Laws for use of car indicators?

Stephen_Leak

esmerobbo wrote: »

I have a BMW do these have indicators?

"Top Gear" magazine had a special feature on BMW drivers. It was a pull-out-without-indicating supplement.

SHIPSHAPE

arcon5 wrote: »

They are also exempt from speed limits, parking regulations and several other regulations:p

In my local authority, and I guess many others if not all, taxi licences supercede many regulations, including parking regs, but never speed limits.

What may annoy you could actually be perfectly legal, hardly the fault of a taxi driver.

Lum

Taxi drivers are also exempt from seatbelt regs.

(Genuine post, not sarcastic)

Strider590

This is simple....... Indicate if doing so would benefit ANYONE.
The emphasis is on paying attention to the f**king road and judging whether it's necessary or not, the problems start when people do or don't do things by pure habit.

Lum

Strider590 wrote: »

This is simple....... Indicate if doing so would benefit ANYONE.
The emphasis is on paying attention to the f**king road and judging whether it's necessary or not

Not just the road... also the pavement.

But the basic point is correct.

NBLondon

Lum wrote: »

It's actually getting worse with these modern clever indicators they're putting on cars these days.

...

The Mondeo has latching switches but it still does the 3 flash thing if you tap the lever lightly, so poke it wrong when trying to flash your lights, you still end up giving a misleading signal.

Me too My old Mondeo (Mk3) was fine - one tap for one flash or down to indicate properly. My new Focus does the 3 flash thing. Which is sometimes handy when changing lanes on a dual carriageway (no danger of it not cancelling because the turn wasn't sharp) but can be confusing if you hit it by accident.


And I do indicate for the benefit of pedestrians - I also make eye contact if I've chosen to stop short for them (without impeding anyone behind) to make sure we both agree.

almillar

Strider, Lum, we've been here before, but instead of 'Indicate if doing so would benefit ANYONE', I would simplify it even further, to 'JUST INDICATE EVERY TIME'. I don't agree with this 'advanced' way of looking out for people before deciding whether to indicate or not (which people say makes drivers pay more attention to their surroundings, rather than driving around in autopilot), it seems to me that there's not enough indicating going on, so just indicate anyway, what's there to lose?
That business 'driving school', BTW is a disgrace in my opinion and should be shut down. If businesses are really trying to manipulate the rules of the road to save themselves money in the event of an accident, they shouldn't have employees driving for them. Shocking.
I quite happily walk out in front of cars that were turning into a side road all the time, I look, see no indicator, and cross. Sometimes they're patient, rarely you get a stare, and you stop, point at their indicator and walk on. I've also got a nasty habit of walking out at crossings when I know the driver isn't going to stop for the red light, so if I ever don't come back here, please avenge my death etc...

Lum

almillar wrote: »

That business 'driving school', BTW is a disgrace in my opinion and should be shut down. If businesses are really trying to manipulate the rules of the road to save themselves money in the event of an accident, they shouldn't have employees driving for them. Shocking.

As you say, we've been here before on a lot of this thread, but I'm quoting this bit because I'm entirely in agreement with you here.

As for walking out in front of cars that you know aren't going to stop. Sorry but this is a silly thing to do. They'll write on your tombstone "he had right of way".
I'd rather yield to an idiot than be dead.

muckybutt

I would certainly say Driving without due care and attention would be applicable :

Meaning of careless, or inconsiderate, drivingE+W+S
(1)This section has effect for the purposes of sections 2B and 3 above and section 3A below.
(2)A person is to be regarded as driving without due care and attention if (and only if) the way he drives falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.
(3)In determining for the purposes of subsection (2) above what would be expected of a careful and competent driver in a particular case, regard shall be had not only to the circumstances of which he could be expected to be aware but also to any circumstances shown to have been within the knowledge of the accused.
(4)A person is to be regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving.

Lum

That is such an hilariously vague offence description though.

If you assuming driving standards are on a bell curve, where would you place "competent" would you place it at middle point of the bell curve and criminalise nearly half the drivers on the road?

Would you place it near the bottom of the bell curve, at which point your definition of "competent" doesn't mean very much.

Do you assume that "competent" falls under "above average" and criminalise pretty much everybody by placing it near the top?