave enough to take on the 40mph everywhere brigade? how would they fare in a test? nearly 100% old men who have the same reactions as drunk drivers. if your not sat at a junction waiting for twenty-odd cars to pass your stuck behind them on a main road. usually, the same sort that straddle merge in turn lanes so nobody can get past
I think the biggest problem here is lack of clear, unambiguous, properly publicised information from the DVSA. There is obviously a lot of confusion out there: several driving instructors, and many other people with opinions, have been putting out videos and trying to make sense of the rules, their followers have requested it, and the comments sections are usually hotly debated. If that's happening, then the message from the DVSA has not got out effectively. It's also clear that even people from organisations that should be able to give the official line are giving varied responses and opinions. It should _not_ be opinional. They need to make clear, unambiguous, very public statements - and then repeat them until the majority have got it. Remember the old "public information broadcasts?" I can still remember the detail of many of the messages that they put across. Maybe we need something like that. I found the comparing of junctions to roundabouts in the official sources interesting. Junctions: clear instruction to give way to pedestrians crossing roads into which or from which you are turning. Roundabouts: be *aware* of pedestrians. Quite a different message. It makes me think that either the writers saw a clear distinction between the two, or didn't notice the apparent contradiction. I suspect the former, but since then loads of people have said "yeah, but a roundabout is a junction" and that has prompted the variety of opinions that have been aired ever since. Again, the DVSA need to get their message out in a clear, unambiguous way that reaches as many people as possible. So far, this has not happened.
@@ado543 It does seem to, and the information presented by James in this video certainly seems to support that position. I think the problem is that, since the release of the new rules, people have been saying, "but what about roundabouts, they're junctions too?" and people have been putting forward opinions based on that question, and assumptions about the answer to it. That's where I feel that the DVSA really need to step in and make a clear, unabiguous statement specifically addressing this. They, as the standards setting body, need to clear up the confusion and misinformation so that we can all move forward with implementing the rules consistently and safely.
Not sure about your advice - the statements for turning have the word 'should' and not 'must' this puts this category into the same situation as those for roundabouts i.e. it is not mandatory. I've always followed the basic rule that the road is not yours, and to drive defensively. The approach and exit speeds on most roundabouts is too fast - this is the main problem that any pedestrian has when trying to cross. Too many aggressive drivers on the roads today - it's little wonder that 20mph zones are in effect as a result of this behaviour.
1.42 secs into video shows the Stupidity of pedestrians crossing because you have stopped and they perceive you said it’s ok to cross and they just don’t look at the main road traffic turning in and could have been knocked over. Also I believe you shouldn’t wave to them to cross as you then become liable if an accident happens which then confuses the crossing pedestrian. I also walk most evenings crossing numerous junctions and not once so far have they stopped for me. Just a joke
Sheer lunacy! Take away the onus on the pedestrian to be responsible for their own safety; then place that responsibility in the lap of the driver. further increasing inconvenience, the chance of errors and unpredictability. Cyclists too have been given '''further rights'''; has the safety of cyclists increased? No! Why? because of their proven recklessness! Their failure to recognise that they are responsible for their own safety, as well as failing to give consideration to other road users out of sheer '''privileged arrogance''', road users that may be inconvenienced by THEIR actions. These '''new practices''' have been introduced because of a failure to address the issue of carelessness on the part of certain pedestrians and those others who use our pavements irresponsibly or illegally. The Americans long had a law against '''jaywalking''', it is about time we adopted the same attitude. There is no time that I would be stupid enough to cross a road if there was a vehicle approaching or indicating to turn into a junction; nor would I expect a driver to stop at any other than a designated crossing ( zebra, light controlled, or patrolled ). As a driver, cyclist and pedestrian, I recognise that motorists have enough on their plate without having to comply with another stupid law..
01:47 never ever beckon the pedestrian to cross the road, let them make up their own minds, if you beckon them to cross the road you’re potentially inviting them into danger, if they get injured you’ll get the blame because you invited them to cross the road, never ever take on that responsibility.
All drivers should recognise the judgement by Judge Shanti Mauger, in _Brushett v Hazeldean_ (2015) , that a pedestrian established on a road/carriageway has right of way/priority over vehicles. That means that when turning at any junction, including a roundabout, it is required that anybody in control (driving or riding) of a vehicle (or a horse or herd of sheep!) *must* give way to a pedestrian established on the road, otherwise it is an offence.
The rules in the Highway Code are very clear about that. What is under discussion here is where the pedestrian is not established on the road but is waiting on the pavement.
As a pedestrian, i hate it when vehicles stop and wait for me, just carry on, i'll wait until there's a gap in the traffic, it only takes a few seconds and i'll go when i _know_ its safe, rather than having to jog across the road to get out of peoples way, which as we saw in your example at 1:39, could result in another vehicle being missed. To take it even further, i don't even like using light controlled crossings, lights mean nothing to some people, wether the lights show i can go or not, i'm still going to look at make sure that its clear before i cross, so why interrupt traffic flow at all, i'll just wait a few seconds until there's a gap i _know_ is safe.
Agree. I also hate it when other motorists flash their lights to let me out of side roads when I’m driving, and for the same reasons.
There were examples of pedestrians shown waiting near bollards, trying to cross a single lane to reach the opposite pavement. So often these are with a small child, effectively standing in the middle of the road. To leave them there is potentially dangerous. All pedestrians I allow across seem to understand they're not being 'hurried' (why else would I stop completely!?) and usually show some gratitude. If you don't continue to cross it causes even more confusion and frustration. Fortunately you appear to be in the minority.
On busy (but still fairly slow) roads they are waiting minutes not seconds.When crossing 2 lanes, the driver stopping is closing that lane to help, but has no control over drivers in the other lane. Pedestrians also have a responsibility to themselves to look out for this.
Absolute madness they have not thought this through. As with 20 mph speed limits the world has gone mad. We where bought up with the green cross code don't cross in front of cars they hurt. And this applies to both of these
To me, the most important question to ask oneself regarding giving priority to pedestrians is "are they safe now, and will my giving priority to them make them less safe?".
A pedestrian who is stood on the pavement or a large traffic island is reasonably safe. It becomes less safe once they step into the road. However, as usual, individual circumstances can differ depending on a myriad of factors, so no blanket rule can apply to all situations.
@@broadsword6650 superb 👌🏻
This is exact attitude that makes a road a safer place. Bravo.
You don't "give priority" to pedestrians, they already have it. You should wait for them to give it to you.
The reason the rule was introduced was that previously the only for a pedestrian to get motorists to give way so that they could continue on their journey was to step out onto the carriageway which puts them at risk. The new rule requiring motorists to stop to let pedestrian to cross before they step out removes that risk, making junctions safer for all. But only if motorists actually follow the rule and show due consideration.
I think that's the wrong question to ask. The pedestrian may well be safe on the pavement at that moment, but they need to cross the road somehow. The question is, would it be safer for the pedestrian overall if I stop and let them cross, or if I continue and they find a gap? It depends. I remember a situation where I was trying to cross a side road junction with poor visibility up the main road, and a driver turning left off the main road stopped. This instantly made it much safer for me because it physically prevented cars that I couldn't see well from flying up to the junction and turning in with little warning. It also made crossing quick and convenient.
At most side roads in urban areas, it is normally safe to let a pedestrian cross. Most roundabouts are multi-lane and too fast, so it's rarely safer to stop for a pedestrian.
@@ado543 I was mainly writing about the situation at roundabouts rather than other junctions. As I say, individual and specific circumstances (such as those you describe) may well change my decision.
It’s absolutely ridiculous I always wait for vehicles to get out of my way before crossing the road has I was taught from a child and in my opinion it’s the best thing to do don’t rely on other people to make your decisions.
Thanks for this. I had been stopping for some pedestrians at roundabouts and confused others behind me. Won't do it again unless they've already started crossing.
I don’t have any problem giving way on the entrance of a roundabout. However as far as the exit is concerned. Not a good idea. As a pedestrian I really don’t care. I don’t need drivers to give way to me because I’ll pick my own time to cross. No problem
2:31 i learned long before these rules but that's is something I was taught when doing a right turn to keep the wheels straight in case of being shunted into moving traffic. So the same principles apply if turning left and giving way to pedestrians
One problem is that really experienced and professional drivers find this rule tricky, so why would you expect inexperienced drivers and pedestrians to understand this safely.
That's the essence of why the new rules aren't fit for purpose.
It should have been obvious at first examination of them that the majority of drivers, even if they were conscientious and law-abiding, would have trouble knowing what to do or even if they work it out, would struggle to have the skill and mental ability to assess the many variables involved.
The next thought should have been "these rules need to protect people against the average inattentive idiot driver too. Let's think again". Let alone "if everyone does as they should, the traffic in city centres will grind to a halt"...
The new rules encourage pedestrians (and cyclists that have similarly nutty priority rules) to behave in a way that trusts their lives the the moral judgements and mental acuity of 'the average driver' instead of practices that are simply safe.
A junction is one of the most dangerous and complex situations on the road. To go from complete safety: "wait until there is no traffic coming" to "you have priority, so go ahead - the car should stop - oh but, be careful in case they don't!" is insane and should have been laughed out of the first meeting that suggested it.
They _are_ fit for purpose, and drivers who cannot cope with the new rules should have their licences revoked.
How would you test if I can cope with it? (before revoking my license and destroying my life and career opportunities)
@@James-cheese If you have an accident in the circumstances described, and have not kept up to date with HC and law changes (as required by your licence) you have breached your licence so should have it revoked.
Nothing tricky about it at all. Only difficult bit is getting pedestrians up to speed but if all drivers get up to date and follow the rules then pedestrians will start to understand. As for roundabouts many have pedestrian crossings on entry and exits so why would it be any more difficult at those without a pedestrian crossing.
If you're at or approaching a give way line and there 's a single lane, stopping for people waiting to cross feels natural, especially if your speed is low. Other situations feel less natural and less safe to me. I don't think it's unreasonable for pedestrians to wait for a gap in traffic or use a crossing. I very rarely find it hard to cross the road. We're all pedestrians, many of us are cyclists, many of us are drivers or bus or taxi passengers. It's about what's a reasonable compromise.
I am often surprised how close zebra crossings (as well as just a traffic island) are placed on the exit to a roundabout. This can cause a sudden halt for a driver who has been looking right for a clearance to move out and then fiinding himself almost on top of the crossing, and the pedestrian. The following traffic is similarly brought to a sudden stop affecting the the circulation to general annoyance all round. Giving way in these circumstances calls for a lot of "judgement" which of course is very personal.
The problem is pedestrians will try to cross there anyway. If they came from one road into the roundabout and want to continue along another that is not the first exit the shortest route for them is to cross where the first exit joins the roundabout. Many of them will cross there rather than walk down to a pedestrian crossing further away.
A rule designed to make things safer has actually, in many cases, made things more dangerous. It's also ridiculous to bring multiple vehicles (each weighing 1.5-3 tonnes) to a complete stop when the pedestrian could have (and in many cases would have rather) waited for a couple of seconds.
Thanks for this - you break it down really well.
It's not working in my experience. For me a lot of pedestrians do not cross when I stop to allow them to at junctions of 'major to minor roads' specifically. I even get waved on by pedestrians. The roundabout information was a fantastic learning point though. Good video 👍🏻😄
@@Richard_Barnes yes it is a bit of a pain sometimes. My learner and I stopped to allow a lady across a road we were turning into. And as you say she just stared awkwardly at us…… an unbreakable stare! So we carried on. Some pedestrians don’t like being allowed to cross so it can be a pain
@@JamesSimpkinsADI Try it on a motorcycle (or a bicycle, since the rules still apply. Probably. Maybe).
Every time you do this, you risk an accident (being shunted from behind by a driver that hasn't seen you) and it is often a 'wasted' effort as the pedestrians are (often sensibly) not willing to step out and trust you have actually seen them and aren't pausing for some other reason. Also a car or motorcycle stopping often obscures the pedestrian's view of the dangers at the junction, so they stop.
The rules basically expect riders to raise their risk of being hurt in order for pedestrians to not have to pause a few seconds and then put themselves in potential danger anyway.
If they don’t cross then you go. This situation happens all the time - quite often other road users with priority give way, think of approaching a line of parked cars on your side and preparing to give way only for the car coming in the other direction to stop for you. It isn’t really a problem.
The benefit of the new rule (which only really clarifies what was there before) is that it should encourage drivers to broaden their understanding of lane discipline and crossing the paths of other road users, whether they be pedestrians established in their lane (the path) or cyclists in a cycle lane or filtering.
The issue i have with this rule change is that it needs an advertising campaign to raise awareness of it.
In my view, it's poorly worded and consequently ofttimes misunderstood, taken far too literally and badly executed by a lot of road users. As you say, it's frequently a judgement call and there is more than enough evidence to suggest that on the roads, the judgement of the vast majority is sketchy at best, whether they are pedestrians, cyclists or motorists. From what I've been seeing in more recent times, it has encouraged an ever increasing abdication of personal responsibility and increasingly witless behaviour on behalf of pedestrians and cyclists and muddied the waters of "rights of way" - perhaps we should all remind ourselves of the following little rhyme on that particular topic:-
"Here lies the body of William May,
Who died maintaining his right of way-
He was right, dead right, as he sped along,
But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong".
In short, being "right" is little consolation when you end up in the back of an ambulance or, worse, laying prematurely on a mortuary slab - walking, riding, driving - all come with personal responsibility, accountability and consequences.
Attitude has always been the biggest barrier to road safety and you can't reliably legislate behaviour that is universal, no matter how some might wish or believe otherwise, because human beings are not all wired the same way. Courtesy and consideration, whilst considered desirable, admirable and strived for by some, is not even on the radar of others. Common sense, duties of care, being well mannered and so much more, like it or not, just don't form part of many people's makeup.
IF I recall correctly there was some publicity around placing more responsibility on the vehicle that can do most harm, Consequently some pedestrians see this as you have to mind me. I have tried to drum your rhyme into my children.
As a pedestrian I actually avoid crossing at a junction. if I have to cross at one and somebody stops for me I'll wave them on. If I'm driving I wiil only stop for peds waiting to cross if I can make sure it is safe. Exiting roundabouts, especially multilane is a definite no as I have no real control over other vehicles. These H rules are badly thought out and can create real danger!
As a Norwegian, it's very interesting to see how this is done in the UK. In the example videos you show from roundabouts, for example, there would always be a zebra crossing, had this been in Norway. Giving way to pedestrians is therefore a matter of course here, and it's been that way for decades. 11:23, for example - that would be a zebra crossing here.
Not always. Plenty near me that have no crossing anywhere near it. Also, plenty of experienced road users who've never even heard of this rule, so it's hasn't been well communicated.
@@richardclarke9966 In Norway, anywhere where there's a pavement that leads pedestrians to cross a road, there is a zebra crossing. You'll be hard pressed to find any exceptions. If there are native road users here who don't know that they should yield to pedestrians, they should hand in their license.
@@hadtopicausernameto be honest at least 60% of the drivers I see should hand in their licenses anyway.
Many thanks for a clear video on this subject which I have been going on about for months now.
Until the DVSA change the Highway Code so that the wording on roundabouts reflects H2 or H2 is specifically referenced in Rule 187, as it is in Rule 170, I will not be applying H2 at the exit to roundabouts unless the circumstances are exceptional.
There is no downside to this from a legal perspective as any prosecution for not following H2 at a roundabout will fail.
Imagine its a roundabout of three lanes with two leading to a motorway slip road. Cars doing 40mph+ passing each other, expected to stop for someone waiting to cross. Crazy rule.
Such roundabout usually have no pedestrian access or have controlled crossings. Otherwise it is exactly the same as a zebra crossing over a multilane road or do you have trouble with those too?
I agree I use a shared cycle path on a local dual carriageway which ends at the M58 roundabout the path has barriers and give way markings on the ground I would no way in a million year's ride or step out expecting traffic to give way , use common sense and don't put yourself in danger
One thing I do as a pedestrian - if I want you to stop and give me priority, I'm right up to the kerb and looking at you. If I'd rather wait until there's a gap, I'll wait much further from the kerb and looking away from you - often at a gap a few cars behind you that I reckon will be the safest time for me to cross.
Just found your channel and I feel I learnt some really useful things from watching this video. Can you do one on tailgaters and how to deal with them as that's one of my biggest bugbears out on the road.
The biggest anomaly is where you have a cross-roads, traffic turning into and out of the side roads should give way to pedestrians as per the rules. Traffic going straight ahead minor road to minor road is not turning and not covered by the give way rule.
A girl local to me said to her friend, it's ok we have priority to cross now. That was the last ever words she spoke .
I was going to ask you about this as it was brought up before on the blackbelt barrister channel regarding the legalities
When I'm a pedestrian, I really hate it when a driver takes it upon themselves to stop and let me across a road where I've decided I'm going to wait. They put me in the position where I have to assess whether the car behind might overtake them, or maybe there's a motorbike filtering down the outside that I can't see, or a bike up the inside. Maybe something coming the other way on the other side that the driver hasn't seen or thought about.
What's worse is that they do this to my kids, who are old enough to cross the road on their own, but not old enough to drive, and don't have the perspective or experience to deal with these more complex situations, and certainly do not need an adult in a car gesturing at them to cross the round when it's not safe to do so.
Recently, while out with my son, someone decided to stop his car at a random point on the road, no junction, and let us cross. I was deliberately looking the other way, which I frequently do to discourage drivers from doing exactly this. My son said "I *think* he's letting us cross, so I had to turn and look, and indeed he appeared to be. Hard to be certain, in the dark especially, what a driver is actually intending. Even for me. Almost impossible for a teenage non-driver. I still would have preferred for him to not have stopped, but since he'd done it, we decided to step out. At the exact some moment, he decided he'd waited long enough and set off again, nearly running us over and having to stop again suddenly. All this happened on an otherwise empty road.
I applaud your efforts to help people navigate these difficult rules.
The problem is that they _are_ difficult to follow and that they encourage dangerous behaviour.
Drivers that are skilful, careful, considerate and conscientious will be able to follow these rules, but they were never the problem.
The danger always was from drivers that aren't concentrating or are just belligerent or selfish.
They will not have changed.
The difference now is that pedestrians will feel that they are safe to step out and have no idea what kind of driver they are trusting their lives to.
I say it again and again watching great vids like this: As a vulnerable road user - a motorcyclist - you are trained to be responsible _for yourself_ if you want to stay alive and to act accordingly, ie. assume drivers have not seen you or even are out to kill you.
The new rules encourage the exact opposite. It may be morally correct that less vulnerable road users should act with more responsibility, but it is stupid to set road rules according to some kind of moral sensibility. The rules should be strictly according to what is most sensible and will keep people alive (and keep the traffic moving, to be honest). They should encourage the most vulnerable to be most careful and keep the traffic flowing in a smooth, predictable way.
The new rules encourage pedestrians and cyclists to use the roads just as they fancy and expect drivers to be able to see in all directions at all times and read the minds of everyone in a 100m radius.
NB the Department of Transport is not the DVSA ... so they responded correctly, they said they would forward it to the correct agency, but gave you generic boiler-plate advice in the mean time
Hi James my opinion it's dangerous, earlier today I had a truck behind me very close so I decided not to stop, I certainly do this normally but also have been overtaken a few times putting the pedestrian at risk
@@AlanMacdonald-on6nd absolutely, sometimes it just will make no sense to stop. I agree sometimes it can even be dangerous trying to be ‘nice’
I completely understand why people don’t want to give way to pedestrians at roundabouts and that is because many drivers see a roundabout as a race track, accelerating hard to get off it as quickly as possible. I have said many times before that H2 was introduced with the best intentions of making everyone more aware of their surroundings and more importantly an attempt to get drivers to make better observations. This is true for a large part but we need to be slower in what we do.
We cannot accelerate hard onto a roundabout and expect to give way when we suddenly see a pedestrian waiting to cross. If we enter a roundabout and drive appropriately it is possible to slow sufficiently for pedestrians to cross. I do all the time and rarely have issues.
One thing I will say and that is the Highway Code and supporting official guides are poorly worded. A roundabout _is_ a junction and therefore H2 prevails despite the poor to non existent references in the roundabout section. If you are think about it, you are always giving way at the entrance and always turning left at the exit 😉
As always though, if you don’t feel safe or comfortable then do not do it. Just because others can and have few issues doesn’t mean that it is the same in all areas. The overriding commandments are keeping yourself and others safe, and the rules say when you should give priority but you mustn’t cause a collision in taking (or giving) priority
Try doing it on a motorcycle (or a bicycle as I think the rules apply).
You will not only endanger yourself with the fair possibility of being bit by a car that didn't notice you or expect you to stop, but you endanger the pedestrian by encouraging them to cross when you have partially obscured their view of the junction and the confused angry or oblivious driver that chooses to go around your stopped motorcycle.
Sure, if everyone was a skilled driver and had great mental ability, it would be fine. These rules are supposed to protect people, though and basing rules for safety on unrealistic expectations in the trickiest and most dangerous of situations is crazy.
If instructors are struggling with these rules (and they are) then the 'average driver' has no chance and half the drivers are 'below average'.
The bottom line is 'IT'S Dangerous for the pedestrian" I have been overtaken when stopped on a dual exit roundabout when a youth walked out in front of me.
Coming from a country where you will be fined if you don’t stop for a pedestrian round a bought are treated as such. If your exit is not clear. Do not enter. If you get caught out and enter only to discover traffic backed up or a pedestrian waiting to cross have fun. Perhaps it’s a large roundabout with tall decorative features preventing you from being able to see your exit. Your going to be going round and round and round until you can get out.
If memory serves the BlackBelt barrister suggested that the rules apply on entry to and exit from a roundabout. However, I think that it is not cut and dried, being dependent on multiple factors.
One thing that I did see a while ago, a person was waiting to cross our road at its junction with a more major road, a learner driver turned left into our road and did not stop for the pedestrian to cross.
The second sentence of the letter you received is ambiguous.
One interpretation is "This has been passed to [us at] the Department of Transport to respond [and here is our response]."
If that _is_ the sender's intended meaning, then it is reasonable to assume that they consider the matter closed, which would explain the the absence of any subsequent correspondence.
I was riding my bike on a cycle path beside quite a busy, fast moving, ring road recently. I stopped at a crossing point, planning to wait for a gap so I could cross safely. I was at least 2 feet from the kerb, waiting, when a driving instructor approaching from my left must have given his/her pupil the word to stop for me to cross. This lead to traffic coming from the other direction to also stop. To avoid more confusion I took the opportunity to cross. I think they were in the wrong. There could have been drivers following them taken by surprise causing a bump. I'm sure I was right to wait. Yes?
2:07 I was really surprised to hear what you had to say about angling the car when turning left, because doing that is exactly what is needed to stop an oncoming car doing a right turn thinking you are stopping for them. If you don't angle in, you stop for the pedestrian, but a oncoming vehicle thinks you are letting them go, and turns into conflict with the pedestrian. And it looks like exactly that nearly happened in the clip you showed at 1:32 - the clip cuts off but looks like the oncoming car turned in while you waiting. The starting to turn in is a critical part of communicating to other drivers what you are doing.
I'm not in the UK, so I'm possibly looking at this through a clear lens, but while you explain it as it is to protect pedestrians with cars, I see this as protecting pedestrians as they become more self entitled and won't take responsibility for their own actions.
Where I live, at light controlled intersections, if you are turning, you do have a responsibility to give way to pedestrians, but this turn is usually made from stationery or slow speeds.
Roundabouts are designed to keep traffic flowing, and that is best aided by having vehicles clear the roundabout, not stop on it, blocking access for others, while pedestrians cross.
Then you have the matter of cyclists and motorcyclists who are put at higher risk of being rear ended if they stop.
I'm a driver, cyclist and obviously a pedestrian as is everyone at some time or other, TBH I always thought giving way to pedestrians crossing junctions was always a rule before H2, not roundabouts though.
As a pedestrian I expect to be given priority from vehicles approaching the entrance to roundabouts and will be assertive to that fact without actually walking in front of them of course, but at the exits to roundabouts I won't push this priority at all as I think it's too dangerous for vehicles.
I crossed the entrance to a roundabout while cycling recently and a woman who was approaching beeped at me, the trouble is they just drive away not giving you any opportunity to explain I would ask when was the last time they updated on the Highway code.
I was thinking of having a copy handy that I can wave at some motorists who don't seem to know the rules.
This video has finally helped me twig as to why cyclists aren't allowed to turn left at junctions where cars are waiting to turn left, but they are allowed to go straight through, even though that is even more stupidly dangerous for them (as the car clearly might turn across them).
It's because pedestrians might be crossing that side road.
Of course, the cyclist should be following the same rules that car is re. waiting for pedestrians to cross, but I guess they often don't and the car, by stopping even though their exit is 'clear', is obscuring the cyclist's view of the pedestrians.
And of course it's still a stupid rule encouraging cyclists to do one of the most dangerous things on the road they can (passing a vehicle on the side it is signalling to turn), but the point is I only now, after making a few attempts, understand one of the small nuances within that rule.
These rules are bonkers. It's like they tried to work out the best ways to encourage all vulnerable road users to endanger themselves, but make it look like they are doing 'the right thing'.
Few people have a chance of getting it right, even if skilled and willing. And the rules, even when followed, often won't make it safer (might even make it worse).
It doesn't encourage them to endanger themselves, well not unless they are misreading or misinterpreting it, or not even reading it and just going by what someone on social media is saying! In fact, it explicitly tells them not to endanger themselves. For example:
"None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety."
And:
"The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident."
So, the Highway Code is telling drivers that they should give way to pedestrians, cyclists, etc. It isn't telling those pedestrians or cyclists to just "go for it" and endanger themselves. They have priority, but should be waiting to see that they have been seen and have been given way to before proceeding.
The problem is people taking account of some rules but not others, and therefore misinterpreting what they are reading.
There are rules that tell pedestrians how to cross the road safely (I've seen comments elsewhere saying the green cross code doesn't exist any more, but it's still there), ones that tell cyclists to take care when passing slow moving or stationary traffic, etc.
For example, some cyclists read H3, telling drivers to give way to cyclists at junctions, and misinterpret that to be telling cyclists that they have a "right of way" and can just go ahead. They don't seem to read the wording that I've quoted above, nor rule 76 for cyclists telling them they have priority, but to take care and check they have been seen and given way to when they are going ahead.
"Going straight ahead. If you are going straight ahead at a junction, you have priority over traffic waiting to turn into or out of the side road, unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise (see Rule H3). Check that you can proceed safely, particularly when approaching junctions on the left alongside stationary or slow-moving traffic. Watch out for drivers intending to turn across your path. Remember the driver ahead may not be able to see you, so bear in mind your speed and position in the road." (There's also another paragraph relating to the hazards of large vehicles).
So, a long reply, but the rules are ok, it's how they are being (mis)interpreted by some people and (mis)reported on in the mainstream and social media that I think it's causing some vulnerable road users to take risks that they shouldn't be taking.
On roundabouts (mini) surely if a pedestrian has started to cross , stepped off the pavement, the driver should give way regardless of if they have right of way? Local old T junction (minor rds) now a mini r/a! Twice now I’ve nearly been hit as they turn left as I start to cross, I think the drivers were so intent in checking vehicles coming from the right they just didn’t look!
Superb explanation James. Don't hold your breath for an apology from AN or BB😂
I often stop at the entrance to roundabouts to let pedestrians cross as I'm in stop-start traffic anyway, but rarely at roundabout exits as I feel there's a significant risk of my stopping being unexpected enough that a vehicle behind me could hit me or I could cause the whole roundabout to come to a stop for these pedestrians. If they make a move to cross then of course I'm slowing or stopping to keep a safe distance from them, but I've had some very late braking from cars behind me on some of those occasions.
I will also stop at the entrance to a roundabout for pedestrians only if it is a single lane entrance, where I block anyone overtaking me. That way the pedestrian is ' safe '. But on exit that is just dangerous to me and any vehicles behind me
thank you James. great to see hear the evidence-based technique you apply. a paragraph in a letter would be unlikely to override the official documents if ever called upon. It's a shame you are too far away, otherwise you would be first pick to teach my children!
@@familytabletch7517 very kind of you, I really appreciate it
Your point about angling the car at 2:11 is interesting. I would personally angle the car, although maybe not that particular angle. The problem with stopping before the junction is that oncoming vehicles may think you're letting them go first, which can then lead to the pedestrian getting hit. By 'angling' a bit, you will potentially shield the pedestrian, but equally, you may block the view of the pedestrian. I think this is one reason why this rule is problematic.
Also, I really can't see how angling the car would lead to tooting by other drivers. I would have thought stopping further back would lead to tooting as it's a very strange place to stop. Is the person parking by the junction? Is the learner stopping to perform a manoeuvre?
By looking at various youtubers etc., I came to the conclusion that this rule does apply to roundabouts. I honestly don't know whether this is true. One of the problems is that people don't want to cross when you stop. I had one recently (at a normal junction, not a roundabout) who waved me across after I had stopped.
'Is the pedestrian aware of my approach?' is the main question in my mind. And I bear in mind that pedestrians are permitted to use the public highway - my right to the road is no greater than theirs.
On the point about not encouraging pedestrians across the road - should also apply when deciding to let other motorists out of side roads for the same reasons. Very few people understand this.
Those people that are trying to cross at the round-about, just cross earlier 10 metres down the road. Putting crossings at junctions is stupid. Yeah I get the idea that cars can see you (as long as there aren't cars waiting at that junction blocking the view). But its stupid because as a pedestrian, you have no control. Its the definition of putting yourself at risk. Never cross at junctions. I don't care what any book says. Its not safer than when its physically impossible for a car to hit you. You can see cars for a long distance and they can see you. That's the best scenario. Often junctions are at curves where cars can't see you. Even if they come in slowly, its very sudden. Just cross the road even 6 metres down the road and you're much safer. The car has much more time to brake. Go 15 metres down the road and cars can't hit you even if they wanted to. Its just not possible. I've never crossed a road as if I'm walking on a footpath. Even at zebra crossings, I don't cross until I can see the driver has acknowldged me and all looks good. Is the highway code the reason you exist? Cause it will be the reason you don't. Its definitely a priority ticket to what lies after death.
The problem with moving down the road is if you aren't at the junction the cars don't have to stop at all.
The rules basically encourage pedestrians to pick the most dangerous place to cross.
I agree with you that it would be safer to cross further down, but people prefer to save 10 seconds and endanger themselves and now we have rules to tell them they are right to do so...
When the rules effectively said "wait until there is no traffic" it encouraged people to perhaps walk away from the busy junction and down the side road a few meters to a safe spot, because they would have to wait a few seconds anyway.
Now, in the name of making the less vulnerable more responsible, the more vulnerable are encouraged to be less responsible and, in doing so, accept more danger.
"Never cross at junctions" - I do not believe that you never cross at junctions. It's a common situation that you are walking down a main road and need to cross a small side road. Surely you don't personally (or expect others to) walk some distance down every side road?
Ive heard that some test centres are failing learners for stopping on a road to let people cross a road they are turning into as they consider them to be causing an obstruction. Have you had any experience like this and is there any way of challenging the decision if it happens to you?
@@andycross3783 I haven’t experienced it. I imagine if they are failing it either isn’t appropriate to stop, or perhaps if the pedestrian shows no sign of actually crossing they might be just sitting there unsure what to do.
The biggest problem with the H rules is that you're expecting those drivers who couldn't observe someone jumping up and down on their bonnet, and react to things 10 feet in front of them to understand when it is safe and when it isn't.
IMO correct that vehicles give way to pedestrians at junctions and on entry & exit of roundabouts. Highway code should be improved to make it crystal clear. If pedestrians are already crossing at junctions surely HWC should state they MUST be given priority.
They've made the roads more dangerous firstly by being so vague and secondly by not advertising the changes enough for the majority to be aware. Some pedestrians know the rules and take their priority when not all drivers are aware of the rules and don't realise they should be giving way and visa versa.
my original thoughts when they brought out the new priority rules for pedestrians at junctions was to give more legal backing to them in the event of a collision. before it was not a thing to think to give priority, now as a driver its something else to consider and if you hit a pedestrian, its a more slam dunk case when working out fault and compensation.
there are times i dont give way to pedestrians because i dont think its safe to do so but i do what i can when it is safe. but to me, its my fault if i dont give way to them and then hit them. before it could be argued that the pedestrian was crossing incorrectly and they should have waited and given priority to the vehicle.
i find a Should in the highway code gives a bit of play for drivers to read a situation and act in the best safe way they can see.
Hi D I UK, I had been wondering what is the proper behaviour at junctions and roundabouts while we already had advice to wait for pedestrians when exiting a junction trying to turn in was less clear. This new arrangement is much more simple and straightforward. My primary concern for many years has been my reluctance to be the agent of injury when driving, responsibility and fault are not relevant to me!. I have been aware for many years that there are a lot of pedestrians who appear to lack spacial awareness and unschooled in road safety, while this might imply that any collision is probably their fault that is of little comfort to me as the driver. It seems that this situation puts a greater duty of care on drivers and that seems fair enough to me!, the fact that I am in an enormous vehicle taking up so much more public space is a significant factor, also I am expecting to be able to travel more swiftly and in greater comfort, all things considered a bit of extra consideration is not too much to ask!.
The points you make about treating each and every traffic situation on its own merits resonates for me! while I do have a general strategic plan for each trip the precise details of each journey have to evolve as I go along. The is one aspect that I actually relish, that is the constant challenge presented by the endless variations in terrain conditions and other traffic, just the other day I was passing some very slow traffic in a queue on my bright some distance from the junction, I found myself watching more carefully as I came close to each car to be sure that none of them were going to swerve across my path!, more care than I would have taken if I had been passing them on my left!, I do this in the light of my own assessment of other's behaviour, we are mostly more familiar with checking the right hand mirror before switching to the right hand lane but not so careful switching left. I enjoy the perpetual challenge to my skill in observation and judgement, much the same applies to my practise of managing appropriate space around me, sometimes by going a bit faster sometimes by slowing a bit, I do like to have pockets of space available for me or for others. In some ways it is just like one of those computer games that were so p[opular in the early days of computers.
Cheers, Richard.
Have I got this right, a pedestrian "waiting" to cross or already crossing then I am required to stop. I am not required to stop for pedestrians walking and approaching the edge of the pavement. If they are already crossing then I obviously must stop. Is that right. Of course if they are walking and intending to cross then it is safer for the pedestrian to cross but this is not was said.
@@kevinrayner5812 yeah you’ve got it. All depends for me on what the pedestrian is doing, sometimes it looks like they’re just going to walk straight across so might change how I’m feeling
I think the rule change does cause confusion. I have seen pedestrians take liberties with the rule, expecting to have priority when they're not crossing at a junction, zebra crossing or pedestrian crossing. I'm happy to give pedestrians at junctions but I do think it is a judgement call.
If you read the road and look ahead these rules are easy to follow. Those who cannot see further than the bonnet of thier car they will struggle and really shouldn't be driving.
"H" for "hierarchy" (of vulnerability).
Assess the pedestrian's vulnerability, not whether you or they have priority.
If they have headphones on and are in their own little world, don't send them to the next one!
And quite right, if you are going to give way to a pedestrian crossing the road you are turning into, point your wheels so they are not going to be pointing at that pedestrian!
There needs to be official, unambiguous determination with unambiguous written clarification on this, because everybody is saying different things. Different people in the DVSA are saying different things, different DVSA test centres are saying different things, and different driving instructors are saying different things. You're teaching your students not to stop for predestrians wishing to cross at roundabouts. But I know other driving instructors on RUclips who are teaching their students to always stop for predestrians wishing to cross at roundabouts unless it's not safe to do so. This complete nationwide countermanding confusion is a dangerous mess which the DVSA needs to sort out. Guidance, instructions, and rules must be unambiguous, with a single and clear interpretation.
We humans are hard-wired to wait at crossings. Priority at roundabouts is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. Would you just keep walking if there's a 40-tonne truck approaching you? You have priority, don't you?
Why bother teaching children how to cross the road then.
Round abouts were Created to Remove the Congestion '" Caused by Cross Roads " now if Cars have Stop on The Round About there's going to be a Lot of Rear enders . Perhaps necessitating the Need For Overhead Foot Bridges where there's heavy Foot Traffic ..
This is why there have to be big educational campaigns when rules like these are changed. Yes drivers and cyclists are expected to update themselves but unfortunately most don’t. I genuinely believe The Highway Code needs to be taught in schools
It’s very, very simple and I have not had any problems with it.
Pedestrians on phones, wearing earphones totaly oblivious to any traffic. Many a time I have stopped and waited while they just stand in a trance state.
Ridiculous rule tbh my road is u shaped off of a three lane highway and entered at the end of a bus stop so the turn is almost invisible until right on it, it’s also a 20 mph speed drop (40-20) and one way with only room for one car once cars are parked on the right hand side, if I stop on the main highway to let a pedestrian cross the road I have been rear ended albeit very lightly, but there has been 4 car pileups from similar, I’m going to keep braking to 20 and turning in unless a pedestrian is actually in my path and F the ridiculous rule
I'm going to get a copy of that DVSA officiel guide to driving, the essential skills. I see on the DVSA Website that there's one for driving and one for motorcycling. Do you know if there's much difference and if it's worth getting both?
This video really highlights that it's a great compliment to the Highway code.
they should be crossing at blind kerbs, junction, controlled, or island crossings - not anywhere they damn well please. Whoever wrote this law up needs their head examined.
Actually pedestrians have always been able to cross the road anywhere, jay walking has never been illegal in the U.K.
I learnt the old kerb drill when I was five, the first thing it said was find a safe spot to cross. Look right, look left, look right again, if all clear cross.
@@MRCAGR1 that's still in the HC, though it says to look all around and listen, and to keep looking and listening while you cross.
@@neilp1885 the old kerb drill morphed into the green cross code, which included the keep watching and listening. I was pointing out to the original comment that pedestrians can cross the road anywhere. This puts the onus on the pedestrian to cross safely but it also puts a responsibility on those in/on mechanical vehicles (motorised and pedal) to be aware of what’s happening ahead of them and to some extent expect the unexpected.
Good stuff 👍
To me its a judgement call on what is going on around you do . Personally I don't stop at pedestrian at roundabout but may stop if appropriate. Where junctions i will slow and give the option for the pedestrian which they can take. Or if they don't want i will then carry on. I usually ask the question are they safe . Do I need to do something so they are safe
In France you give way to pedestrians.
It means when pedestrians are around you should be driving SLOWLY.
@@jfryer485 I do see it potentially heading more that way. In Norwich they updated a particularly hazardous roundabout, and it is now single lane with pedestrian and cycle crossings at every entrance and exit. Very good design, the problem…. The attitudes of people driving it! Generally much safer though
That is only true in France for Pedestrian (Zebra) Crossings since 2011. It has been the law in the UK to give priority to pedestrians at Zebra crossings even before I started driving in the 1960s.
@ Yes, road rage.
People are happy to wait 30 seconds at traffic lights.
But anticipating how not to run over a pedestrian trying to commit suicide and they think they have every right.
Exaggeration but having many family and friends knocked over and killed as well as friends killing pedestrians, I do feel rather than trappibg someone at a road block the police should follow up EVERY accident that gets reported.
In one of the above deaths, nobody was blamed but theyspent a fortune putting in a roundabout to improve safety.
I really do think in towns that not only should you drive safely but slow down and even give a wide berth to pedestrians and cyclists.
Basically a driver has a lethal weapon and the only acceptable driving technique is to help the more vulnerable and be courteous rather than getting irate at other more courteous drivers that hold you up probably ten times less than at a traffic light.
If you adopt road rage when pulled up by the police you will get KARMA straight away, so you should treat every interaction as with the same type of person and deaths and accidents might come down drastically.
My experience is driving should not mean having accidents unless there is nut at the end of the wheel.
Ever tried using a zebra crossing in America.........
Three lane highway with 30mph limit but you really take your life in your hands when trying it!
I see where you coming from, and as others have said I'd only stop if was safe to do so. Until the everyone gets the message it's doing pedestrians more harm than good. As I said before in a previous video, I wait for the pockets of space in between the cars rather than them stopping for me. Or alternatively if its busy I walk so I'm further away from the mouth of the junction. I feel like some peds take the mick sometimes and abuse the priority rule. In my honest opinion peds should wait for cars not the other way round. Obviously key thing is saftey so if they have started crossing and a car turns then they should let them finish but besides that, peds should wait in mv opinion.
Making a left turn the other day, I stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross. For my sins the driver of a car directly behind me sounded his horn and through abuse at me with language that’s unprintable. It would seem that this AH was unaware of the current rules. Roundabout are another question as there are so many different types going from the mini roundabout that’s was once a cross road or tee styled junction right up to the huge multi lane roundabouts that can be part duel carriage part single lane. There really isn’t a straight forward answer to that, other than useing ones common sense.
.
Pedestrians Have Priority On the Highway.
Unless Notices Say Otherwise.
That's it, and all about it.
.
You have to use common sense - in my opinion this rule is reasonable, as many pedestrians fail to look properly before crossing, and they shouldn’t have to wait anyway since they’re going straight ahead. However, it says should and not must, so don’t stop if everyone else isn’t going to or if someone’s driving really close behind you.
The Highway code has no legal standing, so can be ignored. Nobody has ever been prosecuted for ignoring the highway code. At best the HC is a training aid. Personally I have never read it. But I have 60+ years on the road in which I have never been involved in an accident where anyone was hurt. Nuff said.
I'd hate to see someone fail their test for not stopping to let someone cross. It feels to me it wasn't originally their intention for roundabouts to be included but now they're afraid to back down from it.
Roundabouts were deffo included from the start in my memory of the endless Facebook posts telling me 'From January 22...'
Seems more like they are now backing down to me with these caveats and lack of specificity in the sources.
@@intruder313I think that's how it's become common, from word of mouth.
@@intruder313What was the source of those Facebook posts? I'm not subscribed to anything like that.
@@intruder313 I don't remember roundabouts being included in any of the official publicity (not that there was much of it).
In the right circumstances I would stop to let pedestrians cross when I am turning into a road. I stop before turning and wait but the pedestrian does not always realise quickly that I am waiting for them to cross, this could cause a problem from other drivers getting impatient and maybe hooting. Quite often, as you say when the pedestrian starts to cross they are often only aware of me and don’t look the other way for other vehicles. Am I wrong in waving to the pedestrian to cross? This, I feel, encourages them not to look the other way, would I be at fault if they walk out in front of a vehicle in these circumstances?
@@boblawrence5011 I would definitely not say you are wrong, as instructors we try not to encourage it. But I’m sure you’ve noticed some pedestrians will not cross unless they are waved across. So I would always say take each situation as it comes, which it certainly sounds like you’re doing
Can you please start your videos with the statement that was included on the DOT Email/letter...
"...all road users, cyclists and pedestrians are required to comply with road traffic law in the interests of their own saftey and that of other road users..."
Then during any video clips and from the drivers perspective show that other road users also need to improve thier attitudes to other road users.
In this particular one the pedestrian who clearly was not interested in their own safety at the road junction, "..pedestrians are required to comply with road traffic law in the interests of their own safety.."
Always add if its safe to do so to every rule. If in doubt stay out.
Pedestrians don't even bother to look now while crossing
I am a 88 year old driver ii used to hold hgv1 ang public transport class 1 allso now of couujrse i only hold a normal car licence , i oplways give way to pedestrons IF IT IS SAVE to do so,causion is the by word.
The letter says you emailed DVSA. The letter you have got *is* the response from DfT
@@deadlymarkham I didn’t though, I emailed the department for transport. It even has a department for transport stamp
5:12 that is not a pedestrian it is a cyclist, they should have dismounted first before crossing. I stop at smaller roundabouts where the speed is low but there are roundabouts were it is not practical or safe. When I travel to work I go around a roundabout that is to big and fast to stop on the exit but I try to stop on the entrance.
Very good.
Wasn't the rule on turning into a side street in the rules before 2022? Also, H2 requires the driver to cede priority only when safe to do so, and as roundabouts are junctions, it applies here as well. In neither clip, it wasn't safe for your learners to stop as they had traffic close behind.
I'm sure I hear Ashley Neal said he contacted the DVSA and was informed roundabouts are junctions
Exactly, although it is kind of like asking if roundabout roads are roads. Yeah, why wouldn't they be? It is kind of a obvious answer question.
Roundabout junctions are... junctions. There are rules for junctions. Every single rule in the book is not repeated for every single section - you would have a book 100 times as big and heavy. Giveway marking at roundabouts follow the giveway markings rules. Stopping distances follow the stopping distances rules. Junctions follow the junction rules.
The only leeway is the 'waiting to cross' being subjective, similar to Zebra crossings. If the person doesn't look like they are waiting to cross then it is valid to continue - you better be able to show this if something happens, though.
@@Lanzy4lee yes , in one of his videos he also states one of his instructors learners failed a test for stopping at a roundabout exit. The examiner said ‘it wasn’t a formal crossing, you should not have stopped’
I’ve stopped at about 3 roundabouts , it’s very rarely safe
@@aimerw What matters in this context is whether the Highway Code treats a roundabout as a type of junction, or as something different with separate rules. It clearly treats them as 2 separate things; the phrase "at junctions and roundabouts" is even used in one rule. If they intended H2 to apply at roundabouts, they would have modified the wording of the roundabout rules, but they clearly made the decision not to.
@@aimerw I'm not sure if it's just the way you phrased it, but it seems like you are saying the markings and rules at roundabouts are the same as at "normal" give way junctions.
At give way junctions, the give way mark for pulling out of the junction into the more major road is a double dashed line, and the side of the junction that you enter from the major road is marked with a single dashed line.
The double dashed line and give way warning triangle at a normal give way junction indicate a requirement that you MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging.
At a roundabout, the give way line for entering the roundabout is a single dashed line, and there is no marking across the carriageway for leaving a roundabout.
The single dashed line marking for entering a roundabout indicates that you should give priority to traffic approaching from your right.
There is no mark for leaving the roundabout, you are effectively continuing on the road. (Yes, you indicate left to leave, but that's because the road/lane often also continues around the roundabout (not always, you may be in a lane that is dedicated to leaving) and because it is useful for traffic trying to enter to know that you aren't continuing in the roundabout, and for traffic near you in the roundabout to know that you are leaving and may be crossing their path.)
So, at a normal junction there's usually a major and a minor road, with the major road continuing (no markings across the carriageway), whereas at a roundabout all roads usually have equal priority, they all have a line showing that you should give priority to traffic coming from the right.
@@JamesSimpkinsADI yes I agree I very rarely use this on the exit of a junction especially multiple lane.
The main problem with this is being rammed
Driving, Riding and pedestrian road awareness has become terrible since 2020. I come across it all on a weekly basis.
so far ive only given way to them when approaching a roundabout, i also dont think ive done it on one that isnt a mini one, yet. i wouldnt dream of doing it when exiting a roundabout, holy fuck is that unsafe for everyone
This is why there is no dotted white line at the exit from a roundabout. Different road markings to reflect different expectations.
Yes you should give way to pedestrians on the road and you should also stop parking on the bloody foot path
0:50 I try and teach people facts and not my opinion
2:08 where in any part of the guidance does it talk about where and how you should wait to allow pedestrians to cross? Isn't this simply your opinion?
Social Media was SWAMPED with updates on this rule for the months before it came into being and once it did I immediately started to exercise my priority as a pedestrian. Years later it's slowly taking root but most drivers still don't know/observe it. My first beep was yesterday when someone beeped at the car CORRECTLY giving way to me as I crossed a tiny side street.
The social media posts made it clear that this included roundabouts.
I see side streets and roundabouts as 'invisible zebra crossings' now. But I think I'll back down on roundabouts now as they have not put those into writing as clearly as with minor roads.
I'm sure I'll be ranting about my priority from a hospital bed some day but until then I keep on walking. (I'm also a motorist)
self-righteous, pompous and vindictive. seeking harm for yourself, fine. Seeking harm to others, not fine. Unfortunately the person that will end up hitting you, won't deserve to have the suffering you cause them. But you would.
There is also the issue of traffic light controlled junctions. The Highway code references that pedestrians " should " wait for the green man, but so many have read ' part ' of the Highway code and assume it is everywhere. Even in the middle of a major road.
Are you brave enough to take on the 40mph everywhere brigade? how would they fare in a test? nearly 100% old men who have the same reactions as drunk drivers. if your not sat at a junction waiting for twenty-odd cars to pass your stuck behind them on a main road. usually, the same sort that straddle merge in turn lanes so nobody can get past
There are too many 'ifs' for this to make any sense.
I think the biggest problem here is lack of clear, unambiguous, properly publicised information from the DVSA. There is obviously a lot of confusion out there: several driving instructors, and many other people with opinions, have been putting out videos and trying to make sense of the rules, their followers have requested it, and the comments sections are usually hotly debated. If that's happening, then the message from the DVSA has not got out effectively. It's also clear that even people from organisations that should be able to give the official line are giving varied responses and opinions. It should _not_ be opinional.
They need to make clear, unambiguous, very public statements - and then repeat them until the majority have got it. Remember the old "public information broadcasts?" I can still remember the detail of many of the messages that they put across. Maybe we need something like that.
I found the comparing of junctions to roundabouts in the official sources interesting. Junctions: clear instruction to give way to pedestrians crossing roads into which or from which you are turning. Roundabouts: be *aware* of pedestrians. Quite a different message. It makes me think that either the writers saw a clear distinction between the two, or didn't notice the apparent contradiction. I suspect the former, but since then loads of people have said "yeah, but a roundabout is a junction" and that has prompted the variety of opinions that have been aired ever since.
Again, the DVSA need to get their message out in a clear, unambiguous way that reaches as many people as possible. So far, this has not happened.
The way it's written, I think the Highway Code does see junctions and roundabouts as 2 separate things.
@@ado543 It does seem to, and the information presented by James in this video certainly seems to support that position. I think the problem is that, since the release of the new rules, people have been saying, "but what about roundabouts, they're junctions too?" and people have been putting forward opinions based on that question, and assumptions about the answer to it.
That's where I feel that the DVSA really need to step in and make a clear, unabiguous statement specifically addressing this. They, as the standards setting body, need to clear up the confusion and misinformation so that we can all move forward with implementing the rules consistently and safely.
Not sure about your advice - the statements for turning have the word 'should' and not 'must' this puts this category into the same situation as those for roundabouts i.e. it is not mandatory. I've always followed the basic rule that the road is not yours, and to drive defensively. The approach and exit speeds on most roundabouts is too fast - this is the main problem that any pedestrian has when trying to cross. Too many aggressive drivers on the roads today - it's little wonder that 20mph zones are in effect as a result of this behaviour.
@@RS-il5zw I’ve never said you must stop for pedestrians, I agree far too many aggressive drivers
Also you show that the rules are contradictory, same thing with so many others
1.42 secs into video shows the Stupidity of pedestrians crossing because you have stopped and they perceive you said it’s ok to cross and they just don’t look at the main road traffic turning in and could have been knocked over. Also I believe you shouldn’t wave to them to cross as you then become liable if an accident happens which then confuses the crossing pedestrian. I also walk most evenings crossing numerous junctions and not once so far have they stopped for me. Just a joke
Only stopped once, got hit from behind. Stupid rule.
Sheer lunacy! Take away the onus on the pedestrian to be responsible for their own safety; then place that responsibility in the lap of the driver. further increasing inconvenience, the chance of errors and unpredictability. Cyclists too have been given '''further rights'''; has the safety of cyclists increased? No! Why? because of their proven recklessness! Their failure to recognise that they are responsible for their own safety, as well as failing to give consideration to other road users out of sheer '''privileged arrogance''', road users that may be inconvenienced by THEIR actions. These '''new practices''' have been introduced because of a failure to address the issue of carelessness on the part of certain pedestrians and those others who use our pavements irresponsibly or illegally. The Americans long had a law against '''jaywalking''', it is about time we adopted the same attitude. There is no time that I would be stupid enough to cross a road if there was a vehicle approaching or indicating to turn into a junction; nor would I expect a driver to stop at any other than a designated crossing ( zebra, light controlled, or patrolled ). As a driver, cyclist and pedestrian, I recognise that motorists have enough on their plate without having to comply with another stupid law..
01:47 never ever beckon the pedestrian to cross the road, let them make up their own minds, if you beckon them to cross the road you’re potentially inviting them into danger, if they get injured you’ll get the blame because you invited them to cross the road, never ever take on that responsibility.
All drivers should recognise the judgement by Judge Shanti Mauger, in _Brushett v Hazeldean_ (2015) , that a pedestrian established on a road/carriageway has right of way/priority over vehicles.
That means that when turning at any junction, including a roundabout, it is required that anybody in control (driving or riding) of a vehicle (or a horse or herd of sheep!) *must* give way to a pedestrian established on the road, otherwise it is an offence.
The rules in the Highway Code are very clear about that. What is under discussion here is where the pedestrian is not established on the road but is waiting on the pavement.