Chance of FPN for crossing an asymmetric red light on a specific lane?

Ermia

Manxman_in_exile said:

Grey_Critic said:

It is all about Lane Dicipline - see it every day cars in wrong lane at junctions

But the OP wasn't in the wrong lane*, were they?  Weren't they in the right-hand lane wanting to go straight ahead and the lane markings in that right-hand lane allow them to go straight ahead?

*I'm assuming by "wrong lane" that you mean that the OP was in the wrong lane to go straight ahead and not just that they weren't in the most appropriate lane to go straight on.

That is correct. I was allowed to go straight from the right-hand lane, though the general recommendation is to use the left-hand lane.

The question was about whether the green arrow on the left-hand traffic light also applies to the right-hand lane. And my understanding from the replies is that it is allowed.

BTW, I understand I should prefer to use the left-hand lane in general, but on an empty street, at midnight, when the left-hand lane opens 20 meters before the junction and mergest into the right-hand lane shortly after the junction, made me feel it is unnecessary to do a curved path (go left lane and come back to right), when I'm actually allowed to use the right-hand lane.

Manxman_in_exile said:

It looks to me like either they've installed the wrong set of lights at that junction and/or the lane markings are wrong.  The OP might be right when they suggest:

Ermia said:

... To give more context, the markings on both roads allow for going straight now. However, the markings have been different in the past:

• Until 2012, the right-hand lane was for turning right only
• Around 2018: both lanes were for going straight only 
• Now, the right-hand lane is for going straight AND turning right

and that is possibly why the traffic light configuration is asymmetric. It might have been installed when the right-hand lane was only for turning right...

Yes, I suspect the traffic light is a legacy of the past.  The roadworks in the Westfield area are never-ending. Just a couple of nights ago they changed the speed limit there. The drivers are left to shoulder the burden of interpreting the law for such as unprecedented configuration, and you just have milliseconds to do all that reasoning.

Car_54

Manxman_in_exile said:

daveyjp said:

Similar to lights near me.  Two lanes ahead, right lane is also right turn.

When lights first change it is ahead green arrow only, for both lanes, then a few seconds later the right filter lights.  If in the right lane and going straight ahead you can go, if turning right wait for the right turn filter.

Coming the other way left for ahead snd right lane is for right turn only.  First green is a green arrow ahead and there is a sign telling traffic not to turn right whilst red is showing, this eventuallh changes to a right arrow green.

But isn't the problem that the lights at the junction the OP is talking about are nothing at all like the lights you describe?  (The lights you describe sound sensible whereas the OP's lights are just daft).

1.  There are no green straight on arrows in both lanes at the OP's junction.  There is only a single straight on green arrow and that is for the left-hand lane.  That arrow is illuminated while the lights for the right-hand lane are still on red.

That is simply not the case. ALL the lights apply to ALL the lanes.  There is absolutely nothing in law (AFAIK) or in the HC to suggest otherwise.

Further, the direction arrows are not mandatory, unless accompanied by the wording "Turn Left", "Turn Right", or "Ahead Only".

Manxman_in_exile

Car_54 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

daveyjp said:

Similar to lights near me.  Two lanes ahead, right lane is also right turn.

When lights first change it is ahead green arrow only, for both lanes, then a few seconds later the right filter lights.  If in the right lane and going straight ahead you can go, if turning right wait for the right turn filter.

Coming the other way left for ahead snd right lane is for right turn only.  First green is a green arrow ahead and there is a sign telling traffic not to turn right whilst red is showing, this eventuallh changes to a right arrow green.

But isn't the problem that the lights at the junction the OP is talking about are nothing at all like the lights you describe?  (The lights you describe sound sensible whereas the OP's lights are just daft).

1.  There are no green straight on arrows in both lanes at the OP's junction.  There is only a single straight on green arrow and that is for the left-hand lane.  That arrow is illuminated while the lights for the right-hand lane are still on red.

That is simply not the case. ALL the lights apply to ALL the lanes.  There is absolutely nothing in law (AFAIK) or in the HC to suggest otherwise.

Further, the direction arrows are not mandatory, unless accompanied by the wording "Turn Left", "Turn Right", or "Ahead Only".

I think you may have misunderstood my  post - or perhaps I didn't express myself very well.

@daveyjp had posted that the set of lights described by the OP were similar to ones close to them and went on to describe them.  I was simply pointing out that the lights described by @daveyJP were completely different from those described by the OP and, in contrast to the OP's, seemed quite sensible.

AIUI the OP is saying their junction has two lanes approaching it, and at it you can either go straight on or turn right.  There is no left turn. 

In the left hand lane you can only go straight ahead according to the lane markings.  In the right hand lane you can either go straight ahead or turn right according to the lane markings.

The four lights adjacent to the left hand lane are in descending order red, amber, green, and green straight on arrow.

The three lights adjacent to the right hand lane are in descending order red, amber, and green.  Apparently there is no green filter right arrow for drivers wishing to turn right from that right hand lane.

I'm not disputing with you that the lane markings are merely advisory and not mandatory.  Neither am I necessarily disputing that "ALL the lights apply to ALL the lanes", although I'm not sure either that that is correct.  (All the lights applying to all the lanes?  I'm not sure that makes sense...? )

What I'm saying is that the combination of lights and lane markings at that junction don't seem quite right to me and are potentially - if not actually - confusing.  I'm inclined to agree with @Jenni_D that that junction is an accident waiting to happen.