Rear headlights weren't on

clt66

Hi all,

Looking for a bit of help/advice. Was stopped last night with my rear lights out which the officer asked if I was aware of which I wasn't. Was confused as they were working earlier in the night - looks like I had "daytime running lights on". Thankfully my rear lights weren't damaged as i them realised what had happened and turned then on

They asked if I had anything to drink which I hadn't, and they accepted as they didn't brethalyse me. They asked why we were in the area, and after checking my name on the radio and running my number plate said we were free to go. The other officer also said to be careful with the lights

No TOR "traffic offence report" was given to me and they didn't say they were intending to prosecute. Just wondering whether I should still expect any more from this? I'm posting on here as I have terrible anxiety at the best of times

Only hoping the fact no TOR or any kind of ticket was given/the fact they didn't say mention anything about prosecuting or caution is a positive thing

clt66

* should say rear lights not headlights! But can't find a way to edit

Richard53

They have identified your error, given you a bit of advice, and sent you on your way. Nothing to worry about. Seems they behaved decently to you.

If your car had daytime running lights, these are at the front only. It can be confusing, seeing the front lights on and assuming the rears are on too. It's not made easier by the fact that most modern cars have the dash lit up all the time. In the old days, the speedo lights came on with the sidelights, so it was easy to see when they weren't on after dark - you couldn't see the instruments!

I'm sure the police see this a lot. Driving at night in town (headlights not needed), it is common to see cars relying on their DRLs - I assume the drivers think their lights are on when they aren't.

clt66

Richard53 said:

They have identified your error, given you a bit of advice, and sent you on your way. Nothing to worry about. Seems they behaved decently to you.

If your car had daytime running lights, these are at the front only. It can be confusing, seeing the front lights on and assuming the rears are on too. It's not made easier by the fact that most modern cars have the dash lit up all the time. In the old days, the speedo lights came on with the sidelights, so it was easy to see when they weren't on after dark - you couldn't see the instruments!

I'm sure the police see this a lot. Driving at night in town (headlights not needed), it is common to see cars relying on their DRLs - I assume the drivers think their lights are on when they aren't.

Thank you so much for your reply - I really do appreciate it. 

The dash thing is confusing and like you say my front lights were lighting up the road ahead. What's not helped also is that 2 weeks ago, another driver drove into me from a side road and wrote my car off, that one was different as if the lights weren't on the dash wasn't lit. I'll definitely never forget about DRL only being the front lights now

They said the car was "in trade" which worried me a bit. But when I asked what that meant, they just said it meant the previous owner had let the DVLA know it was no longer their car

Honestly been beating myself up over it since last night, felt sick all day and hardly able to eat thinking i'll end up with something on my doormat

Richard53

I'm 99.99% certain you have heard the last of it. I can be a bit of a 'worrier', but in your situation I would be confident it was all behind me. You've learned something, now move on.

Grumpy_chap

Richard53 said:

They have identified your error, given you a bit of advice, and sent you on your way. Nothing to worry about. Seems they behaved decently to you.

Seems like the OP passed the "attitude test"

Richard53

Exactly. 
..

AdrianC

Hopefully, you've taken the hint, and been reminded that driving without turning your lights on at night is as bad an idea as it ever was before DRLs...

It's ridiculously common, bad design exacerbated by drivers who simply assume. You'd think the fact that DRLs simply don't actually illuminate much in front would be a clue... Apparently not.

clt66

Richard53 said:

I'm 99.99% certain you have heard the last of it. I can be a bit of a 'worrier', but in your situation I would be confident it was all behind me. You've learned something, now move on.

Grumpy_chap said:

Richard53 said:

They have identified your error, given you a bit of advice, and sent you on your way. Nothing to worry about. Seems they behaved decently to you.

Seems like the OP passed the "attitude test"

Thank you both for your replies. I really appreciate them! 

With the attitude test, I pulled over as soon as I knew they wanted us too. When the male officer asked if i knew my rear lights weren't on I was honest and said I had no idea that they weren't. I realised that the headlights weren't on so flicked the switch and asked him if he could confirm they were now on which he did, and I told him I was asking because the car is having its MOT this week

The female officer asked my name and address, she misheard my address so i told her the correct one. She was speaking on her radio, she asked me my date of birth. Then read the number plate out to the person on the radio - I'm guessing the name, address, dob etc is so they can check you on the PNC, which i've never been in trouble with the police

I'm assuming from the PNC they would have told her details of my licence - which is clean. No points or offences

When she asked if I had had a drink, I said no. I've had 2 diet cokes. If she had wanted to double check that with a breathalyser would have had no issue but she didn't ask for one

And although I had my licence on me, they didn't ask to see that either

Told me that the car was "in trade" which I asked them to explain. When they said it just meant the previious owner had let them know it was no longer his car. I was then able to explain that I'd had another driver drive in to my old car so this one is new and we are awaiting the V5 document in the post

And other than all of that, there wasn't anything else that happened. Wasn't asked to get out of the car, no paper TOR handed to me. No mention of being told I'd be prosecuted or to expect anything in the post. Just that they said we could go and the male officer said to be careful with the lights

clt66

AdrianC said:

Hopefully, you've taken the hint, and been reminded that driving without turning your lights on at night is as bad an idea as it ever was before DRLs...

It's ridiculously common, bad design exacerbated by drivers who simply assume. You'd think the fact that DRLs simply don't actually illuminate much in front would be a clue... Apparently not.

Definitely been a reminder, Adrian! Promise my lights are one of the first things I turn on when driving at night. What I think happened the other night was we were parked outside a takeaway in a well lit street and I turned the lights off to save the battery, when it came time to turn the engine on I totally forgot that I had turned the lights off and my dash was lit so wasn't alerted to my moment of forgetfulness - my previous written of car I would have known instantly! As we got driving, we were in a well lit town centre so the fact the DRLs weren't illuminating much wasn't as obvious as it would be on a pitch black road. Genuinely one moment of forgetfulness. In future will be checking and double checking my lights are properly turned on in

Richard53

Point is this: you have committed a moving traffic offence. The police were fully entitled to stop you, check you are who you say you are, and that the car is yours and is legal (the reg number check probably checked the car was taxed and insured as well), and that you haven't been drinking. You satisfied them on all of those points and were (I'm guessing) polite and co-operative. They decided there was no purpose in pursuing it further, so they gave you a bit of advice and sent you on your way. Good, old-fashioned policing.