Zebra crossing lights not working

Strider590

littlerock wrote: »

He was dressed in black, trousers, shoes and overcoat, and carrying a large black umbrella held down low to protect him from the rain. There are no street lights at that point, and he was practically invisible.

Fortunately I spotted him and he spotted me and we both stopped so no damage done. He was in fact on a zebra crossing but I had not seen any lights for it. On my return journey I checked and both the flashing lights, one on each side of the road were broken. (The crossing was only marked by the flashing lights, which were not working, nothing else. It was not a pelican crossing.)

Regardless of the lights, you should have seen the crossing, as they are all I believe painted in retroflective white paint, so they are visible as long as your headlights are turned on.
This is one of the reasons why I think the law needs to change so that the Police can crack down on drivers who drive about on their parking lights.

Pedestrians dressed in black is idiotic, I saw one yesterday crossing a junction in dark jeans and a black hoodie at around 7pm, he nearly got hit by a car, he stopped and started giving the driver a load of abuse. To the car driver, against the lights of the passing vehicles he would have been totally invisible.

150940

Car_54 wrote: »

No need for a demo. The law requires me to give precedence to the ped. But not right of way.

Anyway, enough pedantry. From the OP's description, I take it that the crossing in question is actually within hospital grounds. Again according to the OP, it had no ziz-zag or other markings. So it wasn't a zebra, or indeed a crossing at all.

He hasn't said there weren't zig-zags has he?

Car_54

150940 wrote: »

He hasn't said there weren't zig-zags has he?

He said "The crossing was only marked by the flashing lights, which were not working, nothing else."

150940

Car_54 wrote: »

He said "The crossing was only marked by the flashing lights, which were not working, nothing else."

Hospital on one side and flats on the other, suggests he's on a road and not in the hospital. He's missed the zig-zags as he did with the crossing.

Nick_C

Car_54 wrote: »

The law requires me to give precedence to the ped. But not right of way.

Not having a go, honestly, but can you explain what you think the difference is between "giving precedence" and "right of way". I think most people regard the two phrases as synonymous. Despite what the HC says in the preamble to 103/158, I can find scores of examples on Government websites of references to pedestrians having right of way on zebra crossings. And when discussing driving with friends and colleagues, and to the best of my recollection my driving instructors, we always talk about "right of way".

littlerock

OK - just to clarify. There is a major crossroads controlled by lights with the possibility to go straight on, turn left or right from all directions. There are no filters or road markings. There is frequent congestion at this junction. There are often rush hour queues on all the roads.

The hospital was modernised a few years back and they built a main vehicle access road into it very close to this junction. Large vehicles turn left or right into the hospital grounds here and also obstruct the passing traffic so it is would seem that stationary traffic is often stuck on the crossing and its approaches making the markings more difficult to spot as you approach. Particularly in rush hour on a dark wet night.

I was in stationary traffic last night in the hospital road behind a car and a lorry, when it started to move. As I edged forward, a male pedestrian all in black carrying a large black umbrella hurried into the road on what i saw to be a crossing (yes it does have road markings which had been obscured by a large stationary lorry but currently no flashing lights). Fortunately I saw him and stopped. Recently there was a nasty accident here when a bus turning right out of the hospital grounds knocked down a pedestrian on the same crossing.

The hospital has been there a long time so there are limits on how easy access can be made. Ideally there would be a pelican crossing and/or a roundabout at the entrance but there is no room for a roundabout and I assume a pelican crossing has been considered and rejected because of its potential impact on the traffic flows - it is a very busy road.

Sometimes pedestrians need to act cautiously as well. Can they just walk dressed all in black out onto a crossing in heavy traffic on a dark rainy night in a busy area without bothering about the cars?

neilmcl

Car to share a google maps link of the location?

JP08

littlerock wrote: »

Sometimes pedestrians need to act cautiously as well. Can they just walk dressed all in black out onto a crossing in heavy traffic on a dark rainy night in a busy area without bothering about the cars?

Well, yes they can, provided they have given you a reasonable space to stop in (and as you say you were edging forward after having stopped, that distance is !!!!!! all). There's no law against it. Advisable, no. Legal, yes.

Couple of thoughts from the pedestrian's perspective.

a) When he left for work this morning I'm sure that crossing a pedestrian crossing in the dark 12 hours later didn't even enter into his thoughts when selecting his wardrobe.

b) what seems like reasonable visibility when outside a car can be very different from inside, especially through a rain splattered windscreen. He may well have thought you should be able to see him perfectly well (and, lets be honest, he was right !)

Car_54

Nick_C wrote: »

Not having a go, honestly, but can you explain what you think the difference is between "giving precedence" and "right of way". I think most people regard the two phrases as synonymous. Despite what the HC says in the preamble to 103/158, I can find scores of examples on Government websites of references to pedestrians having right of way on zebra crossings. And when discussing driving with friends and colleagues, and to the best of my recollection my driving instructors, we always talk about "right of way".

I think you'll find driving instructors these days talk of "priority".

I believe the DVSA's thinking in avoiding "right of way" (apart from pedantry!) is that the phrase encourages a mind-set of entitlement, rather than taking responsibility.

almillar

littlerock - you passed a test and earnt a licence to drive. The pedestrian doesn't need a licence. So you should treat them all as if they're dressed invisibly and about to jump out in front of you, so that you don't get a shock, you'll probably get the blame if you hit one! One thing you can do is report the lights not working at the crossing (to the Council?).