Fixed Penalty Notice..... Gobsmacked!

Sgt_Pepper_2

brat wrote: »

Fair comment on the face of it; but many mini roundabouts can be made much more dangerous by people shortcutting them (turning right before them or over them rather than round them) causing traffic approaching from the other side to have them coming into their path much more quickly than expected, from the wrong part of the roundabout. Usually the person shortcutting doesn't think he's done anything wrong, and gives the other motorists grief for crossing into his path.

It's lazy, it's potentially dangerous, and I don't think a £30 ticket is too harsh.

Perhaps we need a public information film on BBC about the correct negotiation of mini roundabouts.

A public information film. Are you still on dial up?

redux

I just looked on a Google maps at a road that came to mind.

At one mini roundabout the paint disc is about 7 feet in diameter and the clearance from the give way line to the centre disc is about 12 feet.

At another one about 200 yards away on the same road, with exactly the same alignment of the 3 roads, the centre disc is 9 or 10 feet in diameter, with a solid extra hoop around it making it 13 feet diameter, and the clearance from the nearest give way line to the centre is barely 7 feet, which is a lot narrower than any of the lane widths approaching or leaving

brat

redux wrote: »

I just looked on a Google maps at a road that came to mind.

At one mini roundabout the paint disc is about 7 feet in diameter and the clearance from the give way line to the centre disc is about 12 feet.

At another one about 200 yards away on the same road, with exactly the same alignment of the 3 roads, the centre disc is 9 or 10 feet in diameter, with a solid extra hoop around it making it 13 feet diameter, and the clearance from the nearest give way line to the centre is barely 7 feet, which is a lot narrower than any of the lane widths approaching or leaving

Mmini roundabouts can have a maximum central disc of 4m. They can be smaller. In the UK, they cannot be used on roads over 30mph. Their design often depends on the volume, proportion and type of traffic coming into the mini-rab from each arm.

Wig

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

If you had bothered to read the whole thread you would realise he corrected himself.

I believe derricks reply was valid, TNO had dismissed out of hand the reference to the Highway code, which refers to laws by using the word MUST. and then postscripts the relevant laws at the bottom of the paragraph. The highway code reference in this thread was very useful, because it showed which laws were potentially broken.

If TNO had read the highway code and had known how it works, he would have known which law had been broken.

Lum

brat wrote: »

Fair comment on the face of it; but many mini roundabouts can be made much more dangerous by people shortcutting them (turning right before them or over them rather than round them) causing traffic approaching from the other side to have them coming into their path much more quickly than expected, from the wrong part of the roundabout. Usually the person shortcutting doesn't think he's done anything wrong, and gives the other motorists grief for crossing into his path.

It's lazy, it's potentially dangerous, and I don't think a £30 ticket is too harsh..

It's really an education issue though. Many people believe that it's ok to treat mini roundabouts as if they were a T junction or crossroads, just with altered priorities. If this is causing a problem then a quiet word should be enough to get most reasonable people to nip it in the bud.

Of course, we don't know what the OPs attitude was like upon being pulled over but they seem to have taken it well when the law was pointed out to them, even if they started with a "f*** the police" response due to having been given a ticket.

And that is the key issue. A quiet word and a reminder of the law and the majority will take that onboard. Going straight to a ticket and people react a lot more negatively.

The people on this forum have actually done the officer's job for them, by politely pointing out the law, the OP is now going to avoid making this mistake again. That's all it took. A bit of common decency and some friendly advice.

But, hey ho, the ticket means another crime solved, and better stats.

brat

Lum wrote: »

It's really an education issue though. Many people believe that it's ok to treat mini roundabouts as if they were a T junction or crossroads, just with altered priorities. If this is causing a problem then a quiet word should be enough to get most reasonable people to nip it in the bud.

Of course, we don't know what the OPs attitude was like upon being pulled over but they seem to have taken it well when the law was pointed out to them, even if they started with a "f*** the police" response due to having been given a ticket.

And that is the key issue. A quiet word and a reminder of the law and the majority will take that onboard. Going straight to a ticket and people react a lot more negatively.

The people on this forum have actually done the officer's job for them, by politely pointing out the law, the OP is now going to avoid making this mistake again. That's all it took. A bit of common decency and some friendly advice.

But, hey ho, the ticket means another crime solved, and better stats.

I agree it's about education, which is why I mentioned about the 'public information film'.
That said, I believe that most drivers would know it's wrong to nick to the right of a mini roundabout, and all should know. It's slightly less cut and dried when all they're doing is putting their right wheels a foot onto the disc.

Your primary point brings a deeper debate to the fore about penalties. Should they be to punish drivers for their wrongdoing; should it be to discourage them from doing it again,; or should advice be given when appropriate - penalty only when believed they won't benefit from advice?

I know what camp I'm in. But many would say I'm being unfair by granting myself the right to exercise discretion.

Lum

I don't agree that most drivers would know how to use a mini roundabout. This is largely based on personal observation, but if you think about it mini roundabouts are only a relatively recent addition to UK roads. They came in in the late 1970s so anyone who passed their test prior to then is unlikely to have received any education in how to use them. Most of the early mini roundabouts were used as drop-in replacements for busy T-junctions, so it's understandable that people would treat them as a T-junction with altered priorities.

It's not just mini roundabouts either. I remember the chaos and confusion when M53 J4, where I lived at the time, was converted from a traditional 3 lane roundabout into a turbo roundabout. Again for older people these are something new that they wont have encountered before.

A good natured quiet word should be all that is needed to get people to use it properly. If they get funny about it, then it's ticket time.

brat

Lum wrote: »

A good natured quiet word should be all that is needed to get people to use it properly. If they get funny about it, then it's ticket time.

I tend to agree, although there are circumstances where I believe a person would benefit from a ticket, despite not giving me grief beforehand.

I'm pleased that the recent ACPO roads policing strategy 2011 2015 endorses a road policing framework that I've campaigned for for a generation.

From ACPO Policing the Roads - 5 Year Strategy 2011-2015
Roads policing needs to shift from a target driven approach to performance, to one that enables officers to use their discretion and professional judgement to deliver safer roads and improved driver behaviour. Working with partners and stakeholders our ambition must be to create a shift in public attitude and behaviour to one of habitual compliance with the laws and conventions of the road.

An over reliance on automated enforcement can undermine public confidence and support for roads policing. Policing can only be successful when it is regarded as legitimate. To engage better with ALL road users will require the Service to find the appropriate balance between education, engineering and enforcement. The Service must focus on road users who pose the highest threat of harm whilst responding appropriately to those who have shown a momentary lapse of judgement or care.

In short we must focus on our relationship with road users in which we work together to fulfil our vision of a “safe and secure environment for all road users”.

There will thus be a greater emphasis on enforcement based on professional discretion and judgement, increasing the number of potential enforcement interactions that result in education

Sgt_Pepper_2

brat wrote: »

I tend to agree, although there are circumstances where I believe a person would benefit from a ticket, despite not giving me grief beforehand.

I'm pleased that the recent ACPO roads policing strategy 2011 2015 endorses a road policing framework that I've campaigned for for a generation.

From ACPO Policing the Roads - 5 Year Strategy 2011-2015
Roads policing needs to shift from a target driven approach to performance, to one that enables officers to use their discretion and professional judgement to deliver safer roads and improved driver behaviour. Working with partners and stakeholders our ambition must be to create a shift in public attitude and behaviour to one of habitual compliance with the laws and conventions of the road.

An over reliance on automated enforcement can undermine public confidence and support for roads policing. Policing can only be successful when it is regarded as legitimate. To engage better with ALL road users will require the Service to find the appropriate balance between education, engineering and enforcement. The Service must focus on road users who pose the highest threat of harm whilst responding appropriately to those who have shown a momentary lapse of judgement or care.

In short we must focus on our relationship with road users in which we work together to fulfil our vision of a “safe and secure environment for all road users”.

There will thus be a greater emphasis on enforcement based on professional discretion and judgement, increasing the number of potential enforcement interactions that result in education

That you've campaigned for?

What have you done about it?

brat

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

That you've campaigned for?

What have you done about it?

Pepper, you can ask, but you must also ask yourself, why do you think anyone should be interested in engaging with such an unpleasant person as yourself?