This Will Be Chaos! Highway Code Priority Updates for Pedestrians, Cyclists, Road Users
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 24. 01. 2022
- New changes to the Highway Code could cause chaos!
Also Me: @blackbeltsecrets
Insta: @blackbeltbarrister
Disclaimer: Neither this nor any other video, may be taken as legal advice. I accept no liability whatever for any reliance placed upon it, as there is no contract between us and I am not instructed by you.
đ Become a channel member to access stripes and perks!
/ @blackbeltbarrister
MY CAMERA GEAR
đ„ Big Camera amzn.to/3tW8nPU
đ„ Small Camera amzn.to/2RB7ez9
đ RODE VIDEOMic Pro+ amzn.to/2QCJURi
Gobe ND Filter amzn.to/2R3eEuA
Neewer Ring Light amzn.to/3aOkLtT
Switch Pod amzn.to/3sZb8yA
JOBY Tripod amzn.to/3dXJYDT
External Media Drive amzn.to/3uxNDOQ đ Brilliant contract law book:
amzn.to/2PHC2O1 đ Excellent book with an overview of criminal law:
amzn.to/3gTPEAV đ Learn more about trespass and tort law:
amzn.to/32N6TLS
(Affiliate link)
LAW FAQS
âą Common Law
CONSUMER LAW PLAYLIST:
âą Consumer Law
TREE LAW PLAYLIST:
âą Tree Law Miniseries
ROAD TRAFFIC LAW PLAYLIST:
âą Road Traffic Law
FAMILY LAW PLAYLIST:
âą Family Law
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER:
I'm a Barrister of England and Wales.
Videos for educational guidance only, Always seek advice before taking action. Videos on my channel are not legal advice and should not be taken as such. I accept no liability for any reliance placed upon the content of these videos or references, therein.
#blackbeltbarrister #highwaycode #drivinglaw
Description contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.
As a pedestrian with 40 years of experience, I'm not going to step out onto the road in front of a car and assume it will stop.
Get out of here with that sensible logic!
As a motorcyclist it always worries me when I slow down to turn whilst indicating that some cars are so close behind me that if I had to stop for a pedestrian that is standing at the side of the road I am going to get wiped out , It has happened to me in the past and with this change I think its going to get more prevalent . Another point , are pedestrians going to put their phones away and take out ear buds before crossing or standing so that they are aware of what's going on around them? Surely as you said people have to take responsibility for their actions, pedestrians as well .
I totally agree with you. As to the headphone/screen staring oblivious pedestrians, well thatâs their fault. Can people be fined for not being specially aware?
Your so right. First rule of the road is â look after your own safety as everyone is out to kill you!â
Yeah I agree dude, when I'm on the bike I'm looking out for who's trying to kill me and I want my focus to be in staying alive, the pedestrians can do the same as far as I'm concerned, they are responsible for their safety, I will NOT be stopping at T-junctions when it's clear of vehicles, I'm I'm fined or hit a pedestrian that isn't paying attention then so be it, I will still be alive and so will all the spatially aware pedestrians.
Fully agree with you. It must happen to me every 2 to 3 weeks where I live. Your driving along and someone is walking along the pavement and then just walks out to cross the road without looking or hearing vehicles because of wearing earbuds etc.
Totally on point ,well done. ive fitted rear and front dash cams to protect against being hit now ,my last car was hit at least 6 times in 2 years with shitty parking and driving too close.
As usual the government has taken something simple, effective and well grained into people from an early age. ie. look both ways & cross when safe to do so, and changed it into utter confusion that'll result in Deaths & increased Motor Vehicle accidents. Yes we all give way and prioritise pedestrians / cyclists, but this rule change encourages people to just step off & hope the driver stops.
Andrew Gilbert
What happened to the "Green Cross Code Man" - did he get run over?
This rule is basically taking away personal responsibility for your own actions. Pedestrians and cyclists can now wonder freely without looking and then have an injury claim.
@@Derek-qu8qi You don't get compo if you're dead mate.
@@redblade8160 sadly Dave Prowse (a man from my hometown) passed away some years ago.
Doubtless some civil servant on ÂŁ100k a year most likely. đ
I am a pedestrian, a cyclist and a driver. I think the new rules are crazy. Who on earth dreamed them up - same person who decided smart (aka dumb) motorways were a good idea?
Cycling Campaign groups.
Here's a starter for 10 and you can phone a fried if you need help...... name something our successive goverments have got right since you were born.
Ah yes the evil cyclist put forward that idea lol. Don't be daft!
@@dallysinghson5569 Not THE cyclist, but pro cycling groups,with the backed agenda of the government to implement the latest bandwagon that's been jumped on------ the environment.
Look at who benefits positively and who loses negatively.
As a pedestrian I would be waiting for the car to turn and Iâll be telling my children to do the same these are the most ridiculous rule changes ever
As an HGV driver of 35 years, all I can see this achieving is to cause more incidents not fewer. Whilst there are a small minority of drivers who think they own the road, and also a miniorty of cyclists and pedestrians who just simply never think of the consequences of their action. The last majority of road users use the best tool available to them, common sense!
To try and shoe horn this into an arbitrary set of rules, just doesn't make sense as those same rules cannot account for either the multitude of circumstances of the multiple of people's individual views or interpretation of any given circumstance.
Where I can and road conditions permit I try to allow pedestrians, cycles, horses, and motor traffic the room they require or the gap needed to cross or pull out, simply as a matter of courtesy; education would be a far more effective tool than these changes to the highway code, that will be at best ignored by most and at worst abused by a minority. Just my two pence
Nobody is going to follow these rules the militant lycra brigade will take full advantage though no doubt. Most of the people currently on the road will not even be aware of the change neither will pedestrians and your average cyclist won't either. The few that do follow these changes are going to cause total chaos on the roads.
All designed too piss the motorist off even more,(to give up).pedestrians,cyclists and horse riders have more right of way than motorists and yet contribute nothing.whoâs the idiots with these ideas.
"Common sense" is not the best available tool for people who don't have common sense, & if your common sense tells you to break the rules as laid down in the highway code, you should be off the road.
"Where I can and road conditions permit I try to allow pedestrians, cycles, horses, and motor traffic the room they require"...That's just terrifying. You should ALWAYS give them room & it's your responsibility to drive to conditions.
This is why we need these rule changes.
@@mauriceadamson224 pedestrians and cyclist,horse riders don't contribute to what exactly????
@@mauriceadamson224 all tax payers contribute.
I think I'll stick to using the green cross code and will continue teaching my grandchildren it's the best way to cross, it's been around long enough to know it works.
and it has a low carbon footprint
â@@truthgiver8286???
@@dylancode Think about it GREEN cross code
@@truthgiver8286 Yes, I get the joke now, took a bit of rereading đ
Apart from being absolutely ridiculous I perceive this insane change is inherently dangerous to all concerned. There is a wonderful piece of advice that I feel sure many readers will know⊠âdonât try and fix anything that doesnât need fixing!â
This area of the highway code did not require any updates which can only serve to cause confusion for all members of the public. May I respectfully suggest that the ones who thought this absolutely absurd and potentially lethal rule submit themselves to sectioning under the mental health act before someone gets killed.
One cannot possibly perceive how this new rule can be safer than the original rule it replaces. Please accept this comment as constructive criticism. As a professional driver for 40+ years I will always do what is correct on matters of road safety in respect of pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, if people do not respect other road users their licenses must be revoked, that should make the roads much safer for all.
May I suggest that, instead of dreaming up irrational and utterly superfluous rules the heads of road safety should focus on the appalling state of many of the roads and pavements in this country, this I feel would be a far more worthy cause to pursue.
I rest my case.
I am a cyclist a car driver pedestrian and a horse rider the only one out of those four I agree needed changing is for horses
@@maxinedurling3425 Also a cyclist, car driver, pedestrian and horse rider and I agree 100%
Mark Percival
Look at the bigger picture, don't you think this is all part of the governmentâs strategy to deliberately cause chaos in people's lives (many absurd rulings are going on right now)?
@@maxinedurling3425 I don't ride, but I totally agree about horses. I've seen cars overtake horses WAY too close, and cut in front of them. Me. I think twice about overtaking horses. On one occasion, I could have overtaken safely. But something about the way the horse was moving didn't seem right. So I waited. And a few seconds later, the rider lost control, the horse moved across the road. If I had started overtaking,. Well, it would not have been pretty (I was in a 3 1/2 ton van). From what I see, many motor vehicle users, simply don't understand, that a horse can be unpredictable. Even in experience hands.
@@redblade8160 I think a good part of this is political and ideological. A lot of the consultation has been with cyclists, horse riders, and those that don't drive. Since when has Chris Boardman been an expert on transport issues? They've got him on board too. What it will put in people's heads -bikers, horse riders, is the attitude "I can therefore I will" Horses are a menace and the people that ride them are very stupid and naive at times...
As Pedestrians we were taught to âLook right, look left, look right againâ. Later called the âGreen Cross Codeâ. This made sure we were safe when crossing, allowing Cars to go 1st. NOT walk out and hope youâve been seenđ
I've seen so many folks just walk out without even looking as I'm turning previously. I think they've just changed to rule to match existing behaviour (lemmings?)
You forgot the Tufty Club!
Itâs like walking out into a used gun range expecting people to hold their fire. Unnecessary danger
I can see David Prowse doing a facepalm right now đ€Šââïž
Kerb drill. Worked fine.
As a pedestrian I have always been taught to wait until traffic has passed and I'm not about to change - it's not worth the risk! I shall be teaching the grand-children to continue to use the old way , it's definitely safer.
and the fact that you are still alive tends to prove it works.
Good man. And thought itâd be only just me.
Also, are pedestrians goi g to have their phones permanently out with the camera on? Itâs the only way theyâre going get a successful prosecution
You owe it to your grandchildren to be assertive as a pedestrian. The habits you were taught are widespread. Because of them, pedestrian right of way is often ignored, so making roads more dangerous for those on foot, including you and your grandchildren.
Assertiveness does not mean leaping out in front of vehicles that cannot stop. But you can signal with body language or hand signals that you expect to be given right of way. Don't step out until you are certain that the vehicle will not hit you.
Why change the habit of a un hit by cars life time?
Well said Neil, absolutely do not risk your and your children's life at the peril of others, use our own common sense as we have always done and not now going to change our habits and take a risk getting killed, this new scheme is totally opposite of reducing road traffic casualties.
They seem extremely counterintuitive - most situations put those deemed the highest risk road users in more danger than they would do ordinarily
Frankly, as a driver, cyclist and walker-of-cities-and-towns, the rule regards waiting for a pedestrian to cross at a junction is ridiculous.
Pedestrians can see better (mostly), they can move more easily (mostly) and they have far more ability to judge a situation at a junction, around them, than a car that's literally just turned up doing 30+mph and taken a quick few glances, with a vehicle surrounding them, and without the ability to stop or turn on a dime, like someone who is walking.
Stupid rule that is going to cause more problems than it solves.
Perhaps it would be better to advise pedestrians to not cross at a junction, move slightly further up the road, wait sensibly for traffic to pass, and don't walk around with your head buried in your mobile phone.
I would disagree. Giving way to pedestrians at junctions isn't difficult; it just means that you don't turn when it looks like someone is about to step onto the road. Yes, in an ideal world they should be looking out for their own safety but there isn't a test to be a pedestrian, nor age, health, disability or sobriety restrictions.
aye some places cars wont move because of a constant stream of pedestrians crossing
Think it is time you surrendered your license
If you're going 30+ mph when turning at a junction, or even just approaching it, then you have no business driving a vehicle in the first place
@@H4N5O1O
Are you talking about the pedestrians walking on the pavement and crossing into the shops on their side?
It should be pointed out that the road layouts are not designed to support a hierarchy of users. They are designed for cars.
That's not strictly true is it. In fact it's not at all true. Depending on how far you go back they were designed for horse drawn chariots. They are now used by cars, trucks, busses, motor bikes, cyclists and pedestrians (and anyone else who wants to use them) and have been designed and re-designed for that purpose. If they were solely for cars not only would we go hungry and thirsty very quickly we would also have to live our lives within remarkably narrowly defined area - especially in Cities!
@@Mike_Ripper Point is that they are designed for motor vehicles, a huge majority of which are private cars.
I learned to ride a scooter in India on my holidays. There is only one rule. " l won't crash into you, and you don't crash into me!". You can walk across a mega busy road and everything will avoid you, I'm talking hundreds of scooters and cars. It's like frogger. Under cutting, over taking, on the pavement, over road works, No rules. Its organised chaos. But it works. Mainly. The problem is all the evasive action won't be allowed.
@@jimmy2minutes My daily taxi ride to work in Mumbai taught me a few things too. It seemed that the rule was be 1 inch ahead of the guy next to you and you have right of way, they must eventually give way. This when there are six cars abreast on a two lane road ! when I got to my destination I would get out of the taxi and kiss the ground. In Egypt there was a different rule for pedestrians and drivers.... Pedestrians should dive out of the way and a driver was only guilty of death of a pedestrian on the third death.
What a mistake that was. Slowly but surely thats being put right
The bigger problem is roundabouts! According to the new rules if someone is waiting to cross , let's say you are turning right 3rd exit on a normal 1 lane roundabout. As you come to take your exit and pedestrian is waiting, you must stop. However the car waiting to go straight over who is on your left is already starting to go as they expect you to carry on.
I can see loads of people getting side impacts from this.
The other car will be to blame but that's not the point. Especially when loads of people don't know the rules anyway.
I purposely drive expecting everyone around me to do the wrong thing and I try to remove that risk. But this one I cannot without driving around all roundabouts at 5 miles an hour max in case a pedestrian is waiting out of view as I come round.
Not a smart move by the powers at be.
Agree.
Roundabouts are designed to keep traffic flowing, as opposed to traffic lights which are designed to stop traffic.
IMO the new rules mean many roundabouts âshouldâ be replaced with traffic lights, with pedestrians gap.
And also many uncontrolled junctions will now require traffic lights in order to remain safe.
Someone really hasnât thought this through.
What !!! ??? Where does it say that about Roundabouts, please ... ???
@@Jester-Riddle Roundabouts are junctions. As the new rules are for junctions and it does not exempt roundabouts from the rules roundabouts are included. Whether that is oversight, a technicality, or on purpose we don't know but they are currently included.
At least there are still roundabouts! Around my area they keep changing the big roundabouts to traffic light junctions. I'm not one to be waving the environmentalist flag but this is going to cause a lot more exhaust fumes as vehicles are having to keep stopping and starting. I wonder how big lorries will handle this too. They aren't as movable as cars. Going to cause chaos, just like the bright spark who thought of 'smart motorways'.
You are supposed to slow down for junctions & roundabouts anyway . Just because there is a stated speed limit ,that only means that is the top legal speed you can do ,if conditions allow for it . Going around a roundabout at 5 mph is no great hardship youâre only negotiating one for a short period of time ..No other vehicle should be expecting you to do anything until you are actually doing it ,never trust on signals alone .
Having "I had right of way" carved into your tombstone does you no good, this applies to all road users
Everyone should pay respect to rules and has their self-judgment before making the maneuver and crossing the road.
In my country, they say: "Let way to the fool."
I think the least issue will come from turning right, as vehicles behind will simply assume that something is stopping the vehicle in front from turning and they will automatically slow down, as most people do anyway when they see the vehicle in front is turning right. The scenario that really concerns me is the potential rear-ending of cyclists and motorcyclists at left hand turns and on roundabouts. I frankly don't give a damn that it will be the fault of the person doing the rear-ending. I'm sure that will be wonderful compensation for the cyclist/rider who gets injured - not. Ludicrous, unnecessary rule. Also, I haven't reached my venerable age by stepping out into the road in front of moving vehicles and I have no intention of starting now.
Does this rule apply to roundabouts aswell ? Never thought about that. If so, itâs even more dangerous due to traffic moving even faster. I can see massive fallout from these rules, especially in the courts where injured pedestrians will be making claims based on them.
Of course, if you stop in the road when turning left due to a pedestrian considering whether or not to cross the road, and a cyclist rear ends you, then this will be the motorist's fault as a collision occurred between a vehicle wishing to turn left and a cyclist wanting to continue straight on!
@@chrislee5096 No, that's not how it works. The "new" highway code simply states that you should check for cyclists on the left hand side before turning. If a cyclist can't stop in time, it's the cyclist's fault for travelling too fast / too close behind.
When I'm cycling though I'd never filter in the left if a vehicle was turning left - otherwise they'd probably left hook you. It's no use saying "but they should have seen me before turning" if you've already been knocked off your bike!
Love to invite the 'brain boxes' who thought this out to be in a car on Blackpool's Golden Mile Traffic light controlled T junction at Central Pier turning left or right into the side road in high season. They'd need an overnight bag waiting for the 1,000's of pedestrians wandering up and down with traffic backed up for miles. Maybe same numbskulls who thought out Smart Motorways.
you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT
Lots of similar cases with constant streams of pedestrians around schools and colleges at the start and ends of their days.
I wonder if that rule still applies where there is light controlled pedestrian crossing.
@@MarkJT1000 i have been wondering this too and cant find an answer to it.
I fully agree with you, it's mad. Any town centre will have an endless stream of pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross. Also, any big events like football matches or concerts will result in total gridlock as event goers return to their vehicles for the journey home. They will sit in queues waiting for everyone else to cross roads on their way home. Sheer lunacy.
After 27 years of driving HGVs, i was going to work on for another 5 years or so, not now, Iâm gladly giving up and taking early retirement !
Iâd love to know how turning left or right in a 40ft artic, at junctions in the centre of London will now be possible ? i can just imagine sitting all day waiting for a gap in the pedestrian onslaught, itâs never gonna materialise, so do i slowly edge my way into said junction, hoping that everybody will stop and let me through ? No, Iâm no longer allowed, so how long do these idiots suppose itâs gonna take for a reasonable gap to appear in the relentless human chain? Iâll tell you, it never will !
The maniacs that have devised these new rules, need dragging from their desks to have some common sense beaten into their thick skulls.
England roads are small.
I've always found, living in a village, that it is wiser to let the HGV get reversed/turned into wherever they are going first. Otherwise traffic is at a standstill. There are 2 junctions in the village where the locals sit back a car length from the line to give HGVs room to turn.
I understand the thinking behind the rules, but in practice it'll simply back up traffic.
These Bureaucrats and Civil servants are the 5th columnists for the UK.
They are doing their level best to bring this country down.
Their agenda has nothing to do with safety.
I'm in a manual wheelchair, Do I cross first? Or do I give way to the Cyclist and the horse? If I have an electric wheelchair what do I have to give way to ?
Great comment Sir! People flying desks should not be allowed to make rules for real people.
The thing about cars waiting for pedestrians is completely counter intuitive to what someone would do naturally, which is stop and wait for cars to pass before crossing. If I'm waiting to cross a road I would ideally wait for no cars to be on the road or at a distance I could walk across long before they reached me. On busier roads I'd either wait for an opening or move away from the junction so I only had regular traffic to look out for. I just don't understand how anyone can think this is going to work?
You have clearly articulated my intuitive concerns about this which I couldnât put into clear words.
I also have a concern about the wording of the new rules. If a motor vehicle is required to give way to a pedestrian waiting to cross the road from which or into which it is turning, does that mean that, in your example, a pedestrian waiting to cross the through-road at the junction has priority over a motor vehicle indicating left to turn into the side road? In the event that a foolhardy, pedantic teenager throws caution to the wind and crosses anyway, is the motor vehicle driver now liable for a collision with that pedestrian?
As a former driving instructor I totally agree with the points you have raised, this is change for the sake of change and has not been properly thought through, there will certainly be more accidents and confusion.
I'm a driving instructor with 18 years experience as an ADI. You're absolutely spot on, the rule change giving priority to pedestrians at junctions is a terrible idea. It will cause confusion and be potentially dangerous at busy times.
Where does this come from? Whoâs driving (excuse the pun) this change?. Itâs come out of the blue with no MSM interest whatsoever. Ludicrous. I agree that itâs all about forcing people out of cars. Criminals and slimy solicitors will be rubbing their hands thinking of all the ways to cash in, Kerr-Ching.
In a busy town it will become almost impossible for cars to turn during the busiest times.
@@jfro5867 In my country (and in most European countries), turning cars should give way to pedestrians for ages. Once I was almost killed by a car in the UK, because I assumed that this rule exists there too. From now, I will be safe, if visiting again. :)
@@williamforsyth6667 Hi William. Of course pedestrians should be safe, absolutely. But this change is doing nothing other than causing huge confusion. I would guess after passing their driving test 99% of drivers never ever look at the Highway Code again so we will have tens of millions of existing drivers carrying on as they are with a small % of âright onâ cyclists and pedestrians being just awkward because they KNOW the changes are in. Activists will be doing slow walks back and forth across main roads and in city centers next you watch, there will be more road rage, accidents, and insurance claims for damages. Drivers pay a lot for road tax, pedestrians and cyclists donât (directly anyway) so is that fair? Just another example of created madness but seeing as our political classes are all a bunch of narcissistâs liars and cheats what else should we expect? I wish you well.
More road rage
As a pedestrian, it is safer to wait for the traffic to clear before crossing because vehicles need to be on the move whenever possible to avoid jams. This new code is not very universally diverse for both pedestrians nor drivers. It should have been carefully revised practically before implementing it.
It's set up to annoy motorists and give the whip hand to to cyclists and pedestrians.
It's pure anti motor agenda.
I am deeply concerned for blind people with guide dogs where the latter have been trained to wait until there are no vehicles. This situation is potentially a huge accident creating decision.
Sorry, Iâm missing the point .
How is the dog waiting until there are no vehicles a problem .
Donât think they are going to retrain the dogs to keep them up with the Highway Code .
Can we please stop perpetuating this myth. Guide dogs are NOT trained to wait until traffic has disappeared, they're trained to wait until cars have stopped. They deal with zebra crossings perfectly well every day. Please, research these things before adding weight to untruths.
Iâm a driver but as a pedestrian as well I would certainly wait until the road was clear to cross, no way would I rely on the motorist giving way for me to cross the road and as a driver I would be concerned about being rear ended by a vehicle behind me while adhering to this stupid new rule.
It's NOT new !! See my other post.
You wouldn't throw yourself on the car bonnet just to get the "no win, no fee" payout then? I know a good many will try now.
This is right. I only been driving for a very short time, but I would never feel comfortable for a car to stop for me at a junction.
As a child, I was always taught to "Stop, Look and Listen". I'd much prefer to stand and wait for vehicles to pass, then safely cross after they have passed... how many people will feel "rushed" crossing the road to let the traffic move on?
I agree with you there Gwen!! What I've been thinking about is what about all the pedestrians who don't ever cycle or drive - how are they even going to know that they have priority at a junction, as they've got no need to read the highway code?? I just don't get it đ
Like many other successful, established rules, in life, it is more than 5 minutes old and therefore seen by the inexperienced youth who made the new rules as old fashioned and clearly therefore dangerous and unworkable; exactly like hard-shoulders; and exactly like many other things in my line of work which suffer the same blight.
I think Stop Look & Listen is more akin to the procedure of crossing a Railway Line. What about the Green Cross Code !! I know, I,m showing my age!
@@xsentfromuk8938 Haha I can't wait to see cyclists stopping for pedestrians - would you step out in front of boris on his bicycle I wonder...
Me too - we should be drumming this into pedestrians, not giving them carte blanche.
Best rule ever isâŠ. If it isnât broke, donât try to fix it. I was always taught to âneverâ wave a pedestrian across the road in case they cross and get run over by another vehicle. So if I stop, but donât wave, will the pedestrian ever cross?
Yes as a pedestrian, on a few occasion someone has waved me across but then another car has arrived and if Iâd gone I may have been knocked down. So only when theres been on other cars coming into the junction have I crossed.
Canât wave a pedestrian on a driving test either or you fail the test. Itâs going to be difficult for learners to knows what to do, so theyâll just sit and wait until they get rear ended. Would not want to be a test examiner under these conditions.
The issue that springs to mind for me in having to stop for a pedestrian at a junction who is waiting to cross, is, how do I know they are wanting to cross? Not everyone stops dead and makes a large gesture of moving their head left to right to check for traffic. When they are in a group, how do we know, in the split second we observe them, if they are intending to cross or just hanging around chatting to one another? There is a zebra crossing near me which I have to pass on my way home and there is a very narrow pavement adjacent. Quite often it is difficult to tell if the pedestrians on the pavement are intending to use the zebra crossing, are going past the zebra crossing and not use it, or are just having a gathering of friends. Now scale that up to every junction you turn in and out of; being mindful and aware of other road users goes without saying but having to second guess their every move is an absolute nightmare.
As a pedestrian I would definitely not take my chances if I saw a car turning in or even indicating to turn. I'd stick to the green cross code; chaos would ensue! đ
i agree, most cars are in constant motion going somewhere when they are able, they don't just hang around in groups in the middle of the road like pedestrians do.
it seems that these rules are designed more to discourage drivers than to improve road safety
i think you are right.
Got it in one, this is just the start................
Indeed. There are more and more such measures being taken. Another favourite of theirs is fake roadworks. Closing lanes on busy motorways, especially ones towards touristic attractions such as the Lake District, in order to cause artificial congestion and to deter people from visiting.
@@spongebobgrumpypants6862 It's not the start. it began when driving became a licensed activity and motor cars had to be registered to the state before you could use them on the road. There is no such thing as a right to drive, just like you have no right to own a firearm.
Agreed, they've got the stick, and they're prodding the hornets nest ------- what could possibly go wrong!!?? đ€
That significant minority of pedestrians who think already, that they are âinvincibleâ (smartphone users, headphone wearers and the downright arrogant), will be further empowered to just walk out into the road without looking.
Clearly part of the grand plan to just stop people driving.
Struggling to think of a single piece of legislation in decades, that has actually facilitated use of road, by vehicles!
You know, roads . . . for motoristsđ
Itâs quite simple.
YOURA SMARTPHONE USER TOO...
"pedestrians who think already, that they are âinvincibleâ (smartphone users, headphone wearers and the downright arrogant"............ you forgot to mention The Ramblers grumpy gimmer club
Roads for are for road users, of which motor vehicles are just 1 participant
You raise a good point. A new thing in London is for pedestrians to just walk out into the road and force vehicles to stop. This "hierarchy" might well give pedestrians more confidence to follow that practise.
You also forgot electric scooter, cyclists who on pavements and roads who don't have much of an inclining of the Highway code
I quite agree with you. My biggest concern is rear end shuts by tailgaters because they are expecting you to turn in immediately because they have either not seen the pedestrian or more likely donât know the highway code.
As a pedestrian, I would wait for the car to pass before crossing. It gives me more time to fully evaluate the situation, more time to herd young children across and less chance of being hit. The only time I need/want a car to stop for me, is if its at a crossing point or if I'm in the middle of the road already. I do wish cars would respect the crossing points more though. I have often been unable to cross safely with a pushchair because cars have blocked the crossing when pulling up to a light or junction. It's anxiety inducing.
Tazzy29
Have you ever thought of crossing the road just wearing black stockings and suspenders - I'm sure all the traffic will stop for you?
@@redblade8160 considered it...but the world can't handle the amount of demons that would be unleashed by removing my coat.
@@tazzy29
And it's still a bit cold at the moment to go outside without a coat on.
@@tazzy29 good morning how are you doing, howâs the pandemic situation over there in your country?
@@austinconnor5297 Hello! Im well thanks yourself? The pandemic situation is...err... reasonable? I'm in the UK so its a medium level of incompetence and idiocy but it's bearable. Tbh I'm very lucky that my loved ones haven't been affected too badly this far
As a cyclists, not one of them in spandex, I can assure all car drivers that I'll continue to stay on the left and as close to the hedge as possible. As a pedestrian I'll wait for the car to pass before I cross.
I commute over 2 miles through busy city traffic by leg each way to and from work. If I had to stop and wait for all the cars to go at each junction, it would be lunch time before I got to work.
We thank you Chopper, you're a wise man.
Very sensible, and keep safe cycling and walking across the road.
That is all well and good but if I see you standing waiting at the side of the road I am now legally bound to stop to let you cross, you waving me across will have no effect the same as flashing another car at a junction if I start turning and you walk in front I am at fault not you.
As a law abiding citizen IMHO if all police forces and councils enforced the current Highway Code/traffic laws the only change that I accept is needed is the hierarchy change.
Common sense used to be rife but since policing of our roads has, in some cities, become almost extinct the roads have become a complete nightmare. As a motorcycle rider (and occasional cager in freezing/icy conditions) I spend most of my inner city riding concentrating on who's going to do stupid stuff and attempt to kill/harm me rather than is that pedestrian/E-scooter user (or dog) going to use their common sense.
I've got helmet cam footage of a cyclist ignoring the red light whilst a marked police vehicle is stopped at the same lights....nothing happened....not even "a quite word in their shell-like"
Time to dash cam every corner of the car, we're going to need it for all the new false claims coming our way, mark my words this will be worse than the break check insurance scams
As a pedestrian I understood that you should not cross on the bend but to go further up the road. Barriers on some corners illustrate this.
Agree totally with your comments; these changes are ill thought out and highly dangerous.
Apart from the obvious suggestions already made, I can also see this aiding insurance scammers by waiting and throwing themselves in front of well positioned cars expecting to be hit at slow speeds. This will cause very little harm but where there is blame..... I'm not sure this will help society at all. I wonder if their aim is to reduce the number of road users by using scare tactics?
Spot on
even being hit at a very slow speed does not always cause very little harm I have witnessed someone who was killed by someone who was moving very slowly they lost balance and car wheel went over their head
My thoughts exactly, grubby little chancers will be out in force I'm sure. I have had a full car and motorcycle licence for forty odd years. But I think I am coming to the end of my driving career despite having a clean licence for all those years. I will now just expect some enterprising soul will jump in front of my car expecting to sue me for everything I own. It is bloody scary what they have done. I have always given pedestrians and cyclist the curtesy I would want myself(I do cycle from time to time) but now it will be 'pay day' for those who can 'take a fall'.
Not to mention a lot of cars over a certain age will now be written off by the insurance companies soley based on getting it off the road. A cracked rear bumper will jump up in price meaning it'll cost too much to replace. Hidden agenda.
I doubt it will have an increase in insurance scammers
As a pedestrian crossing the road I would be reluctant to assume a driver turning would know the new rules. This new rule is simply Daft and potentially dangerous.
Would a pedestrian know of the rule changes anyway?
Think they're designed to be daff aren't they. Think the grand plan is to get as many cars off the road as possible!
P*ss the motorist off as much as they can.
Got their net zero target, and they also think that the vast bulk of people will live in cities and not need a car.
@@wittywoo Only if they happened to see it on the news or on the internet. I'm a biker and the only reason I know of them is because this video happened to pop up on my main YT homepage and I was curious. Far, far too many people, both pedestrians and road users are not going to know about any of this. Which might be a good thing so things can carry on as normal.
@@wittywoo I'm a pedestrian and I didn't know the new rule until I saw this. It's bad enough trying to cross the road where I live without having this level of complication added.
its not really a new rule though, when turning into a road pedestrians crossing already had priority
Absolutely spot on right BBL this is a ridiculous new set of rules and is going to cause more accidents than it prevents ...
I have realised for a very long time that a large number of motorists are unfamiliar with the current Highway Code and don't observe it in the matter of turning into or out of roads at junctions. The present rule is that drivers are required to give way to pedestrians 'who are already crossing'. There is even a picture in the Code that shows that happening. So the only difference in the new rules is that pedestrians 'waiting to cross' are added to the rule. At the moment the majority of pedestrians give way to cars, largely because their experience is that the majority of drivers don't give way to them and are approaching too fast to be safe. In some cases pedestrians wait for a very long time to cross at some junctions. Why should they? The driving instructor who said he taught that a driver intending to turn should slow down early and control any traffic behind them to allow a safe negotiation of the junction, has got it right. By and large both parties (driver and pedestrian) need to size up what is going on and act safely - which is what the 'hierarchy' implies. I use my bike pretty often and have to assume that it is invisible. The first junction I approach in a typical journey is a right turn at a mini-roundabout. Frequently - although I signal - oncoming traffic keeps coming, despite the fact that I should have priority. Oncoming drivers would clearly not do that if I was driving an HGV.
A good summary. It will take a long time to change habits and as you say highway code content is not well understood even without these changes. From my perspective the changes are to encourage all road users to be considerate of others. Being held up for a short while just because that is how it has always been is no excuse.
This appears to be a fairly obvious tactic to make motoring as awkward and inconvenient as possible; especially when one adds the threats of fines as a result of cycle cams.
if the intention is to make it safer for cyclist it should be compulsory that they use cycle paths where there is one along side the road. I regularly meet groups of cyclists spread over the road when there is a perfectly good separated from the road, cycle path, so you are right about it being to make motoring as awkward as possible
@@billhall1983 couldn't agree more. The problem is that this is all linked into a gradually unfolding political strategy to make car ownership as difficult as possible; well for all us plebs anyway!
Typical driver. It's all about you.
@@scoopermg8226 I think these days it's mostly about a small minority of selfish, dangerous self-entitled cyclists. At least the new rules give the pedestrian priority.
@grumpygit Road tax doesn't pay for road maintenance - it goes into a general pot along with all other taxation.
My worry is that pedestrians wii start walking out on junctions without looking because they think that they are entitled.
A pedestrian has always had the right of way crossing a side street you are turning into.
With the new changes standing at the kerb will be enough to give them priority
@@GadgetMart Only once they were in the road itself, not the pavement. This is a godd example of having misunderstood the current rules
@@c7uk No it isnât
Read what i typed.
And what if they do look? Will the car magically stop because of the power of their gaze? It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the car to STOP, not for the pedestrian to LOOK.
@@sammydemon666 No cars will have automatic braking.
New cars already do
From my experience in the last week, as a pedestrian and cyclist I am going to act as though the changes have not happened because motor vehicle drivers seem to mostly be ignoring the new rules. As a car driver I will observe the new rules but a mindful that stopping for pedestrians at junctions may put myself in danger from other motorists not paying attention.
ignoring or don't know about them because they've been poorly communicated?
@@ba55bar I agree that the government has failed in its duty to communicate the changes. Not having a public information campaign until three weeks after the new rules come into effect is ridiculous. However even after the campaign I will not trust other road users to do the right thing. Letâs face it, how many road users know and comply with the previous versions of the Highway Code?
@@worldofameiso5491 yep, I'll be going by the same common sense I use now whether I'm walking or driving
@@ba55bar For the most part, ignoring, pretty much every driver and pedestrian I know of thatâs heard about these rules has said ânah thatâs ridiculousâ. Women especially. Think about it, itâs night time, youâre waiting to cross a side road, a car or van pulls up on the main road indicating to turn left. Under this new rule, the car/vans supposed to sit there and let them cross. Many women would rather wait and let the car go past them than have a car sat there behind them creepily watching them cross.
Every driver has to keep the gap behind the car enough as long as to be ready to react and complete the emergency stop without the hit the car.
From the point of view of a motorist: This morning (a couple of days after the code changes) I had a cyclist cross my lane (as I was approaching at 20mph ) at an island crossing point without slowing or appearing to look, and a pedestrian walk across the road as traffic lights turned from red to green. I wonder if this behaviour (which I do not normally see) has been brought about by the rule publicity
lol, I see that shit all the time. Everyone is always in far too much of hurry and are often distracted.
Nah. Bad cyclists happen, and impatient pedestrians are practically the norm. (I've been guilty of slightly excess haste at crossings myself.) Complex crossings with poorly-thought out light cycles can trigger this; the pedestrian stands there at a "Don't Cross" for what seems like minutes while no cars pass because the lights may permit traffic from another direction, then gives up and steps out just as the lights turn green for cars that are there. I'm surprised you haven't see that often enough before.
Rules and regulations are no substitute for what is needed - patience, consideration and caution. Those who possess none of these will continue to cause accidents as usual.
Patience goes a long way but One of the biggest factors in most accidents is hesitation. And the fact that people don't know how to control their car properly if the shit hits the fan.
I agree.. I think the new rules are going to need a step change in motorist mentality, that 'continuous momentum' is absolutely neccessary. To those impatient motorists behind the considerate driver letting the pedestrian cross, you're just going to have to wait.
@@fergman3690 Exactly! Happens in other countries. Unfortunately UK car drivers have been spoilt for too long and now have a heightened sense of entitlement as a result.
@@fergman3690 yes wait for the bang as your hit hard in rear, pedestrians right of way absolute lunacy it won't work WAIT TILL ALL CARS GONE) is sensablething to do
If at a Junction I stop turning left into the junction and their is a pedestrian with a child in a pram, then they will have to make sure they can get all the way across the road. You then have them panicking because they will feel that they are holding up a lot of traffic. They in response will probably just start crossing without checking and end up in the path of a vehicle coming out of the junction on the other side. So if that person and child gets hit I will feel that I am responsible. So in real time it will be like this! I drive up see a pedestrian and stop . That person will look at me then have to see if there is car coming the otherway. If no car look and make sure I am not going to go... This law makes no sense. When I am a pedestrian I would rather just wait and take responsibility for myself and cross when it's safe. People are going to be pressured into crossing the road quick without thinking about safety Also what are kids going to be told just cross because you have priority. THIS LAW HAS NO THOUGHT GONE INTO IT.
Also what if someone is just standing on the path waiting with no intensions of crossing!
*"THIS LAW HAS NO THOUGHT GONE INTO IT"*
You mean like a lot of UK legislation?
Itâs got Chris Boardman written all over these laws. Ridiculous!!!
Within a day of this I've seen pedestrians who have been verbally abused for complying with these new rules.
As someone who always waits for clear passage, I stopped at a junction, looked behind me to check it was clear. A council highway van came speeding round the corner behind me, too fast to stop, and it's passenger leant out of the open window yelling 'GOOD BOY!
As im a 62 year old woman, that was many levels of verbal abuse. Is this what the new rules mean to me? I can see a whole world of road rage culminating in murder.
Eye contact is always what I use, you can gather a lot of information from your fellow road users, but at the end of the day we should all be looking out for each other, we all want to be able to get where we are going safely
As a full time pedestrian, I trust that no one in a car sees me as a priority. I will not cross the road expecting other road users to give me right of way
Good thinking because I wonât be stopping. I will also adopt your comments about waiting still.
@@craigr306 It's good best practice but not a great reflection on the quality of driving here.
@@craigr306 If you are unwilling to keep to the rules, do not drive.
As a full time pedestrian Iâm glad you have the forethought. To make sure that you and others around you are not at risk of accidents.
@@craigr306 please dont drive
Very well explained. Absolute chaos will ensue, what about the poor learner drivers taking a test! Who goes first in a âMexican standoffâ? During 42 years in the driver training industry I have never come across such an âunpoliceableâ rule!đ„ș
âunpoliceableâ cameras are your enemy, run by a private firm, no plods required
Yep I'm going to be taking my hgv test soon this new change fills me with dread. Do I stop on test potentially blocking the whole road. And get marked minor fault for impeding traffic and failing to make good progress then the whole what if they just stand there am I allowed to wave them across. At present I am not as I can not ensure their safety from the actions of outher road user's for this reason I would not wish to.
It's guidence not law, hence the wording being "should" not "must"! So it wouldn't be policed anyway!
Some very good points, I also wonder about children's understanding of road safety and I can imagine younger children might step out as they have priority and in the right, but they are severely injured because it wasn't safe to exercise their rights.
To add to the first example, could be interesting when vehicles are turning into (from both directions off the main road, and one leaving the side road while in a busy city centre where you can have a constant stream of pedestrians crossing... All traffic will come to a standstill in every direction. đ€Ł I'm glad I no longer drive.
I'm a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. I'll just carry on doing exactly as I've always done in each situation, which is: apply common sense at all times.
the fallacy of 'common' sense is that its 'common' or that it has any 'sense' attached to the thought or behaviour at all
@@LeonEvans_Guyver1 It does exactly what it says on the tin. What you talking about?
@@ibexdnb2879 if common sense was so 'common' or was brimming with 'sense' laws would not need to exist and health and safety legislation would never have been needed to have been written to protect idiots from themselves.
Totally agree, the problem is if the law doesn't and sensible individuals are fined/penalised..
The problem is, these rules go against all common sense, and everyone knows the police love handing out easy fines for people doing nothing wrong
I know a number of junctions in my small town where pedestrian footfall is almost constant. If cars have to wait, the town will be full with tail backs as a result ( in all directions at two places). Right now pedestrians wait until the road is clear and the cars turn and get out of the way quickly. These new rules are plainly designed to make as much trouble as possible. I am absolutely certain they will increase the number of accidents, especially back end bumps from cars going into the one that stops at the junction in front of them to wait for the pedestrian.
That assumes that the car drivers' journey is more important than the pedestrians - is this what you believe?
I mean this sincerely.
Couldn't give two shits about your small town & very specific inconveniences you may or may not face.
RE 'back end bumps'.... FOCUS ON THE TRAFFIC IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU LIABILITY ON WHEELS.
Rule 170 already stated that pedestrians crossing a road you're turning into have priority - doing an awareness campaign about that particular rule would probably have been better than creating a new one.
Don't worry they plan to ban all private vehicles by 2035 this is all their plan to remove freedom from the general public. Helped of course by the ignorant chimps that think this is for their benefit.
Everyone's journey is equal. I didn't need another rule, I already give way to pedestrians that look like they are about to cross at a junction. As a pedestrian I have never found the need to cross at a roundabout. Remember all car drivers are also pedestrians, but not all pedestrians are car drivers and they do not read the high way code.
@@boxenjoyerkona utter bollox, what an arse
Complete madness! So the fools have decided to put the âvulnerableâ person in the middle of the road in the hope that the vehicle driver has seen them and knows the rules. I can see only one outcome, and I for one, as a pedestrian, will be standing back from the kerb until I am sure there no vehicles turning into the road I am about to cross.
The position is middle of the lane to discourage overtaking at vulnerable times. This is not new it is the 'primary' position. I have had several close passes near bollards where a driver underestimates the distance between me and the bollard and cuts-in dangerously. Far safer to make it clear that there is no room to overtake.
@@alanjarrett940 fair point, but my comment was about pedestrians, not cyclists, sorry if I wasnât clear.
Question: As a motorcyclist, would I have grounds to sue the dept responsible for making these changes if I am involved in an accident that is caused by adhering to the new rules they've laid out?
I'm honestly dreading to hear the string of stories of bikers being shunted on corners over the next few months and as a London biker already being attacked by terrible road planning changes and ULEZ, i'm really struggling to understand this sudden hatred towards the motorcycle community from the powers above!
its because people now solely rely on polluting transport to get around and think its a right to travel, when they should be living, growing food, working local (a short walk away at most). and now the planets Fucked theyre starting to try this stupid shit to get people off the roads rather than do whats needed ban all vehicles. fyi i was a leisure biker too, now ride a wee ebike.
Never mind the rules,codes or laws - keep yourself safe, that's rule #1 on a motorbike.
License since 1975
@Padraig Joseph claiming it's "their fault" won't help you lying in a&e with a broken arm, leg or spine injury or worse.
@@H4N5O1O Not possible : many of us do jobs which cover a large area ; my work takes me all over Scotland đŽó §ó ąó łó Łó Žó ż, regularly travelling hundreds of miles every day . Although I previously had a base of operations 11 miles from home , and cycled it on the rare days I did not need to carry a car load of equipment , since the pandemic I have been based at home on days I donât need to travel . Very few people have jobs within walking distance of home , and only a minority donât need to take tools or equipment with them .
@Padraig Joseph No it would not ; these so called rules are incompetent and unworkable and the fault lies with the incompetents who brought them in . This nonsense will soon be overturned
Surely, we can't make rules based on the most vulnerable status... I ride a motorbike in addition to being a car driver, and I use the "law of gross tonnage" rule.... if there is a truck, even if I have right of way, I give in to the truck.... If you are dead, it doesn't matter to you who was in the right. When I am on foot, I follow the same rule.
It is already illegal to kill someone with a vehicle. These rules are to stop that situation happening in the first place.
Couldn't have put it better myself, no-one wants to see "it was my right of way" on your headstone.
I've always thought that if motorbikes had a front facing machine gun they would suddenly become much more visible to other traffic, particularly vehicles emerging from side roads
These rules seem to be aimed at making car use as problematic as possible. Confusion never leads to good outcomes
Agreed.
Thank you very much for putting this video up. I hope that people share it far and wide.
I have an issue with how a driver can be sure that a pedestrian is waiting to cross the road. On many occasions when I have attempted to give way to pedestrians standing at a junction, the pedestrian is not actually intending to cross. So we must assume that all individuals standing at or close to a junction is intending to cross?
Many years ago I was talking road rules with my motorbike instructor who said to me ' what's the point in being in the right if you're lying in the gutter with a broken leg' I've never forgotten that. Chaos will ensue with these new changes pedestrians WILL get hurt.
Mine said "its not easy to take the moral high ground from a wheelchair"
I'm concerned about pedestrian priority at busy roundabouts; as stopping in the middle of a busy roundabout to let pedestrians cross is likely to end in a MVA. With bigger roundabouts you can't see the exit until you're already on the roundabout, so you're already committed, and giving way means that you will then have to stop in the middle of the roundabout. Most roundabouts here are like jousting competitions already; making cars stop suddenly can only end in disaster IMO :(
The key is - you should never need to 'stop suddenly' unless in an emergency. If you approach with caution & identify the other road users, including upcoming pedestrians, then your points are null and void. If driving as per the laws of the road - these may be inconveniences at best... But ultimately the 'vulnerable road users' clause already placed the duty of care on you in these scenarios, so nothing really changes.
If you don't do this - you should cease operating vehicles before you kill someone.
Just go to Europe. It works just fine there.
There's a roundabout near me that has pedestrian crossings and plenty of cars stop for pedestrians and end up being rear ended.
@@magdamanoli8753 Just goes to show there's a need for better rules and better compliance.
Better a car rear ended than a pedestrian run over. Even better drivers who pay attention.
Most of the consultation was between the DfT and cyclists & pedestrians..like, drivers are the enemy...until it comes to getting cash out of them!
I live in BC, Canada and we already have the rule that cars need to wait for pedestrians to cross at junctions. The main effects have been that car drivers have become very timid - stopping for everything. However, this assumes that stationary cars are not an obstacle whereas they are an obstacle to the visual field of other drivers. Secondly, pedestrians have abandoned looking out for traffic and will blindly walk into the road (even roads away from junctions) expecting cars to stop. There are many pedestrian accidents because of this - which is ironic since its designed to help pedestrians. As for roundabouts - virtually no-one in BC knows how to use a roundabout - most treat them as four-way crossings (priority to the car arriving first).
Roundabouts are often badly designed, even in England.
You need to force a reduction in speed by landscaping to reduce visibility. And the roundabout needs to be the right size to allow one vehicle to enter from each direction at the same time, but prevent a second entering.
Canada has a higher pedestrian casualty rate compared to the UK (314 in 2019 compared to 470 in the UK). Make of that what you will.
In the Yorkshire Dales, very many of the roads are narrow and it would be impossible to give 2 metres clearance without crashing into the stone wall at the other side of the road. Furthermore, even slightly wider roads are often occupied by crowds of lycra-clad cyclists in groups of 20 or 30 riding 2 or 3 abreast. Again it would be impossible to pass. It often is already.
These have got to be some of the stupidest rules anyone has ever come up with...
Could you imagine teaching your children road sense and saying to them just walk out onto the road the cars must stop for you! The fact that the driver will be prosecuted is small consolation when you are saying goodbye for the last time to your child...
As you are entering the road from the path surely those already using the road have right of way and you should wait till it's clear...
You should cross the road after the new rule change in the same way that you would use a zebra crossing.
@@jamesdewitt84 Then why change the rules? Plus some people just walk onto zebra crossings expecting traffic to stop, so they are already ready for the law change.
The benefits of new rules are clear. We no longer need paths so all roads can be made bigger. Crossings can be done away with.
@@neildoerdan2298 because currently the pedestrian has to yield to cars and wait for a gap. This law effectively places a virtual zebra crossing over every junction. Do you think zebra crossings endanger pedestrians?
@@jamesdewitt84 So who decides how close to a junction the pedestrian has to be to qualify under these new rules? Do we need to measure the distance to see if the pedestrian goes first or the car?
@@ElgarL that is a good point I would assume they would need to be in line with the pavement crossing the road but that does raise the question if a person is heading the other way vertically towards the crossing when do they gain priority.
Frankly these new rules has made the roads even more dangerous âconfusion equals danger in its own rightâ
All drivers claim to leave enough space for a safe overtake, introduce the 1,5M rule and everybody is raising concerns. 1.5M is not a huge gap so just how close were the safe drivers getting to cyclists when overtaking?
I've more or less given up on road cycling mostly due to close passes.
As a cyclist (and ex motorcyclist) I have noticed that most car drivers once they have passed the test, then seem to completely ignore the highway code.
So they probably won't know or want to know of any updates to the highway code. Classic example of this is most drivers when approaching a junction or roundabout fail to indicate the direction they intending to go they seem to forget what indicators are for, I always try to give clear hand signals so as to let other road users know what my intention is, and avoid possible accidents
These rules are completely insane. Makes me feel reluctant to drive. Maybe that's the purpose?
If people can't drive safely then they shouldn't be on the road anyway.
@@garymitchell5899 - what about walking safely?
Whilst I appreciate the idea behind these rules, the rules themselves are completely ill thought out. This will for sure lead to many rear end collisions in busy built up areas such as where I live, where the main road has sideroads every 30m, and many many pedestrians. The main road would be completely blocked, pedestrians would be confused, not knowing whether to go ahead and cross in front of moving cars, something I was taught from a young age was dangerous. From a driver's point of view, you won't be able to judge if a car is really going to turn into a side street, as visibility down the street is not possible until you have already turned in. I feel that these rules have been made by people who live in quiet, lightly built up areas, and not by those who have the experience of a highly populated built up area. Also, if a pedestrian is waiting to cross at a side road, and therefore has right of way over a car turning into that road, what about the cars coming up the road, who still have right of way over pedestrians because they aren't yet turning into a road? It's extremely confusing, and will lead to accidents, injuries, and doubtless, increased insurance premiums for all motorists.
The rules have been brought in by a cyclist that have no road sense in the first place
They have this law in Germany and have had for years, itâs a terrible law, as a driver Iâve almost run over pedestrians Iâve not seen, as they just step into the road without looking, as they have right of way!
I canât agree with you more on that one.
@@karhu100 So much for Brexit. We lose the good stuff and sheepishly implement the continentals' stupid ideas.
Nobody should step out in front of any moving vehicle no matter what the new laws say even though they do it anyway if you make the decision to step infront of a moving vehicle the consequence should be their fault entirely
I always thought pedestrians had the right of way at the leg of a T-junction. But a right-of-way does not help heal broken bones, or regrow legs and arms, let alone broken necks or backs, so as a pedestrian, I never took rights-of-way seriously, and waited for drivers to invite me to cross. And will continue to do so, no matter what it says in the Highway Code, which I haven't looked at in 25 years.
I was driving in Hove today, behind two cyclists who road through red lights without
any regard for others. They sailed on while I naturally adhered to the red lights.
This new code is ill thought out. In Germany there are cycle lanes everywhere and every cyclist
adheres to the lanes and the rules. This new set of laws is done on the cheap without
proper facilities. The German and Netherlands fund the travel arrangements between
cyclists, pedestrians, cars and lorries.
How can you provide cycle lanes and cyclists arenât required to use them?
So why not provide pedestrian lanes and car lanes and then also say
that they need not use them either?
Care and consideration will succeed with proper supervision and presence
with education and reinforced with appropriate fines or punishments accordingly.
But it requires investment in structure and traffic police presence.
Cameras are no solution.
Thank you for raising awareness of these changes, I would not have known if I wasn't a subscriber. I've not seen these changes publicised anywhere. I can't agree more about the chaos and confusion this is going to cause. Time to get a rear facing camera fitted to the car. The front camera will prove I was waiting for a pedestrian and the rear one to record the vehicles running into the back of me.
All designed to paint the motorist in a bad light, annoy them to give up driving as "not worth the hassle, " which is what the Governments agenda is, fits in with the green, environment theme. Higher road tax. ,Lousy fuel, leccy cars ,congestion charges,emission zones, etc, it's all the bigger picture,folks.........
All aimed at stopping freedom of movement, getting people on centralized transport, and holding their transport passes hostages if they say something mean online or refuse to take yet another booster.
Buy a bike itâs the future đ
Another thing we were told as kids was if a vehicle is waiting to pull out of a road end which you want to cross you should ALWAYS cross behind the vehicle waiting to pull out. NEVER across the front of the vehicle. It's fairly obvious that this isn't told to kids any more.
Based on what I've grown up with, as a pedestrian, I would most definitely wait until I knew 100% the driver(s) see's me! This is what I teach my children. Of course, this is going to be confusing for all, especially when it goes against the grain of what common sense dictates. This is definitely accidents waiting to happen! Let's hope not and best of luck with the petition.
Taken in conjunction with the new powers to allow councils to tax - sorry, fine - drivers for stopping on junction hatchings, I would say that one of the main positive points for councils will be more revenue. Having said that, perhaps these rules could in fact be an unexpected Godsend in that drivers will be able to justify being caught in the junction boxes thanks to them "thinking/fearing" that somebody somewhere was about to cross the road as the driver wanted to exit.
I am at a loss to see how these ill-considered changes can be honestly expected to improve accident figures. Quite the opposite I would guess.
A typical example of legislation not properly been thought through.
Itâs within the rules to stop inside the hatch marks, IF your direction of travel is clear.
Common sense and, in this case road safety, have again fallen victim of political stupidity. Will it cause confusion - yes! Will it help anyone - no! Crazy.
Two additional comments:
1. As a driver, I have noticed that the past 20 years have seen a huge increase in the number of pedestrians who walk straight out into the road without the slightest attempt to look for traffic.
2. As a pedestrian, over the same period, I have noticed that bicycles have become quieter and there has been the almost complete disappearance of bells from bicycles.
I'm a driving instructor. I and other instructors teach our clients to keep turning into the sideroad if the pedestrian is waiting to cross but, if they step off the kerb with. Say 1 foot on the road you must give way for them to continue to cross. It then becomes an extension of the pavement. I've asked driving test examiners about these new rules, and have all said the same, keep teaching to the old rule. They will not fail their test if they keep turning into the road if the pedestrian is waiting to cross
Another point. Schoolkid has just learned he has this superpower to stop traffic so stands on the kerb looking like he is about to cross. As soon as a driver gets frustrated and starts to turn anyway, schoolkid takes a single step forward. Rinse and repeat until schoolkid falls over from laughing. Not likely to happen? Ask my 12 year old grandson, because that was his very first thought.
These things are bad enough without rules that will encourage it!
@@BlackBeltBarrister Front and read dashcams seem a must.
Eventually some schoolboy will learn that it's a superpower for getting a sore face.
Kids are taught the Green Cross Code in school. It's been this way since what, the 60s or 70s? They're not taught to just blindly walk into the road without looking.
And besides, kids aren't taught the Highway Code. So what exactly is the problem?
@Eddie Hitler Yes but very few kids will do cycling proficiency lessons.
Whereas pretty much all children will learn the Green Cross Code in primary school.
So glad I've invested in a dashcam, I feel there are so many ways this is going to be a disaster! đ
Dunga bunga wolly wops
Absolutely I have had a dashcam for several years due to the growing menace of cyclists just doing what they want on the road.
As a pedestrian this is terrifying, because it just invites people to cross unsafely (without checking). It also makes things hugely confusing, because unlike cars (who *should*) be using indicators so everyone else knows their intentions regarding turning, pedestrians don't have that: is a person standing at a junction waiting to cross (and in some cases, to cross which road?), or are they simply waiting for someone/something? I suspect the cyclist rules are less about visibility and more about keeping them away from the less well-maintained road edges, drains etc.
I was never explicitly taught who has right of way and when, perhaps because I don't drive, and always knew that was going to be the case, so never learned much of the highway code outside of that applicable to cyclists (and even that was decades ago - I stopped cycling years ago, because of balance issues). I have always taken the practical view of, 'If, in a collision, I would come off worse, I do not get priority unless it is clearly signaled that I am being given priority.' So crossing points, vehicles indicating they are not intersecting my path, drivers waving me across, a halted car flashing its lights etc. Likewise, if I'm waiting near a crossing but have no intention to cross at that time (specifically zebra/belisha crossings), I will make sure that my back is turned to it, or if I'm walking past, I will make sure I'm not displaying the body language I would be if I intended to cross.
I have a horrible feeling that there's going to be instant abuse of this by some pedestrians who are aware of the changes, against other road users who aren't. Hope the courts are ready...
This is effectively like putting a zebra crossing at every junction! A junction is a bad place to put a zebra crossing, for visibility reasons (one near my house right by a mini-roundabout, its preferable to wait until the car has left the roundabout!). I can't see peoples actions changing, as whilst I might be legally right to walk out in front of the car turning into the road, it's a bit of a moot point when I'm dead (and not much of a victory when seriously injured).
We've said this will be a problem all along. Stopping on the road is not always a safe option and WILL cause collisions. Non driving pedestrians won't know the new rules so if they stop at the curb, clearly see me indicating to exit the main road onto the side street then I won't be stopping and inviting them to cross.
It is bad enough with people stood by zebra crossings texting - not intending to cross.
I'm a driving pedestrian, and I still don't know what the rules are...
If you run into the back of a stationary car there's only one reason for that. You are driving too close and too fast. It's on you.
@@johndoggett808 I personally make eye contact with a driver before stepping on a zebra
If you can't stop in time when the car in front of you comes to a stop then, frankly, you shouldn't be driving.
We've had generations of education telling us to only cross the road if its safe to do so. I would never blindly cross a road hoping that a driver a) saw me and b) knew the new rules. This rule feels like it was implemented based more on what the lawmakers think ought be safer rather than a pragmatic understanding of uk traffic norms.
The problem is we have had Highway Code rules 170 & 163 giving cyclists and pedestrians priority for as long as the highway code has been around but nobody bothers learning this.
We also has information films telling drivers to cut their speed, & a fat lot of good that did.
This is how it works in many European countries and there's nothing wrong with it. The problem is the average UK driver would never pass a driving test in Germany, Austria or Hungary, they don't even know the current rules, let alone learning new rules.
Before you ask no, we were not told to just jump in front of a car and hope for the best, but to wait and after the car stopped we can go across the road.
@@bence.gabor.slezak I agree that this works well in many European countries, however, the quality of roads, pavements and cycle paths in main Europe far exceeds that in the UK. This I think contributes to the UK aggressive style of driving, as we simply don't have the space and investment in road and pathways that I have seen in most other European countries, to allow us to give way to every pedestrian that wants to cross the road wherever they wish
@@MrJozza65 roads in Hungary are much worse then in the UK, and no investment needed, no extra road markings. I wouldn't call it aggressive driving, more like "can't be arsed" with the rules. The big difference between the UK and EU is the driver education system, that's where the change is needed, but it would take a lifetime to have a significant effect. Other thing is at junctions with traffic lights there won't be time needed just for pedestrians, when traffic is only allowed to turn left or right they can cross the road too. No it won't slow down the flow of traffic, although it seems like it would.
These new rules are crazy. As a pedestrian & cyclist I will stick with the old rules. Are parents now going to teach children to just walk out into traffic assuming the car will stop?
Questions: What happens when a cyclist is riding in the centre of their lane on a faster road where the speed limit is the national speed limit (60mph)? What if we make the road a bit bendy, with hedges? How is the cyclist going to see a vehicle approaching from behind? Are bicycles going to be fitted with a screen showing a live image from a following drone?
As a cyclist on roads as described above, Iâll stay as far left as the road surface allows regardless of the fact that any collision will be the fault of the other vehicle driver, because being in the right is no good if Iâm dead!
Drivers should not be driving faster than their ability to brake for an obstruction in the road. What if that obstruction around the bend is a tree. This is a situation of the driver not driving with due attention, but I take your point and reality is that they will drive faster and cyclists keep over and be prepared to bail into the ditch, hedge or whatever.
Totally agree with you, this has been designed to cause as much chaos as possible and try to push more cars off the roads by making journeys as frustrating as possible. Add this to councils charging emission taxes and you have a anti car campaign.
No, it was designed through a large consultation exercise last year. Iâm assuming you didnât respond?
And so what if itâs anti car? Thatâs a good thing! The pollution and health issues caused by too many car journeys (ever seen how many are single occupancy under two miles? Crazy!) needs resolving.
There are too many private cars on the road anyway, just using vehicles for short journeys to the farmers market, village shop etc.
If this isn't a recipe for more road rage I don't know what is!
Not everything is on 1's doorstep including employment so 1 doesn't have a choice but to use a vehicle to get about, when you don't live in the centre of a town, what about those that live in rural areas, do they not have consideration, you can't say too many cars on the road, this was probably an absurd idea from someone who doesn't have a clue and prob live in centre of London đ
Yup, agree 100%, let's hope it works!
Having driven professionally for 40 years, police and advanced trained both here and in Europe plus my experience of driving in many foreign countries. I can tell you categorically this is an exercise in theory without any practicality. It sounds good but is inherently dangerous and will cause confusion and many collisions. Most times these well meaning decisions are arrived at by inexperienced or even non experienced road users, probably fresh out of Uni, i.e.theory vs practice. You can witness their lunacy in the reorganisation of London UK traffic, which is more political than practical.
i can imagine a police car being on a high-speed chase and someone wants to cross and steps out in front of the police car -- due to the pedestrian not using common sense this means they will be injured or killed, the criminal will probably get away, and the police driver has committed a crime by not following the highway code and potentially killed someone -- yet if we had it where pedestrians were made to use crossing AND have to check it's clear (after all they have the most visibility), then it might be safer for them
@@paul28177
Police hitting pedestrians in circumstances such as that is a thing thatâs happened several times already as things were.
Also, having right of way doesnât absolve you from the responsibility to look where youâre going.
Correct, itâs all part of the plan to rid the streets of petrol/ diesel cars, slowly but surely they plan to grind us to our knees.
@@andy.m265 exactly mate. These morons forget we have to earn money to pay for their lunacy! Grinding the country to a halt
I live in a rural area with narrow lanes, overtaking cyclists will now become impossible. I will just have to drive at the same speed as the bike for many miles, polluting as I go. Madness!
As a recently retired Police Traffic Officer with 27.5 years on that department I can see these changes will cause more problems than they want to solve !!!
We have this kind of system in Poland and its really dangerous due to the simple fact that pedestrians and cyclists don't pay attention, particularly cyclists and fly across cycle crossings (pelican crossings I think they are called), this leads to fatal accidents and driving in cities is very challenging as 60% of the time turning right you have a significant blind spot in which there are often cyclists fast approaching expecting you to stop (in the UK this would be a left turn). In reality its very inconvenient and personally I find it ridiculous and stressful as a driver.
I am a retired hgv driver, one of the hardest things to do in a fully loaded 44 tonne articulated lorry, is, when following a cycling club riding in a block, is to 1) find a long enough, clear, stretch of road with enough visibility to overtake, and 2) accelerate quickly enough to take advantage of the chance. I have, in the past, had to follow these clubs for up to three miles at speeds of less than 25mph before being able to successfully and safely pass them.
You can imagine the length of the tail back and the level of impatience of the drivers,
Had that happen to me on my hgv test
I am a cyclist and passionated driver. I left a cycling club just 3 months after joining because of their arrogance.
Even on narrow roads they were riding abreast and not letting cars pass.
Always stating that they allowed to do so and screw this lazy car drivers.
I had my run ins with this cyclist on some other forums.
I have the opinion that of there is a cycling lane/path by law they should use it.
One of the most frustrating things happened to me a few years ago.
New and wide cycling lane, a club of around 20 cycles on the road not letting people pass...
I followed 3 cyclists playing the last man overtakes two riding side by side whilst they acted out their interpretation of the tour de France for 5 miles last year on a twisty road. I was not directly behind them but in a Q about 30 cars back. These new rules will lead to even more chaos already it will serve the Govt purpose of wanting to ban personal ownership of cars ...even EV's will succumb to those demands, as they are only a stepping stone to achieving the ultimate aim., as the cost of charging will restrain most owners to a range of about 20 miles from home, along side payment per mile. Freedoms are going to be seriously compromised by the drive towards net zero... it is a path to nowhere for the citizens
@@ldorman Which club was that? Or did you just make it up?
@@nighttrain1236
Try a larger one in Glasgow
Yet ANOTHER layer of madness in an already cockeyed society! Iâm a âMasters levelâ IAM advanced motorcyclist and Iâd NEVER HEARD of these Highway Code changes until this video! This information is completely new to me. Itâs all totally ridiculous and bound to compromise safety rather than âimproveâ it.
Weird - Iâve heard about these almost daily for months now. Iâd got so sick of it I assumed they were in force from 1 JanâŠ
By design agenda 21, they want your cars, off the roads, by design read Agenda 21 legislation đ€Łđ€Łđ€Ł
I follow Ashley Neil on CZcams and he has been covering these changes regularly. I commented that giving way to pedestrians at every junction will mean town's and cities will grind to a halt. That's what's intended though, they want driving to be so slow its pointless.
Been going on for months .. a lot are already existing recommendations ie tuning into a side road or entry and giving way to a waiting pedestrian it's always been that way .. there just pushing green agenda crap more with these new things
Can't figure out why you've only just become aware of this. I'm a motorcyclist too, been riding for forty six years. I first heard that this was coming about six months ago. Stay safe out there.
Every point you make is 100% valid. I'm a van driver and have been giving priority to pedestrians crossing all week. Very few realise they have that priority.
just keep doing it and be an example to other drivers. Many thanks on behalf of the pedestrians.
I had walked (safely) out to a vehicle separation (bollard) island in the middle of a main road and was waiting for an opportunity complete my crossing when the only car approaching stopped for me. I was dumfounded. No other cars approaching I walked over to her open window and asked why did she stop for me? She replied "It's in the new Highway code!" I thanked her and considered that I would never cross in front of or impede any vehicle, for 78 years of self preservation. The 'old way' is definitely better.
The âgive way to pedestrians *waiting* to cross at junctionsâ is likely quite dangerous and problematic. All vehicles should give way to pedestrians already crossing; thatâs perfectly reasonable and what those lines are for. Likewise most pedestrians are not so stupid that theyâd step out in front of a car just because they now, apparently, have right of way (the pedestrian will come off worse from the encounter regardless).
My concerns are that (a) most drivers wonât spot the rule change at all (who reads a Highway Code after passing their test?) and (b) the rule change may lead to children being taught they have now have priority (a reverse of the Green Cross Code) and (c) some adult pedestrians actually being preoccupied/stupid/bloody minded enough to cross like that anyway.
Irrespective of who gets the blame, this will lead to unecessary injuries and maybe even deaths.
I donât think anyone is actually that stupid. This is like arguing that Zebra crossings are inherently dangerous.
@@armadillito Have you not met people? They are as stupid as stupid comes, given half a chance..
@@georgebaker2164 p. Oaupiit
@@georgebaker2164 I am aware of that, yes. The level of outrage over this minor reclarification is demonstrating it quite effectively.
@@armadillito Assuming that people are "not that stupid" is the most stupid possible basis for law. People are always going to be stupid.
I can imagine pedestrians stood by a junction with no intention of crossing and inadvertently causing chaos. Also, as a previous cyclist I can't imagine riding and looking behind for faster vehicles all the time.
Agree what about electric cars that are quite
Then in this case, there needs to be a law that states cyclists MUST have 2 handlebar mirrors fitted so by enabling them to see behind them, as we car uses have our wing mirrors!
The next regulation for bicycles will be compulsory wing mirrors,lights, Insurance and Bicycle road tax.
With fines of up to ÂŁ100,000 and /or ten years in jail as well !!
@@reme2493 Electric cars are not silent outside. I was passed by a Tesla earlier this morning and due to the tyre noise it was just an noisy as the ICE cars around it
As a pedestrian who is partially sighted, these new rules are going to make crossing a nightmare as it was bad enough before hand.
I still wait until I am aware that the road is clear as far as I'm sure, but I do not trust most drivers as they will flash their lights but then carry on driving when I'm crossing so it means I have to walk faster, but as I've already come across this but where E-Scooters shoot past the car giving way almost hitting me. Can't win.
I completely agree with you, thereâs obviously a need to always review the existing procedures with the aim of making it better and safer for all, but these new rules are laughable. It actually creates uncertainty and will lead to more confusion and chaos. It is impractical and unworkable in my view and expect more accidents on our roads and more road rage as well. Imagine the number of occasions that teenagers and even adults meet up at junctions and street corners just shooting the breeze. If itâs not revoked, then at the very least, zebra crossings must be placed on every street corner so pedestrians know they can safely cross without having to wait for the vehicle as the âlook left look right and repeatâ grilled into us from childhood is deeply ingrained in our subconscious. I can begin to visualise the long tailbacks following a cyclist on a busy single carriageway, we will need to adjust to driving at the pace of the cyclists considering how narrow our roads are. I wonder who comes up with these changes, and to think they are being paid for this rubbish.