My main concern is that these changes do not seem to have been publicised. I only know about them because I take an interest, and I would guess the majority of road users are unaware of the changes.
I've carried out inspections on many building sites . There are many people injured by plant. So a simple rule was brought in.. the bigger the plant the more room you give them. This rule caused the death rate and accident rate to plumit.
Nicely put. At the end of the day, no _sensible_ pedestrian / cyclist deliberately puts themselves in danger, irrespective of liability, and no _sensible_ driver should knowingly endanger a vulnerable road user. Some drivers in this country have a scary "get out of my way or else" attitude. If this is you, then you might want to rethink your attitude towards driving a 1.4 ton metal box...
My biggest issue is that pavement users will now take priority at junctions. Pedestrians don't signal their intention as to which direction they are going so there is no way they can alert other road users to maintain flow. Under current rules a competent motorist turning left into a side road will note the pedestrian walking towards/near the junction and stay alert should they need to react whilst approaching and making the turn. Under the new rules the motorist would have to stop on the main carriageway, just in case the pedestrian is crossing the junction and continuing, and wait for the pedestrian to either turn left (in which case a disruption has occurred for absolutely no reason) or cross the junction. It's going to cause absolute havoc, especially when the pedestrian is more often than not going to be completely unaware of the rule changes and will stop at the junction regardless to let the car complete its turn, resulting in an 'are they going to move or not' situation for all parties involved. It's going to cause a lot of confusion
@@ivanboyes9773 Not all of the time, every time it's not...no matter how much common sense you possess. Don't forget, you may have all the common sense in the world...but that just means the pedestrian has none...
One thing I'd like to see, and this is just on a common sense level. Is that pedestrians need to make themselves more visible at night it's very hard to predict the movements of a person who has decided to dress like a ninja. I came close to running someone over the other night when they walked out of an alleyway and crossed the road without stopping or paying attention. The saving grace on this occasion was that they had a dog on a lead with a flashing LED collar, I spotted the dog before I saw the owner! Perhaps they need hazard lights!
The mobile phone is an issue even with pedestrians, it's becoming an everyday occurrence of pedestrians crossing roads whilst looking down at their mobile phones oblivious to the danger they bring upon themselves, it's the road user who has to make up for their stupidity in most cases because most if not all, just carry on across that road regardless..
It just happen to me a few hours ago, a mom with her 3-4 yo child had her eyes on the phone, walking on the sidewalk and suddenly turned to the road, I was 2-3 meters away on 20 mph with a 44 tons truck, what do you expect me to do? Do you think that I could stop? The driver at the other side of the road returned home to change his pants. I saw her but I believed that she just walks, I couldn't believe that she will try to pass the road, she didn't even turn her head to my side, she just took her eyes from her phone turned 90° and walked in front of the truck!!!!
@@chrishar110 With most of these things it will probably sort itself out in the wash. Our legal system whilst incredibly flawed is still very able to apportion blame. I think there will inevitably be a few cases in the future describing exactly what you have just witnessed but with a more unfortunate outcome that will test the rules. I can't see our system just thumbing it's nose up at an impossible ask. If there is no way you could stop, physics will bear that out and any conviction would surely drum up a s storm to be amended. The public are generally fair and rational people and would not want to see someone jailed through no fault of their own. I guess the path forwards for you will be, make sure you always drive with a decent dash cam and as painful as it might be, always slow down and be ready for emergency stops/manoeuvres if you see a pedestrian distracted. Log those instance each journey and make sure your employer understands the impact the rule now has on your journey times. Businesses can then lobby accordingly if they are unwilling to swallow the extra cost. Or something like that. I don't have the answers, but I imagine if there truly is a problem it will rear it's ugly head and change will result, that's pretty much how it goes with everything.
@@DrWhosmate I don't want to prove to court it wasn't my fault. I don't want to hit or kill somebody. I was already on 20mph instead of 30, but I had too many frustrated drivers behind me in the morning rush and a transport manager who sees that Leigh to Liverpool is only an inch on the map and believes that you don't need more than 30 minutes to do it at 07:30 am. I can't use a dash cam, it's too annoying to move it when I have to change trucks at least once a day.
@@chrishar110 I hear you, but the reality is still the same, if these pass and come into effect, I don't see how it will be any other way. If the majority of people (as we see in the consultation) are for the rules and they get implemented in this form, then there will be no drive to have them changed _unless_ it comes to light they are not fit for purpose. So that only leaves you three options: 1) Adapt. 2) Risk not changing anything and hope for the best. 3) Quit driving. Unless I am missing something? Please let me know if I am.
Really nice to see you put the time in to keep us updated to changes. Sadly I don’t think everyone will see the changes as they have the ‘I passed my test years ago so I don’t need to look at the Highway Code again’ attitude. I still watch UA-cam videos on learners on their lessons today even though I passed my test nearly three months ago. tbh I think a refresher should be made compulsory but at the moment the test centres are still trying to get back to normal with all the backlog due to Covid. Looking forward to the next instalment on the changes
I get why they are doing this and I agree with what it is trying to achieve. However, my main concern is that this will have the opposite effect as people assume others now have the responsibility to look after them. I think there needs to be a third arrow for "Personal Responsibility" going the same way as risk; being "Right" will not stop bones breaking or blood flowing. I'm a biker and I've lost count of the times someone else has done something stupid or taken my right of way and I've spotted it and just backed off. Laws of Man will always lose against the Laws of Physics, and that 18-wheeler that pulled onto a roundabout without looking will not notice my squishy form going underneath it. Please assume everyone else is out to kill you and pay attention to your surroundings, whether your a trucker or a pedestrian.
Danger is when you're assuming you have right of way, nobody has that per the HC, only situations where you must give way. It's dangerous to assume you have right of way when in reality you should always be thinking that others technically should give way to you, but may not
I think most motorists won't care. When i'm out on the bike, the number of motorists who kick off and tell me i'm not allowed to filter is frankly absurd. If they don't know filtering is legal in 2022, then I doubt they'll care about this change.
Filtering isn’t illegal IF DONE WITH GREAT CARE it’s a wonderful thing to do but it’s very dangerous ! other motorists fail to realise that by filtering, two wheelers are actually reducing congestion but you get many belligerents who think of it as “Pushing in” and will deliberately try to block a riders progress
@@supremeleader9838 Thats a typical arrogant cyclist response, if I need to go shopping I cannot use a bike. As for the disabled Driver they are even worse off.
Excellent video. I think the changes are great. The problem is that plenty of motorists just don't care and will continue with the "might is right" approach to driving. In the video, the examples you give of pedestrians crossing carelessly actually show two instances where the pedestrian already has priority. i.e. they're on the road before the driver gets there. We need to change our driving culture so that more drivers acccept that getting from A-B isn't a race.
Thanks Ahley, really useful to keep upto date. Basically I agree with everything you say. I am a pedestrian, a cyclist and a car driver so I see it from all points of view.
I do my best to drive safely and try my best to look out for cyclists and pedestrians and other road users. However I feel as though this change to the highway code is not too relevant. What I do think is that there should be tougher penalties to tailgating and dangerous driving. I've had countless experiences of being tailgated for sticking to the limit. In fact sometimes it's for such a long period of time that I actually pull over and let them go past because I worry they're going to hit me. Also, as a newish driver, 2 years license, I remember quite well my days behind the wheel of a driving school car and give learners on the road time and space. However when doing this I get people being impatient at me for being patient. More needs to be done about dangerous driving imo
@Advanced Driving The issue is going through the insurance sounds like a nightmare from what I heard, so I'd rather let the tailgaters crack on and rush to the red light 1 car ahead. If there is a collision, I don't want to be a part of it! I can't imagine how scary it is for motorcyclists
@@nadim2769 I'd ignore advanceddriving, you don't want to get rear ended, though not your fault, if you're involved in an accident your insurance will go up to reflect that some drive defensively, others don't.
I was being tailgated, in a 20 mph limit road, by a very aggressive transit driver. So I pulled over to let him by so that he could tailgate the HEARSE in front of me. Karma!
@Advanced Driving I disagree with you on tailgating. It is better to let them pass quickly if you can. A man lost an eye recently because of a violent tailgater. Tailgating is a massive problem and people are being bullied on the road to drive faster!
This rule change is aimed at the small minority of arrogant drivers who think the road belongs to them. I hope it will encourage them to think more about their duty of care than their right of way.
True but. Duty of care is also your personal responsibility. So whose to fault for a cyclist not pausing at a Give Way and just rides out and they are hit by a car? The car? Or the Cyclist? Could the car have anticipated the cyclist? Possibly Change it up a bit; it is raining at night time the cyclist has no lights on and is wearing dark clothing personal responsibility. Take that to the extreme and EVERYONE would have to slow to a crawl in case someone who disobeys the law come out of a give way! That includes ALL vehicles you try that on the average high street in a residential area.
@@robertwillis4061 The key here is vulnerability. You talk as if it's just a case of who's to blame. If you are on a bike and you get hit by a car you are likely to be seriously injured or die! That's quite some incentive to take some personal responsibility!!
Thanks for this video. Really informative and I look forward to the next one in the series. It's good to be properly informed about this kind of thing. I do agree with those who have pointed out that Joe Average probably won't know about these changes and it's only through yourself, having a relative who is a driving instructor, and happening to come across an email from a mailing list I am on that I knew anything about them.
Also, in relation to what you said about some pedestrians being unable to hear or see vehicles - or have poor mobility - cognitive impairment is also a major issue when considering pedestrians
Whilst I can see what these changes are trying to achieve, I can't see them actually having any real effect. Surely it *should* be up to each and every individual to do anything they can to keep themselves as safe as possible whilst being equally mindful of others.
i do agree as everyone should look out for each other for everyone's safety but sadly even SOME adults still act like children so wat can we really do, i just look after myself the best i can and towards others. have a nice day and stay safe.
Applying sanctions is part of the teaching process. If there are no sanctions, folks will not change their behavior. Another unfortunate attitude is that some people will not understand what about their behavior might be anti-social, all they will understand is that if they are caught in such behavior that there will be consequences.
The amount of people that just walk into the road without looking even at pelican crossings because they're too busy staring at a phone is still a bigger problem than just making a hierarchy. I feel for the HGV and bus drivers being given the shaft more. Drivers love to go up any gap a lorry leaves for a manoeuvre.
@@inyobill yes i see many many tw- i mean morons behind the wheel all i can say is really, everyone is responsible for their own actions. lets say a guy walks out without looking he will be mainly at fault as he caused the most risk but the driver that hits him is still at fault but at a lot less as he was either 1 watching the roads or 2 watching for other cars, unless the driver was texting then thats a whole other story. anyways stay safe urself and have a good day.
Still see so many posts saying "The highway code is not law". Puts hand out in front, turns palm upwards, raises it to forehead with a loud slapping noise. duurghh
What I see also. As an HGV driver... the biggest risk I find is car drivers taking liberty's with lorries by cutting in dangerously close and getting hit due to stopping distance but suddenly you get blamed for their stupidity. Not to mention instances of being head of the queue at the lights and the opportunistic car driver jumping infront close to save 30 seconds because the lorry will pull off slower. Car drivers need to take a crash course on what it's like to drive a large vehicle. I also envision more instances of pedestrians stepping into the road blindly assuming priority 🤷♂️
The CPC course for drivers of buses and wagons is key with this, we're always taught to make damn sure you know what's in your blind spot and what could approach from anywhere, I had a cyclist pull straight out on me and I was doing 30mph, simply by making sure I knew I was aware of the road joining from the left I was able to change my manner of driving to be more suitable for the condition, plus previous experiences with cars running out at said junction I knew it happened a lot, whether that's local knowledge of mine or luck is to be seen however my point remains the same, keeping my eyes open prevented a cyclist getting run over by a bus, admittedly the passengers had a sharp breaking event to deal with and a blast on an air horn but I digress, I think the CPC course should be more universally taught especially for van drivers and maybe even taxi drivers too, the more people taught with it, the better, it gives me a better understanding of the hazards that can occur and how to lower/prevent entirely risks that can form with me just driving in tunnel vision and looking 30ft ahead of me..
Gotta say the "people will use this an excuse to not look after themselves" comments border on concern trolling. Consistently people comment on these changes and say how it will affect other people but no one is taking ownership and saying they will be one of those people that suddenly stops looking out for their own safety. So if everyone agrees that its stupid to not take personal responsibility isn't it quite obvious that the vast majority of people will not have their mentality effected by this at all. A pedestrian doesn't step out into a road without looking because they think its someone elses responsibility to stop, they do it because they have had a lapse in judgement or concentration ... and some changes to the high way code isn't going to cover for that. Most people who don't drive (and many that do) will likely never know about these changes because those who only use the pavement rarely pay any mind to the highway code. If these changes force more people to be more considerate of how they are acting on the road, that is only a good thing.
I have a copy of "How to Pass the Driving Test" published by the British School of Motoring in 1935 i.e. before the test was compulsory. According to that, pedestrians have always had priority when crossing a side-street, and I've always worked on that basis. There were far more horses about then, and the guidance on how to pass them is still equally relevant.
I also remember that when turning a corner and there was a pedestrian crossing they have the right of way, I have been lambasted, received blaring horns and abuse for giving way,Everyone is in too much of a rush nowadays but this new format is just going to end in tears, bloodshed and many broken bones as people will just assume they can cross the road as if they are impervious to damage, in fact this will cause a lot of grief on the too busy roads, its just a cop out by the government for not forseeing the problems and making safe paths and cycle lanes where they have to give way in a safe manner, we could starrt with raising the kerbs to at least a foot to stop pathway parking and using the paths as a driveway or entrance to an illegal drive without a dropped kerb
This is a very good video. It is good to get more explanation and clarity. It is a long time coming. I live in a rural area that has lots of bends and I am concerned drivers just won't wait and will still overtake cyclists and horse riders unsafely. I am looking forward to more videos so it helps me remember things visually
The rule about giving way to pedestrians waiting to cross at side roads does worry me to be honest. I have no problem with giving way to pedestrians and I do my best to drive safely but I would be very worried about someone driving into the back of me 😕 I know the response is going to be “you should always be prepared to stop” and I always am, but would the person behind? I know how people drive in the UK - angry and impatient. I nearly got rear ended by a lorry just the other day and all I was doing was slowing down for a roundabout! I know some will say “well if they go into the back of you that’s their fault” but if your car gets damaged, or even worse you end up in hospital…it will be little consolation knowing you pointed the finger at the right person.
@@ben.taylor Are you not reading the comments here? What's here is mild compared to some forums. I've read - not on this channel - people saying they will mow down any pedestrian or devil cyclist who tries to put this into effect. The idiot tendency in Britain is really strong and the rags know how to stoke it up for financial gain.
The new rules seems to be something I have naturally done for a few years living near and driving in the Blackpool area especially in the tourist season. Always being prepared to give way to pedestrians horses and cyclists most folks in Blackpool are quite good and courteous at helping each other on the roads. It's a good place to hone your driving skills.
As a pedestrian, I will IGNORE any car telling me when I can cross the road. Drivers CANNOT see the road as well as a pedestrian and there have been plenty of times a car stopped to let me cross and another car either driving in the opposite direction or coming up behind in another lane hasn't stopped.
Overall I like the changes they have made, I just hope that it doesn't lead to some entitled people with priority finding themselves under a lorry that didn't see them. My most direct cycle commute home from work is on a shared cycle path / footpath alongside a dual carriageway. There are many entrances to the industrial estates that cross through this path from the dual carriageway. Currently there are give way markers on the path making it clear the vehicles turning in have priority. These are going to be removed so priority is given to cyclists and pedestrians on the path. I'm very aware that many lorries turning into this estate will not have a good view of, or be aware of the rules that cyclists could be legitimately coming down the path on their inside and have priority and end up in a similar position or worse than the mobility scooter at 5:30 in your video. I will certainly continue to proceed with caution when cycling.
It seems like the authority who made that design (be it with or without priority for the shared path) is actively trying to kill anyone using it. Who thinks that path is a good idea? Better spend the money elsewhere for an actual, safe bike lane.
There is a similar shared path on my commute. I don't use it because of the extra hazard of having to give way at every minor side road. This is actually quite difficult to do, as vehicles can come from at least 3 different directions (out of the side road, turning left into the side road approaching from behind and also turning right into the side road from the opposite side of the road. The new rule, if followed, will thereofre make things much safer, but it seems likely that until all road users are aware of the change, cyclists won't be able to assume drivers will follow the rule.
Ashley Neal, please read this, I too have a similar shared path for cyclists and pedestrians, there are give way sign's either side of the path making it clear pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way but I and a few others only seem to take heed of this situation then there's some really selfish motorists who actually use this to illegally get on their drive's and actively bully people legitimately using the path, many years ago there were railings and bollards to stop vehicles accessing the path but with lots of roadworks these were removed but never replaced (Coventry city council) as for passing a vehicle obviously turning left or right takes a special kind of idiot when not on a designated pathway, I would never dream of passing a vehicle on the inside if I could see it was turning left or on the outside if it's turning right, how can it be right that the person in the wrong now becomes the victim?
@@southwirralcyclist1986 I agree most cyclists aren't up to looking around properly at crossings on cycle paths it can be quite confusing for them. The council should really have dedicated lanes away from road traffic and pedestrians for everyone's safety.
@@nothingsurprisesmeanymore The government has recently introduced minimum standards for cycle infrastructure and so with future infrastructure drivers will have give way signs rather than the cyclists at junctions across minor roads, which is consistent with these rule changes. The standard also requires that cyclists are segregated from both pedestrians and vehicles. The only drawback is that meetng these minimum standards will be more expensive wich means less new cycle infrastructure each year.
Fun fact. Many pedestrians including children walk with music systems plugged directly into their ears. Sometimes while looking at their phones too. Another fun fact. Electric vehicles are virtually silent.
Surely priority has always been given to pedestrians. If you don't, you end up running them over! Pedestrians WAITING to cross the road will be the problem as the majority of drivers don't LOOK into the junction before they turn! I have said many times that out of the 3 E's, driver education is way behind.
Although I agree with having a duty or care, the risk of having such a "hierarchy" may mean that pedestrians and cyclists are more likely to put themselves in potentially dangerous situations.
Do you really think anyone vulnerable is going to start walking into the middle of the road or cycling in the outside lane of a major A road NSL stretch just because of this? It's about making the biggest thing in the situation think about the smallest thing
The biggest thing that could have been done was to ensure ALL road users, which includes pedestrians, take all possible measures to avoid a collision as is the case with ships and aircraft. The problem with these changes is that they take responsibility away from cyclists to avoid accidents.
Musn't make cyclists responsible, their vehicles are mostly illegal to use on the road, they haven't passed any testing regime and haven't got insurance why should they have any responsibility for their own safety or any duty of care towards anyone else.
Not finished the video yet; i get giving priority to pedestrians to cross the road but i feel intuitively that having more hatched white road markings along roads as crossings (like in the USA) would help with that. MAYBE not at traffic lights though ha, having to give way to pedestrians when you have light + sound signals controlling the flow is a recipe for disaster. I only ever see those types of crossings around supermarkets here, can think of a few places where they would make pedestrians looking to cross a lot safer. That way pedestrians have clear and obvious areas to look to cross, and motorists have a more visual clue on the road to think "oh, people are waiting to cross here, i should look to slow down"
4:23 In fairness that is a very poorly designed cycle route. Sometimes I think the people who design these things go out of their way to cause conflict between cyclists and pedestrians.
back in 1970 when I got my driver's license in New South Wales, Australia, the basic rule was that PEDESTRIANS had right of way at all times and when a motor vehicle hit a pedestrian the vehicle driver had to prove they had taken ALL REASONABLE care to avoid the collision. In most cases the driver was clearly at fault, but in many cases it was also clear the actions of the pedestrian gave the driver no opportunity to avoid the collision and the pedestrian was found at fault. In the last couple of decades that clear responsibility has been removed from the NSW traffic laws and things are now much more confusing due to how they worded the change which made the responsibility equal on both drivers and pedestrians. I don't like the change as it leads to confusion and slackness by some types of drievrs.
One thing missing from the list is agricultural vehicles. In my view drivers of the current huge tractors which often tow massive loads and can have attachments on both front and rear should have to pass an HVG test.
The disruption on the main carriageway will definitely be an issue. However, more vulnerable road users should still proceed with caution. For example, a cyclist riding up the inside of an indicating vehicle will have priority. Should probably still hold back. Just because you are right does not mean you will not be injured. One thing that is particularly interesting to me is that horse riders must give way to cyclists. A cyclist will likely have more control over their form of transport. No way will I be riding down the road expecting a horse to get out of my way!!
",,, more vulnerable road users should still proceed with caution", as is well spelt out in the codification. There will always be idiots out there not paying attention and/or not aware of the actual rules.
That's what I don't get - there are specific highway code rules saying cyclists shouldn't ride on the inside of vehicles slowing or indicating left. As far as I am aware those rules are not being changed.
Nowhere in the hierarchy does it mention giving way because the other is less at risk. It's saying that horse riders have a responsibility to keep their horse under control and prevent unnecessary incidents. Normal road rules still apply, but if an incident occurs they will look at it like this: Who are involved? Where does each party involved rank in the hierarchy? What could the road user that posed the biggest threat have done to reduce the chance of an incident? What could the road user that posed the next biggest threat have done to reduce the chance of an incident? Etc. If both parties could have done more to avoid an incident, the primary blame will be put on the road user that poses the biggest threat. If the road user that poses the biggest threat did everything they could, the blame will primarily be put on the next road user in the hierarchy. Etc. Like I said, nowhere does it say that this hierarchy automatically grant a right of way to anyone. Your point of being careful is still very valid. Those more vulnerable should still do everything they can to keep themselves and other's safe. Just wanted to clarify your misinterpretation. :)
Well done Ashley this is a very important message that needs to get out to ALL road users to help harmonise the use of our roads to improve safety and reduce danger. A simple message that most get however as you point out the minority are unable to grasp the concept. The biggest issue is when was the last time anybody read the Highway Code, who maintains their understanding of the latest legislation. ? CPC Courses for all road users no pass no right to drive. Awareness of accountability needs to raised. Next instalment please 👍👍
Another informative video from Ashley. Looking forward to rest of this series about the upcoming changes to the highway code. Which I see as more of a clarification of what it already said. The only difference is the having to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross at a junction you are about to enter. This I think will cause confusion initially as most pedestrians won't be aware of the change of priority and won't be expecting a cyclist, horse, motorcycle, car, bus or HGV to stop and allow them to cross.
Completely agree!!! While I'm totally in favour of the new rules, as a motorcyclist I'm already terrified at the prospect of being rear-ended by a car or truck while I'm giving way to the pedestrian waiting to cross the junction I want to turn into...
I can see why they have introduced these changes, I doubt many people will stop for pedestrians, but that isn't actually the point. The point is people will be prepared to stop for pedestrians as they know full well that they should, this will in the situations where someone steps out without looking properly reduce the chance of injury massively.
I totally agree with your final statement about trying to look after other road users not relying on other people to keep you safe. I think everyone should look after their own and other peoples safety. I personally drive in a manner where I can go out driving again tomorrow, I.E. if I crash my car, or lose my licence, I can’t go out driving it tomorrow and I love driving. So I don’t speed; don’t take any unnecessary risk with my vehicle or other road users, stick like glue to my lane/side of the road specially at corners and at road abouts, and I only over take when it is absolutely safe to do so.
It's almost fate I should be watching this today, after a close call with a few impatient articulated lorry drivers yesterday! In short, I was cycling along a 30mph main road, 3 lorry drivers come up behind, each of them sat on my rear wheel, but 1, before passing within inches of my handlebars they were sounding their horns time after time, the one that did try to give me the required space when he went passed, almost caused a collision with an on coming vehicle... I know it's frowned upon, and I don't think it's illegal? But, I did the rest of my ride on the pavement after that. (It's very sparsely populated) Ordinarily, if I have enough time, I will try and get up onto the pavement when a lorry is approaching, I may be guilty of being in thought yesterday, by the time I registered the lorry I didn't have the time or space to hop up onto the pavement without ending up as lorry lunch. The thing is with these proposed new rules, is they still won't stop that group of pig headed road users, across the scale, acting like complete morons. =/
I've chosen to ride on the pavement for my own safety on occasion. It's all very well people getting upset about that but compliance with the letter of the law doesn't bring you back to life.
"Cyclists are tw@ts"; I read a couple of days ago on Facebook. After a few exchanges, with the man posting, I told the man that if I ever see him, on the road in his car, then I will crash into his car, on my bicycle, and write it off! He didn't reply 🤔
There’s absolutely no requirement for you to move from the road to the pavement to get out of the way of a lorry. These drivers are well trained in order to gain their licence and fully aware of their responsibilities and the consequences. Sadly a number of them conveniently forget all this and fall on the might is right mindset. Fortunately the numbers of LGV drivers holding “grandfather rights” is shrinking which means we will have better trained drivers out there. While it is still an offence to cycle on the pavement the Home Secretary a number of years ago issued guidance for the police in dealing with this matter. Basically if you don’t ride like a tool and highlight the reason why you left the road the police officer should use their discretion and allow you to proceed.
@@pussinboots1145 Basically anyone who has been professionally driving LGVs (3.5 to 7.5 tonnes) pre 2009 when the CPC was introduced will have inherited grandfather rights and all they need to do is keep their noses clean. This caveat was put in place to prevent the haulage and logistics industry collapsing due to there being no qualified drivers and only experienced drivers. Anyone now opting for haulage as a career needs to gain a CPC before diversifying to LGV or HGV. They then need to fulfil 35 hours of training every 5 years. Those in the former group, some of whom will have been driving for decades will most likely have a lot of rough edges with nothing in place to iron out those poor driving habits and the attitudes of ‘I’m a professional driver I know better’. When I’m out in my car on my bike I can pretty much tell if the LGV in front or behind has a driver with a CPC and LGV licence under their belt or not.
This is superb, Ashley, and very well presented. The Dept of Transport should take this up as their publicity vehicle. I am working hard to communicate the changes locally and was considering making a video. I won’t need to now as I will share yours. Thanks again for being the wisest voice of reason for all road users.
The main issue with these rules, other than the mass confusion going to be caused, is that you are legally liable for other road users.... But not liable for your own safety! So pedestrians are essentially put on a pedestal and can do no wrong.
I think if you consider driving style includes a way to respect others, let a pedestrian cross a road at a junction, you give way to cyclist and give them room cos you respect people, don't park on pavements as you know the problems your disabled daughter has; then this change does nothing. I you drive with the mentality that driving is a competition and pedestrians and cyclist are just there to piss you off, then these changes will really annoy you. Life many things, the problem might be closer to home than you think.
Hopefully these rule changes might encourage better design of HGV's with regard to sight lines from the cab as there's always going to be more vulnerable road users who for whatever reason are unable or unwilling to take care of themselves.
There is a 'direct vision standard' for HGV's operating in London, so maybe this should become the standard across the country. I understand more than half of cyclist fatalities in London are due to HGV's and the difficulty that drivers have in seeing other road users close to their vehicle must be a major factor. Generally I think cyclists give HGV's a wide berth, but some cyclists are unaware of the dangers.
I must thanks Ashley, as an older driver this was never an issue when I passed, people had accidents and people got on, suing someone was something that happened in America, but now its here we the drivers need to be aware of this. I have never had issues with cyclists, I give them a wide birth, but I have become more observant around corners. my main problem with this proposal is the small amount of bad cyclists and pedestrians that are either impatient or not observant to whats going on or don't care until an accident happens, I would be happy with the proposal as long as there are protections also for the other road users. ie do not undertake on the inside of a car that is indicating, or do not walk off a pavement without first stopping and looking, councils seem to me to be making the roads less safe for pedestrians by bad road layouts, so they need to up there game as well, when you look at other countries that have done this well, they separate the different road users much better and by this exact hierarchy.
Most cyclists are bad and arrogant, failing to obey the Highway Code, I rarely see a bicycle legal for road use and now they will cyc;le all over the place and if they are hit its always someone elses fault.
@@simonjames3845 That may be true in fact I've read that in a very bad year they will kill 1 or 2 pedestrians A close(ish) second to cows , vicious bastards with no tax , mot or insurance who kill around 4 folk a year. Sadly most cyclists are also drivers (87% own cars) therefore road safety isn't a straight forward pick yer team issue which clearly complicates things for the hard of understanding types. Hating on these motorists only when they are pedalling something might work ? Meanwhile if UK drivers could please stop killing 5 people daily that would be great.
These changes have been VERY poorly communicated. Basically a few sites have breathlessly run headlines like "Car drivers to become second class citizens to new cycling overlords" to get clicks, but that's about it. If it takes Ash 3 videos to get through it - then it may be over-complex, too. I sincerely doubt cyclists and pedestrians will be charging out in front of motorists demanding priority, because that's going to be extremely painful if they don't get it. My guess is that it's biggest use will be the insurance using it as a way to apportion blame after collisions. It may also be used by the police for similar purposes. I don't think it'll effect road user behaviour much. Unfortunately.
Thank you Ashley, I've seen you around Liverpool and you have a driving school and its great that you do these videos.. I don't drive, just cycle and walk, I've never manage to pass that bloody test lol this subject is highly inflamatory ATM but still I guess this is all about slowing the roads and making them safer
As an LGV driver myself I have a question about Highway Code Rule 259. Far too many people seem to think it’s acceptable to dawdle along the slip road at a slow speed, look at the last moment and just just expect everyone to jump out of their way. If I find myself in that situation where there’s a queue of dawdling cars on the slip road, I’ll move over a lane if I can. But, you can’t always move across as there’s often something overtaking you. When I’m in that situation I’m usually on the horn to alert traffic on the slip road to my presence, and quite often met with 2 fingers or a ‘handshake’ gesture from the car/van driver. This is my biggest gripe with other drivers today. Do these people want to get to where they’re going in one piece? I’ll do everything I can do to avoid a collision in this situation, but at what point am I deemed to have done everything I can possibly do and therefore can’t be held accountable for any collision that may occur? Am I supposed to brake heavily to allow the other vehicle to pass me and change lanes but risk someone running in to the back of me?
I think that in theory, the changes are a good idea, and they don’t pose an issue to people who care about driving, but the problem is those of us who care are in the vast minority. The majority of road users are, to put it politely, idiots. I can see the majority of road users not even knowing about these changes and the ones who do, misusing them in exactly the same way that 90% of dashcam footage involves people deliberately charging into a dangerous situation because they’re not the one in the wrong. Encouraging pedestrians to step off the pavement at junctions WILL cause accidents. Lots of junctions have restricted visibility and the majority of people will still go too fast. I’m not sure putting a motorist at fault is worth someone being injured or killed to be honest.
I drive a small van for work that has a huge blind spot, even with added blind spot mirrors (at my own expense, not provided by the company) my concern is situations like waiting for a pedestrian to cross and having a bike sneak into my blind spot as I move off (especially at night) Other vehicles have larger blind spots. Pedestrians crossing already have right of way on side roads so extending that to those that may want to cross (they may just turn and follow the pavement but drivers have to stop anyway) seems excessive while bikes are allowed to undertake waiting traffic, perhaps bikes on the road should overtake on the right if a car is waiting and signalling left
@Wooly Chewbakker cyclists in general these days, I was on my way to a site at 4:45 this morning and a commuter on his bike, all in black, no lights or reflectors was cycling in the middle of the road (the whole road, not the lane) on an unlit 60mph part of the road, made no attempt to get to the side when he heard a vehicle coming… where do they get their brain cell from. Thankfully it’s a very wide road (used to have a shared overtaking lane in the middle) so I passed him on the inside but if one car was passing another…
06:02 "I don't think these amendments will affect me in the slightest." Actually, they will, and they tie into your series about learning to drive an HGV and driving an EV. I've said this elsewhere but it's worth repeating. As someone who has a business vehicle, what are your thoughts on the 2022 Highway Code addition to Annex 6 that instructs "Undertake all aspects of the daily walkaround checks for commercial vehicles as recommended by the DVSA and the Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme"? And as an electric vehicle owner, what are your thoughts on the revised rule #239 which adds rules for parking at EV charge points, including "Display a warning sign if you can." and "minimise the danger to pedestrians"? And as an HGV learner, what are your thoughts on the further Annex 6 change to include audible warning systems as things that you must now check to be in working order?
The liability copout is so true. So many people think they're absolutely right and did nothing wrong just because technically/legally/according to insurance companies they did nothing wrong. I hate this mindset because it misses the point of driving responsibly and using your own skills to avoid an incident, your fault or not. People seem to think just because technically it's not their fault, they don't have any part to play in the situation, and as we know, incidents are very nuanced and can completely be your fault without it "according to the book" be your fault.
I agree there are essentially 2 levels of driving standard which we should all aspire too. The first is complying to all the rules and the second is driving such that we avoid incidents, by anticipating when other drivers might fail to achieve the first standard. Insurance premiums reflect this, in that if you are involved in an accident which isn't your fault, you are still deemed to be a higher risk than someone who avoids accidents which could have resulted by another driver's error. The benefits of avoiding all accidents is clear for cyclists, as almost always they will be injured.
It seems unlikely to me that pedestrians are now going to start walking out in front of cars. As someone said to me years ago "Pedestrians may have right of way, but cars have greater mass". Only most belligerent of people are willing to be "in the right" from a hospital bed.
... especially as the poorly worded 2021 rule could be read as advising pedestrians to "look out for traffic" only "when crossing", and the 2022 revision changes that to "when crossing or waiting to cross". Pedestrians are also instructed to "cross at a place where drivers can see you", which they were not instructed in the 2021 rule. The pedestrians-will-be-leaping-out brigade haven't actually read what the revised rules tell pedestrians to do.
Indeed, most pedestrians are not in fact actively suicidal. Hell most pedestrians I have seen are like me in that they look to verify approaching vehicles are in fact decelerating even at a pelican crossing. Turns out they generally seem to prefer not to get creamed by an approaching driver that is looking at their phone, sat nav, stereo, or whatever instead of the light.
I totally agree to your attitude to this topic and your opinion it's only the misinformed and selfish that aren't willing to accept these new rules that will have a problem.
So if someone stands on the pavment all traffic has to stop so if your at a crossroad and there is potential of 3 directions going into it so the ehole junction will come to a standstill..that makes sense..
It's very interesting that The Highway Code states that it applies to "all road users" as I don't think I've ever seen a government information advert telling pedestrians to read it. I think that if they taught The Highway Code in primary school or secondary school and set out some play roads and gave kids toy cars, toy busses, toy motorbikes, horses and pedestrians, they could instill good behavior at a young age. This would be especially useful for making sure cyclists start off with good habits. They could probably also get someone like you to make videos aimed specifically at children.
More cycle lanes needed firstly. I was cycling to work last year on a straight road passed a junction (just like the drawing in the video) a van was waiting to merge but didn't move,i cycled around and when i pulled in again close to the curb a different van rear ended me ( the witness in the car before was going 45mph and saw me thrown 9 foot in the air) the driver was breathalyser and said the sun was in his eyes. My back was Brocken in 2 place and 4 brocken ribs. I wont cycle on the public road again. My advice to anyone who is ,wear high vis use lots of lights,plan your route. If i was cycling in the middle of the road i would be dead.
In a situation where a pedestrian about to cross a junction is waiting for a turning car, as the turning car I'd be weary of stopping on the main road because the car behind me might not be aware of the new rules and wont be expecting me stop. That's always a risk but I think if the pedestrian is yielding then it's probably safer to just proceed rather than stopping and waiting.
and if one car is intending to turn into a side street, it is polite and courteous for the pedestrian to pause for a few seconds to allow the turn. if I'm pedesting I certainly make an effort to be aware of the potential for that, but on the other hand, if it's a full line of cars, and one pedestrian wanting to cross, then it's polite and courteous to let the pedestrian be on their way. as I've said in multiple other areas of endeavor, you could eliminate all rules if everybody obeyed just one: "don't be THAT GUY."
This all seems to be a lot of hot air from the DoT. In my line of work I’d be asking: 1) How exactly do you feel these changes will improve safety or courtesy on the roads? The days are gone where it’s acceptable just to write a well meaning policy document and hope for the best. 2) What will you do to ensure the changes are effectively implemented? and 3) How will you ensure compliance? There doesn’t seem to be much there apart from maybe we need to publicise the changes a bit more. 🤷🏻♂️
@@JdeBP My understanding is that there’s no statutory underpinning to any of the changes; they are all advisory. We’re firmly entrenched now in the land of wishful thinking from a road safety perspective. We don’t even enforce the laws we do have to any useful degree.
@@David-sw2fn Although the 'should' rules are only advisory, in the event of an accident, failure to observe them will lead to apportion of blame. Drivers who fail to follow these rules can also be prosecuted for inconsiderate or careless driving. e.g. The cycling close pass 'should' rule. I agree though that observance of the rules is limited,as the risk of being caught is low. Speeding and mobile phone use are examples where breaches are commonplace, but prosecutions relatively rare.
Public awareness on this subject is paramount, many thanks for your efforts in ensuring this with your quality videos. As an lgv driver developing good habits as you drive and appreciating other road users including learner drivers (haha) helps to develop understanding, patience and an almost sixth sense of potential driver moves in almost any situation. But accident's will still happen of course...... I find it hard to believe these proposed changes will have a meaningful impact as a whole rather I dare to suggest that in fact professional drivers will be used as Scape goats and operator licenses will be held accountable if accident's should indeed happen. But having said all that, keep up these outstanding vlogs.
The pedestrian crossing at junctions I think could cause issues, I dont expect drivers to see me at night if I'm wearing dark colours but apparently they should so I should cross the road anyway? Without rules stating pedestrians should be visible, especially at night, and signal intent to cross as other road users are required to do, I fear this isn't going to work particularly well.
Good work! Hope all gets better. On paper it's perfect, now the drivers. Not sure how it's here in Holland. Maybe somewhat better, but still. I think this car attitude (me, me, and me) is slowly changing.
I agree with the changes in the Highway Code. As a person who is on the road quite a bit with work and social activities I agree that everyone should be aware of their and others positions on the road. Several clips you showed highlighted the both drivers and pedestrians were neither aware of each other and presumed a right to be on the road or proceed to check their surroundings before turning left or crossing the road. The older gentleman crossing the road when the car turned left for example never checked to see if any vehicles were approaching the junction, just proceeded to walk across the road. The driver just presumed to begin their move to turn the corner and didn’t recognise the fact that none of the people at the junction had turned to check their surroundings. If both parties play by the rules I don’t see there being any problem. The only clip I thought the driver had o control over was the hgv turning left with the mobility scooter. The person in the mobility scooter again never looked or slowed down coming to the junction even after the truck went past him. I fully accept the driver if the hgv is in a very large vehicle and can cause some serious harm or death if things go wrong. Maybe I am wrong but I would like to think that if I was in a mobility scooter and approaching a junction from 20/30 yards away from a junction and a hgv goes by on the road with its indicator on signalling left I would slow down or stop at the junction. If everyone is to behave responsible at junctions then great, the changes will be better for everyone. Unfortunately a lot of entitlement is already in the roads and until that mentality changes things will be difficult. Thank you Ashley great video
I'm looking forward to the changes, I live on a single track white road & walk my dog ever morning up & down the road. I quite often meet horses & riders & other walkers (also a campsite so in the summer can be a lot of people including children) but because its a gradual hill cyclists love to see how fast they can go & as a result it attracts the cyclists who think they rule the road, they don't warn you they are coming or slow down so this means I've had a lot of near misses, my dog is big & on the nervous side so if a cyclist comes past at 30+ mph very close it makes him (& me for that matter) jump out of his skin & he can pull in any direction & at 30kgs I can't stop him. The amount of times me or my dog have nearly been run over by cyclists is ridiculous. I would like to add I've had a couple of near misses with cars driving way to quick too. The funny thing is as a motorist I seem to come across the 90% of good cyclist but as a pedestrian I meet the 10% entitled cyclists. I just wish they made it law to have a bell on your bicycle!!!
And yet the evidence proves that pedestrians are the biggest killers of pedestrians, people on bikes are at fault 50% LESS than pedestrians when they are in collision where a death occurs (as per the 2018 cycling safety report the government had done by a bias motor centric author at that) It's typical that people exaggerate for effect, a gradual jhill yet you say the cyclists are doing over 30mph, well I know for a fact that you'd have to be absolutely caning it on a slight slope to hit that speed, I can hit 37mph max on a long 7% and I'm fast and I was all out. So I imagi ne your estimation is well off the mark, the amount of times you've nearly been run over, well I can bank on it that I've been nearly run over/struck by motorists more in a week than you have by cyclists in your life time. And frankly, if you can't control your dog because of its size an strength, suggest you have a rethink, cos if something attracts it and it pulls you, then that's all on you isn't it?
@@ynotnilknarf39 nonsense ! I’ve clocked cyclists flying down hills at close to 50mph, and “the evidence” you speak of is statistical, so obviously pedestrians are the highest number of road casualty because they’re the highest number of people using the roads, cyclists will never make up more than 2% of road traffic journey in this country EVER not even after hundreds of millions were spent on segregated cycle superhighways, cycle lanes etc I ride in the countryside a lot and I occasionally see a professional peloton of safe cyclists, always a pleasure to see but quite a rarity, more often than not however I see a load of adrenaline fuelled “furious cycling” riding two or three abreast around corners on narrow lanes and whizzing past vulnerable pedestrians, horses, dogs etc like they’re out to beat their personal best and can’t possibly stop pedalling for a nanosecond You’ve come at this guy with “if you can’t control your dog” attitude, HELLO!!! Animals are irrational and unpredictable! you need to expect plenty of animals on country roads, some wild, some tame but easily frightened, some defensive and aggressive, you can’t approach these hazards with that belligerent attitude, you’re infinitely more intelligent than an animal so it’s on you to recognise the hazard and not arrogantly believe you have some priority over it This is why I would put horses riders higher up in this hierarchy than cyclists.
As far as I'm aware the rule about pedestrians walking on the road when there is no pavement hasn't changed so "Pedestrians are perfectly entitled to walk on country lanes and other roads which have no pavement *however they have a duty to take reasonable care for their own safety*. In other words your nervous dog that you admit to not being able to control is not the cyclists problem now or after the changes.
@@SeanieVoiceOver I never said its not possible. The fact you talk like its a regular thing and not a very, very small amount of near pro level cyclists and act like it's a major problem that needs addressing says all I need to know about you. How exactly did you "clock" those cyclists anyway? Get out your radar gun did ya? LOL you are so full of crap.
Hi Ashley, I have always had a very high opinion of what you do and the way you do it, this one is no exception. Near the end you show a clip with a large articulated lorry turning left at a tight junction where some one in a motorised wheel chair was going to cross, the truck driver mis-judged the turn and was unable to proceed without the rear wheels crossing the curb, he should have seen that coming and waited for a clearer path to take a wider line with his tractor unit, this might have meant a considerable delay but there is never any excuse for allowing the rear wheels to go on the footpath so far behind the driver's line of sight. Strict application of the precautionary principle here might mean that such large vehicles would be unable to use that sort of road and only smaller more agile vehicles permitted, while this might cause additional costs to the haulage industry I do not think such savings can be justified when issues of safety are concerned, especially when the costs of such 'accidents' are not borne by the haulage operators. Cheers, Richard.
As per now is hard to prove who's fault is if you don't have Dash cam in the right places . You can't find Cyclists if they don't have number Plates and are guilty about something on the road. Anyhow we must prepare to be more often in place of road rage, sadly .
Hardly anyone reads the Highway Code after passing their tests. No one know what a bike box is, nor do they know how to use a yellow box. Bike lanes are just extra parking. No one know hows to join a motorway. And no one understands breaking distances and that a car length gap is safe at 70mph. Changing lanes without looking because theyve indicated is perfectly safe.
100% agree with that. Technically, anyone who goes into a bike box on a red light has jumped the lights. Despite that, it still happens a lot though. Some divers do seem to get very angry when cycles filter to the front into the bike box, as they seem to think that this is "jumping the queue". I suspect that is why some drivers deliberately go into the bike box to stop cycles from using it.
Sums it up pretty much, and the police generally don't give a shit and won't take things further, IF it gets to CPS they downgrade from dangerous pretty much automatically and then the jurists of which most are shitty drivers find more often than not 'not guilty' and IF guilt found the moton bias judge gives them a slap on the wrist cos of any one of a hundred axcuses. Even the most heinous scenario's of a death of a person riding a bike with aggravating factors judges still will not hand out the maximum sentences.
@@smiffy925 I use a helmet camera and submit footage to the police. In the case of close passes, the police usually only send a warning letter, as proving exactly how close the vehicle came to the cyclist is difficult. With bike box infringement though, they usually prosecute if the video evidence clearly shows the vehicle drove into the box whilst the light was red. So, drivers who habitually stop within the bike box risk a £100 fine and 3 points on their licence! In most cases a close pass overtake is far more dangerous than blocking a bike box, but it's much easier for the police to deal with an infringement where the evidence is clean cut.
I can see that there is a increased risk of being rear-ended, when turning left off a busy road, especially with the way that some cyclists, and pedestrians conduct themselves.
Sensible speed and breaking distance would stop drivers from being rear ended. It is not the fault of the pedestrian or cyclist if you get rear ended but the idiot to close behind who can't be arsed to pay attention to their surroundings.
Thank Ashley Good to get your take on this. In regards to personal responsibility of those deemed more vulnerable , I hope that they give out plenty of citizens advice over this. …. My sister in law has always been a timid driver but has now stopped driving altogether due to the teenage school kids across the road from her house. This is because when she drives past the school the school boys step out into the road in front of her as a deliberate wind up in an attempt to assert their control over the road space, she finds this so intimidating that she now refuses to drive altogether. Because it is a 20MPH zone they feel no fear in stepping out infront of an approaching car. [they wouldn’t dream of doing this on the main road the other side] … I agree with the hierarchy but the public need constant reminders of how dangerous roads and streets are, and must maintain personal responsibility. the last thing they need is a sense of entitlement.
Very welcome changes in my opinion. However some aspects concern me: What is being done to make EVERYONE aware of the changes? With so much careless driving on the roads at present how do they propose to make people comply with tighter legislation? Is there a move to step up the conviction rate when video evidence is available? In short, it’s all empty words without active and widespread enforcement.
It's unfortunate that most drivers have never undertaken any form of development other than instruction on how to pass a test. Bad habits and oblivion prevail. To have to highlight dangers and risks in this manner demonstrates the latter.
This will be a great series of Videos and is well needed! Ashley can you in addition to all the details try and give an idea of what it means in practice as simply as possible.
As if anyone's even going to pay attention. Most drivers I come across on my way to work (particularly through Radford and Hyson Green in Nottingham) have never even heard of the highway code.
I can’t help but feel the lorry driver could have prevented the accident at 5:27 The mobility scooter user could (I’m fairly sure) be easily seen out of the lorry’s left window for a fair bit of time prior to the lorry making the turn. Hence the lorry driver should have been aware of them and not actually crossed their path until they were sure where they were going. They could have begun the turn and then stopped before entering the side road to check that it was safe. I’d be interested to hear from any actual HGV drivers about what they think of what I’ve said. Would the mobility scooter user have been easily visible to the lorry driver prior to the lorry’s turn? As someone who isn’t an HGV driver it’s hard for me to say with certainty.
I think the scooter became invisible when the lorry was about 30 feet from the turn. conversely, the lorry was visible to the scooter driver, assuming the scooter driver was not blind, throughout the entire collision. UK rules may differ, but where I live, the rules state that if a person has the ability to avoid a collision and chooses not to, they become liable. that rule was specifically written to prevent abuse.
Agreed. The lorry driver fully at fault in my view. The lorry came up from behind the scooter, so would have been visible for a long time to the driver. The lorry had to perform a strange manoeuvre to make the tight turn, which made them appear to be going in the other direction initially. They were more concerned with not holding up the car ahead, than watching out for the vulnerable person on the pavement and took the turn way too quickly.
It's getting very difficult in some places now. I'm an experienced driver and have ridden motorbikes and driven lorries but on a recent trip to London turning left off the Whitechapel road meant I had to pause and check for cyclists in the cycle track, buses in the bus lane, and a poorly placed zebra crossing at the junction of the road I was turning into. Anyone remember Frogger from the 80s. Same.
I like the proposed changes, I also have adopted the proposed changes many years. But honestly until they remove the attitude from peoples driving, I fear nothing will change.
Iv already had two predestinations walking out without warning as if you must read there mind . On both occasions I was able to stop in time but I think entitled people may get hit and driver punishment increasing.Fine if I do an emergency stop but it increases the risk of an accident and we are all human not machines .
Taking into account the proliferation of scooters that are on our paths and roads, (I know they shouldn't be on the paths) I would have thought the highway code would have either held off until legislation is finalised with these, or included them already. We have had the "Bird" scooters on trial here for more than a year, and they are a risk to pedestrians, and cars are a risk to them, I'm not sure if they should fit between bikes and horses, or actually alongside motorcycles. The thing is though, if we are going to have a hierarchy, they need to have a place in it.
This hierarchy is almost impossible driving large vehicles, we can’t predict stupid drivers! i had a woman in lane two the other day passing me i was doing 25mph in my bus. the bell went i did an internal mirror check to have this woman turn into me she got as far as her wing mirror and turned with no signal, I pushed her up the road a few meters until she turned off me. She then stopped in lane two blocking the road I moved forward less than 100yards to the bus stop as it was the safest space for both she sat there. I was on the radio to report my accident a woman came over started having a go at me telling me i rammed a car and caused damage as if I didn’t know? I got out the bus to exchange insurance details she had left the scene, I found out yesterday that she went straight to the depot and went absolutely insane at staff? Hopefully my company forwards the cctv of her to the police for dangerous driving and leaving the scene of an accident!
I’m Fine with cyclists, the pedestrians are my main concern, As the majority in my area don’t know what a zebra crossing is, Or don’t use them properly. And now they want me to give them priority. I Think this is Pathetic and I will not give them priority if they walk out without any warning, if they wait to cross fair enough.
My main concern is that these changes do not seem to have been publicised. I only know about them because I take an interest, and I would guess the majority of road users are unaware of the changes.
To be honest, even if every driver was aware I would still be cycling just as defensively as I currently do.
First I gad heard of them was Ashley's post, haven't seen any government advertising for it at all
That's the whole point, slap you with a big fine and then educate you afterwards at your expense, it makes more money that way.
It is still in the proposal stage at the moment. I'm expecting there to be a lot more publicity when it actually gets close to coming into effect
I've seen it publicised plenty in Scotland.
I've carried out inspections on many building sites . There are many people injured by plant. So a simple rule was brought in.. the bigger the plant the more room you give them.
This rule caused the death rate and accident rate to plumit.
Nicely put.
At the end of the day, no _sensible_ pedestrian / cyclist deliberately puts themselves in danger, irrespective of liability, and no _sensible_ driver should knowingly endanger a vulnerable road user.
Some drivers in this country have a scary "get out of my way or else" attitude. If this is you, then you might want to rethink your attitude towards driving a 1.4 ton metal box...
My biggest issue is that pavement users will now take priority at junctions. Pedestrians don't signal their intention as to which direction they are going so there is no way they can alert other road users to maintain flow.
Under current rules a competent motorist turning left into a side road will note the pedestrian walking towards/near the junction and stay alert should they need to react whilst approaching and making the turn.
Under the new rules the motorist would have to stop on the main carriageway, just in case the pedestrian is crossing the junction and continuing, and wait for the pedestrian to either turn left (in which case a disruption has occurred for absolutely no reason) or cross the junction.
It's going to cause absolute havoc, especially when the pedestrian is more often than not going to be completely unaware of the rule changes and will stop at the junction regardless to let the car complete its turn, resulting in an 'are they going to move or not' situation for all parties involved. It's going to cause a lot of confusion
It's easy enough to interpret a pedestrians intentions without them signalling, just requires some common sense.
@@ivanboyes9773 Not all of the time, every time it's not...no matter how much common sense you possess. Don't forget, you may have all the common sense in the world...but that just means the pedestrian has none...
One thing I'd like to see, and this is just on a common sense level. Is that pedestrians need to make themselves more visible at night it's very hard to predict the movements of a person who has decided to dress like a ninja. I came close to running someone over the other night when they walked out of an alleyway and crossed the road without stopping or paying attention. The saving grace on this occasion was that they had a dog on a lead with a flashing LED collar, I spotted the dog before I saw the owner! Perhaps they need hazard lights!
It’s not about your time convenience, it’s for the safety and reduction of deaths. As it’s new in time everyone will adjust.
@@cloudyskies1323 Exactly, and it's not safe, as described.
The mobile phone is an issue even with pedestrians, it's becoming an everyday occurrence of pedestrians crossing roads whilst looking down at their mobile phones oblivious to the danger they bring upon themselves, it's the road user who has to make up for their stupidity in most cases because most if not all, just carry on across that road regardless..
It just happen to me a few hours ago, a mom with her 3-4 yo child had her eyes on the phone, walking on the sidewalk and suddenly turned to the road, I was 2-3 meters away on 20 mph with a 44 tons truck, what do you expect me to do? Do you think that I could stop? The driver at the other side of the road returned home to change his pants. I saw her but I believed that she just walks, I couldn't believe that she will try to pass the road, she didn't even turn her head to my side, she just took her eyes from her phone turned 90° and walked in front of the truck!!!!
@@chrishar110 With most of these things it will probably sort itself out in the wash. Our legal system whilst incredibly flawed is still very able to apportion blame. I think there will inevitably be a few cases in the future describing exactly what you have just witnessed but with a more unfortunate outcome that will test the rules. I can't see our system just thumbing it's nose up at an impossible ask. If there is no way you could stop, physics will bear that out and any conviction would surely drum up a s storm to be amended. The public are generally fair and rational people and would not want to see someone jailed through no fault of their own.
I guess the path forwards for you will be, make sure you always drive with a decent dash cam and as painful as it might be, always slow down and be ready for emergency stops/manoeuvres if you see a pedestrian distracted. Log those instance each journey and make sure your employer understands the impact the rule now has on your journey times. Businesses can then lobby accordingly if they are unwilling to swallow the extra cost.
Or something like that. I don't have the answers, but I imagine if there truly is a problem it will rear it's ugly head and change will result, that's pretty much how it goes with everything.
Devils Advocate: substitute "mobile phone" with "white stick" (carried by blind people), and read your comment again:)
@@DrWhosmate I don't want to prove to court it wasn't my fault. I don't want to hit or kill somebody. I was already on 20mph instead of 30, but I had too many frustrated drivers behind me in the morning rush and a transport manager who sees that Leigh to Liverpool is only an inch on the map and believes that you don't need more than 30 minutes to do it at 07:30 am. I can't use a dash cam, it's too annoying to move it when I have to change trucks at least once a day.
@@chrishar110 I hear you, but the reality is still the same, if these pass and come into effect, I don't see how it will be any other way.
If the majority of people (as we see in the consultation) are for the rules and they get implemented in this form, then there will be no drive to have them changed _unless_ it comes to light they are not fit for purpose.
So that only leaves you three options:
1) Adapt.
2) Risk not changing anything and hope for the best.
3) Quit driving.
Unless I am missing something? Please let me know if I am.
Really nice to see you put the time in to keep us updated to changes.
Sadly I don’t think everyone will see the changes as they have the ‘I passed my test years ago so I don’t need to look at the Highway Code again’ attitude.
I still watch UA-cam videos on learners on their lessons today even though I passed my test nearly three months ago.
tbh I think a refresher should be made compulsory but at the moment the test centres are still trying to get back to normal with all the backlog due to Covid.
Looking forward to the next instalment on the changes
I get why they are doing this and I agree with what it is trying to achieve. However, my main concern is that this will have the opposite effect as people assume others now have the responsibility to look after them. I think there needs to be a third arrow for "Personal Responsibility" going the same way as risk; being "Right" will not stop bones breaking or blood flowing.
I'm a biker and I've lost count of the times someone else has done something stupid or taken my right of way and I've spotted it and just backed off. Laws of Man will always lose against the Laws of Physics, and that 18-wheeler that pulled onto a roundabout without looking will not notice my squishy form going underneath it.
Please assume everyone else is out to kill you and pay attention to your surroundings, whether your a trucker or a pedestrian.
Yeah that's my problem. I'm gonna feel entitled and empowered as a cyclist and runner. Insecure, bolshy, running on adrenaline🤔
No one has right of way in the high way code
A lot of people already seem to have the "it's the drivers fault if he hits me" mindset as they step out onto the road without looking soooooooo
“Personal responsibility”.
In high-demand and short-supply at the moment.
(Was it ever otherwise? Well apart from ‘in the good old days’.)
Danger is when you're assuming you have right of way, nobody has that per the HC, only situations where you must give way. It's dangerous to assume you have right of way when in reality you should always be thinking that others technically should give way to you, but may not
I think most motorists won't care. When i'm out on the bike, the number of motorists who kick off and tell me i'm not allowed to filter is frankly absurd. If they don't know filtering is legal in 2022, then I doubt they'll care about this change.
they only get annoyed about filtering because they get stuck in traffic and get salty when we pass them. if they care so much they should get bikes
@@supremeleader9838 They get annoyed because they think it's "not fair" and therefore "illegal".
@@supremeleader9838 To use a well worn trope...
They are not stuck in traffic; they _are_ traffic.
Filtering isn’t illegal IF DONE WITH GREAT CARE it’s a wonderful thing to do but it’s very dangerous ! other motorists fail to realise that by filtering, two wheelers are actually reducing congestion but you get many belligerents who think of it as “Pushing in” and will deliberately try to block a riders progress
@@supremeleader9838 Thats a typical arrogant cyclist response, if I need to go shopping I cannot use a bike. As for the disabled Driver they are even worse off.
Excellent video. I think the changes are great. The problem is that plenty of motorists just don't care and will continue with the "might is right" approach to driving.
In the video, the examples you give of pedestrians crossing carelessly actually show two instances where the pedestrian already has priority. i.e. they're on the road before the driver gets there.
We need to change our driving culture so that more drivers acccept that getting from A-B isn't a race.
Thanks Ahley, really useful to keep upto date. Basically I agree with everything you say. I am a pedestrian, a cyclist and a car driver so I see it from all points of view.
I do my best to drive safely and try my best to look out for cyclists and pedestrians and other road users. However I feel as though this change to the highway code is not too relevant. What I do think is that there should be tougher penalties to tailgating and dangerous driving. I've had countless experiences of being tailgated for sticking to the limit. In fact sometimes it's for such a long period of time that I actually pull over and let them go past because I worry they're going to hit me. Also, as a newish driver, 2 years license, I remember quite well my days behind the wheel of a driving school car and give learners on the road time and space. However when doing this I get people being impatient at me for being patient. More needs to be done about dangerous driving imo
@Advanced Driving The issue is going through the insurance sounds like a nightmare from what I heard, so I'd rather let the tailgaters crack on and rush to the red light 1 car ahead. If there is a collision, I don't want to be a part of it! I can't imagine how scary it is for motorcyclists
@@nadim2769 I'd ignore advanceddriving, you don't want to get rear ended, though not your fault, if you're involved in an accident your insurance will go up to reflect that some drive defensively, others don't.
I was being tailgated, in a 20 mph limit road, by a very aggressive transit driver. So I pulled over to let him by so that he could tailgate the HEARSE in front of me. Karma!
@Advanced Driving I disagree with you on tailgating. It is better to let them pass quickly if you can. A man lost an eye recently because of a violent tailgater. Tailgating is a massive problem and people are being bullied on the road to drive faster!
This rule change is aimed at the small minority of arrogant drivers who think the road belongs to them. I hope it will encourage them to think more about their duty of care than their right of way.
i agree, arrogant people are the problem drivers.
True but. Duty of care is also your personal responsibility. So whose to fault for a cyclist not pausing at a Give Way and just rides out and they are hit by a car? The car? Or the Cyclist? Could the car have anticipated the cyclist? Possibly Change it up a bit; it is raining at night time the cyclist has no lights on and is wearing dark clothing personal responsibility.
Take that to the extreme and EVERYONE would have to slow to a crawl in case someone who disobeys the law come out of a give way! That includes ALL vehicles you try that on the average high street in a residential area.
Yep and they're not going to read it so the whole thing is a complete waste of time and money 🤣
@@robertwillis4061 The key here is vulnerability. You talk as if it's just a case of who's to blame. If you are on a bike and you get hit by a car you are likely to be seriously injured or die! That's quite some incentive to take some personal responsibility!!
@@shm5547 But remember " blame " is the thing. First for the Police and the ambulance chasers to get a claim.
Thanks for this video. Really informative and I look forward to the next one in the series. It's good to be properly informed about this kind of thing. I do agree with those who have pointed out that Joe Average probably won't know about these changes and it's only through yourself, having a relative who is a driving instructor, and happening to come across an email from a mailing list I am on that I knew anything about them.
Being at greater risk does not mean one should have less responsibility
Also, in relation to what you said about some pedestrians being unable to hear or see vehicles - or have poor mobility - cognitive impairment is also a major issue when considering pedestrians
Whilst I can see what these changes are trying to achieve, I can't see them actually having any real effect. Surely it *should* be up to each and every individual to do anything they can to keep themselves as safe as possible whilst being equally mindful of others.
i do agree as everyone should look out for each other for everyone's safety but sadly even SOME adults still act like children so wat can we really do, i just look after myself the best i can and towards others. have a nice day and stay safe.
Applying sanctions is part of the teaching process. If there are no sanctions, folks will not change their behavior. Another unfortunate attitude is that some people will not understand what about their behavior might be anti-social, all they will understand is that if they are caught in such behavior that there will be consequences.
@@endybear3750 "... SOME adults still act like children ..." as I observe pretty much every time I am behind the wheel.
The amount of people that just walk into the road without looking even at pelican crossings because they're too busy staring at a phone is still a bigger problem than just making a hierarchy. I feel for the HGV and bus drivers being given the shaft more.
Drivers love to go up any gap a lorry leaves for a manoeuvre.
@@inyobill yes i see many many tw- i mean morons behind the wheel all i can say is really, everyone is responsible for their own actions. lets say a guy walks out without looking he will be mainly at fault as he caused the most risk but the driver that hits him is still at fault but at a lot less as he was either 1 watching the roads or 2 watching for other cars, unless the driver was texting then thats a whole other story.
anyways stay safe urself and have a good day.
Still see so many posts saying "The highway code is not law". Puts hand out in front, turns palm upwards, raises it to forehead with a loud slapping noise. duurghh
What I see also. As an HGV driver... the biggest risk I find is car drivers taking liberty's with lorries by cutting in dangerously close and getting hit due to stopping distance but suddenly you get blamed for their stupidity. Not to mention instances of being head of the queue at the lights and the opportunistic car driver jumping infront close to save 30 seconds because the lorry will pull off slower. Car drivers need to take a crash course on what it's like to drive a large vehicle. I also envision more instances of pedestrians stepping into the road blindly assuming priority 🤷♂️
The concerns over publication and awareness surrounding these rule changes are a great argument for periodic training and testing for motorists.
The CPC course for drivers of buses and wagons is key with this, we're always taught to make damn sure you know what's in your blind spot and what could approach from anywhere, I had a cyclist pull straight out on me and I was doing 30mph, simply by making sure I knew I was aware of the road joining from the left I was able to change my manner of driving to be more suitable for the condition, plus previous experiences with cars running out at said junction I knew it happened a lot, whether that's local knowledge of mine or luck is to be seen however my point remains the same, keeping my eyes open prevented a cyclist getting run over by a bus, admittedly the passengers had a sharp breaking event to deal with and a blast on an air horn but I digress, I think the CPC course should be more universally taught especially for van drivers and maybe even taxi drivers too, the more people taught with it, the better, it gives me a better understanding of the hazards that can occur and how to lower/prevent entirely risks that can form with me just driving in tunnel vision and looking 30ft ahead of me..
Gotta say the "people will use this an excuse to not look after themselves" comments border on concern trolling. Consistently people comment on these changes and say how it will affect other people but no one is taking ownership and saying they will be one of those people that suddenly stops looking out for their own safety. So if everyone agrees that its stupid to not take personal responsibility isn't it quite obvious that the vast majority of people will not have their mentality effected by this at all.
A pedestrian doesn't step out into a road without looking because they think its someone elses responsibility to stop, they do it because they have had a lapse in judgement or concentration ... and some changes to the high way code isn't going to cover for that. Most people who don't drive (and many that do) will likely never know about these changes because those who only use the pavement rarely pay any mind to the highway code.
If these changes force more people to be more considerate of how they are acting on the road, that is only a good thing.
I have a copy of "How to Pass the Driving Test" published by the British School of Motoring in 1935 i.e. before the test was compulsory. According to that, pedestrians have always had priority when crossing a side-street, and I've always worked on that basis. There were far more horses about then, and the guidance on how to pass them is still equally relevant.
The existing 2021 rule 8 says "when crossing". This is not new. The part that has changed is the addition of "or waiting to cross".
I also remember that when turning a corner and there was a pedestrian crossing they have the right of way, I have been lambasted, received blaring horns and abuse for giving way,Everyone is in too much of a rush nowadays but this new format is just going to end in tears, bloodshed and many broken bones as people will just assume they can cross the road as if they are impervious to damage, in fact this will cause a lot of grief on the too busy roads, its just a cop out by the government for not forseeing the problems and making safe paths and cycle lanes where they have to give way in a safe manner, we could starrt with raising the kerbs to at least a foot to stop pathway parking and using the paths as a driveway or entrance to an illegal drive without a dropped kerb
This is a very good video. It is good to get more explanation and clarity. It is a long time coming. I live in a rural area that has lots of bends and I am concerned drivers just won't wait and will still overtake cyclists and horse riders unsafely. I am looking forward to more videos so it helps me remember things visually
This is the video I've been waiting for.. I've read about the changes online.. This video made me understand it so much better, thanks
The rule about giving way to pedestrians waiting to cross at side roads does worry me to be honest.
I have no problem with giving way to pedestrians and I do my best to drive safely but I would be very worried about someone driving into the back of me 😕 I know the response is going to be “you should always be prepared to stop” and I always am, but would the person behind? I know how people drive in the UK - angry and impatient. I nearly got rear ended by a lorry just the other day and all I was doing was slowing down for a roundabout!
I know some will say “well if they go into the back of you that’s their fault” but if your car gets damaged, or even worse you end up in hospital…it will be little consolation knowing you pointed the finger at the right person.
Great video Ashley, one of your best.
1:18 made me laugh so hard i have no idea why but glad u covered this Ashley ur a great help.
Thanks for explaining the new rules so well, appreciate it.
Following the footsteps of the Dutch. I like it.
That makes it 'foreign', expect readers of the rags to go to war against it.
@@PedroConejo1939 What, for prioritising public safety?
@@ben.taylor Are you not reading the comments here? What's here is mild compared to some forums. I've read - not on this channel - people saying they will mow down any pedestrian or devil cyclist who tries to put this into effect. The idiot tendency in Britain is really strong and the rags know how to stoke it up for financial gain.
The new rules seems to be something I have naturally done for a few years living near and driving in the Blackpool area especially in the tourist season. Always being prepared to give way to pedestrians horses and cyclists most folks in Blackpool are quite good and courteous at helping each other on the roads. It's a good place to hone your driving skills.
As a pedestrian, I will IGNORE any car telling me when I can cross the road. Drivers CANNOT see the road as well as a pedestrian and there have been plenty of times a car stopped to let me cross and another car either driving in the opposite direction or coming up behind in another lane hasn't stopped.
Overall I like the changes they have made, I just hope that it doesn't lead to some entitled people with priority finding themselves under a lorry that didn't see them.
My most direct cycle commute home from work is on a shared cycle path / footpath alongside a dual carriageway. There are many entrances to the industrial estates that cross through this path from the dual carriageway. Currently there are give way markers on the path making it clear the vehicles turning in have priority. These are going to be removed so priority is given to cyclists and pedestrians on the path. I'm very aware that many lorries turning into this estate will not have a good view of, or be aware of the rules that cyclists could be legitimately coming down the path on their inside and have priority and end up in a similar position or worse than the mobility scooter at 5:30 in your video. I will certainly continue to proceed with caution when cycling.
It seems like the authority who made that design (be it with or without priority for the shared path) is actively trying to kill anyone using it. Who thinks that path is a good idea? Better spend the money elsewhere for an actual, safe bike lane.
There is a similar shared path on my commute. I don't use it because of the extra hazard of having to give way at every minor side road. This is actually quite difficult to do, as vehicles can come from at least 3 different directions (out of the side road, turning left into the side road approaching from behind and also turning right into the side road from the opposite side of the road. The new rule, if followed, will thereofre make things much safer, but it seems likely that until all road users are aware of the change, cyclists won't be able to assume drivers will follow the rule.
Ashley Neal, please read this, I too have a similar shared path for cyclists and pedestrians, there are give way sign's either side of the path making it clear pedestrians and cyclists have the right of way but I and a few others only seem to take heed of this situation then there's some really selfish motorists who actually use this to illegally get on their drive's and actively bully people legitimately using the path, many years ago there were railings and bollards to stop vehicles accessing the path but with lots of roadworks these were removed but never replaced (Coventry city council) as for passing a vehicle obviously turning left or right takes a special kind of idiot when not on a designated pathway, I would never dream of passing a vehicle on the inside if I could see it was turning left or on the outside if it's turning right, how can it be right that the person in the wrong now becomes the victim?
@@southwirralcyclist1986 I agree most cyclists aren't up to looking around properly at crossings on cycle paths it can be quite confusing for them. The council should really have dedicated lanes away from road traffic and pedestrians for everyone's safety.
@@nothingsurprisesmeanymore The government has recently introduced minimum standards for cycle infrastructure and so with future infrastructure drivers will have give way signs rather than the cyclists at junctions across minor roads, which is consistent with these rule changes. The standard also requires that cyclists are segregated from both pedestrians and vehicles. The only drawback is that meetng these minimum standards will be more expensive wich means less new cycle infrastructure each year.
Fun fact. Many pedestrians including children walk with music systems plugged directly into their ears. Sometimes while looking at their phones too.
Another fun fact. Electric vehicles are virtually silent.
Surely priority has always been given to pedestrians. If you don't, you end up running them over! Pedestrians WAITING to cross the road will be the problem as the majority of drivers don't LOOK into the junction before they turn! I have said many times that out of the 3 E's, driver education is way behind.
Although I agree with having a duty or care, the risk of having such a "hierarchy" may mean that pedestrians and cyclists are more likely to put themselves in potentially dangerous situations.
Do you really think anyone vulnerable is going to start walking into the middle of the road or cycling in the outside lane of a major A road NSL stretch just because of this? It's about making the biggest thing in the situation think about the smallest thing
@@Gobtik Those are very extreme examples, but there are many more realistic situations which could/will occur.
@@Gobtik literally the other day a guy walking along the road into oncoming traffic ignoring the pavement next to him.
5:00 pedestrian always had right of way.
Yes the code states once on the carriageway. I take that as at the edge of the curb and has so far been a positive outcome.
The biggest thing that could have been done was to ensure ALL road users, which includes pedestrians, take all possible measures to avoid a collision as is the case with ships and aircraft. The problem with these changes is that they take responsibility away from cyclists to avoid accidents.
Musn't make cyclists responsible, their vehicles are mostly illegal to use on the road, they haven't passed any testing regime and haven't got insurance why should they have any responsibility for their own safety or any duty of care towards anyone else.
On point....bang on!
Motorists kill more people each and every single day than cyclists do each year but yea ok cyclists are the problem 🤔
Not finished the video yet; i get giving priority to pedestrians to cross the road but i feel intuitively that having more hatched white road markings along roads as crossings (like in the USA) would help with that. MAYBE not at traffic lights though ha, having to give way to pedestrians when you have light + sound signals controlling the flow is a recipe for disaster. I only ever see those types of crossings around supermarkets here, can think of a few places where they would make pedestrians looking to cross a lot safer.
That way pedestrians have clear and obvious areas to look to cross, and motorists have a more visual clue on the road to think "oh, people are waiting to cross here, i should look to slow down"
4:23 In fairness that is a very poorly designed cycle route. Sometimes I think the people who design these things go out of their way to cause conflict between cyclists and pedestrians.
back in 1970 when I got my driver's license in New South Wales, Australia, the basic rule was that PEDESTRIANS had right of way at all times and when a motor vehicle hit a pedestrian the vehicle driver had to prove they had taken ALL REASONABLE care to avoid the collision. In most cases the driver was clearly at fault, but in many cases it was also clear the actions of the pedestrian gave the driver no opportunity to avoid the collision and the pedestrian was found at fault. In the last couple of decades that clear responsibility has been removed from the NSW traffic laws and things are now much more confusing due to how they worded the change which made the responsibility equal on both drivers and pedestrians. I don't like the change as it leads to confusion and slackness by some types of drievrs.
Nice! Hopefully the 100k doesn't take long to get to! Also, congrats on your HGV licence.
One thing missing from the list is agricultural vehicles. In my view drivers of the current huge tractors which often tow massive loads and can have attachments on both front and rear should have to pass an HVG test.
The disruption on the main carriageway will definitely be an issue. However, more vulnerable road users should still proceed with caution. For example, a cyclist riding up the inside of an indicating vehicle will have priority. Should probably still hold back. Just because you are right does not mean you will not be injured.
One thing that is particularly interesting to me is that horse riders must give way to cyclists. A cyclist will likely have more control over their form of transport. No way will I be riding down the road expecting a horse to get out of my way!!
",,, more vulnerable road users should still proceed with caution", as is well spelt out in the codification. There will always be idiots out there not paying attention and/or not aware of the actual rules.
That's what I don't get - there are specific highway code rules saying cyclists shouldn't ride on the inside of vehicles slowing or indicating left. As far as I am aware those rules are not being changed.
As a cyclist or driver I’ll always take responsibility around a horse.
Nowhere in the hierarchy does it mention giving way because the other is less at risk. It's saying that horse riders have a responsibility to keep their horse under control and prevent unnecessary incidents. Normal road rules still apply, but if an incident occurs they will look at it like this:
Who are involved?
Where does each party involved rank in the hierarchy?
What could the road user that posed the biggest threat have done to reduce the chance of an incident?
What could the road user that posed the next biggest threat have done to reduce the chance of an incident?
Etc.
If both parties could have done more to avoid an incident, the primary blame will be put on the road user that poses the biggest threat.
If the road user that poses the biggest threat did everything they could, the blame will primarily be put on the next road user in the hierarchy.
Etc.
Like I said, nowhere does it say that this hierarchy automatically grant a right of way to anyone.
Your point of being careful is still very valid. Those more vulnerable should still do everything they can to keep themselves and other's safe. Just wanted to clarify your misinterpretation.
:)
@@draconicdusk5911 I see drivers behaving as if that were the case, Not speaking for UK, local conditions.
Excellent, very clear and concise, I look forward to the next installment.
By the way, I agree 100%.
Long overdue . Very well explained
Well done Ashley this is a very important message that needs to get out to ALL road users to help harmonise the use of our roads to improve safety and reduce danger. A simple message that most get however as you point out the minority are unable to grasp the concept. The biggest issue is when was the last time anybody read the Highway Code, who maintains their understanding of the latest legislation. ? CPC Courses for all road users no pass no right to drive. Awareness of accountability needs to raised. Next instalment please 👍👍
I agree with you. This would impact our safety and protect us legally
Another informative video from Ashley. Looking forward to rest of this series about the upcoming changes to the highway code. Which I see as more of a clarification of what it already said. The only difference is the having to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross at a junction you are about to enter. This I think will cause confusion initially as most pedestrians won't be aware of the change of priority and won't be expecting a cyclist, horse, motorcycle, car, bus or HGV to stop and allow them to cross.
Completely agree!!! While I'm totally in favour of the new rules, as a motorcyclist I'm already terrified at the prospect of being rear-ended by a car or truck while I'm giving way to the pedestrian waiting to cross the junction I want to turn into...
I can see why they have introduced these changes, I doubt many people will stop for pedestrians, but that isn't actually the point. The point is people will be prepared to stop for pedestrians as they know full well that they should, this will in the situations where someone steps out without looking properly reduce the chance of injury massively.
I totally agree with your final statement about trying to look after other road users not relying on other people to keep you safe.
I think everyone should look after their own and other peoples safety.
I personally drive in a manner where I can go out driving again tomorrow, I.E. if I crash my car, or lose my licence, I can’t go out driving it tomorrow and I love driving. So I don’t speed; don’t take any unnecessary risk with my vehicle or other road users, stick like glue to my lane/side of the road specially at corners and at road abouts, and I only over take when it is absolutely safe to do so.
It's almost fate I should be watching this today, after a close call with a few impatient articulated lorry drivers yesterday! In short, I was cycling along a 30mph main road, 3 lorry drivers come up behind, each of them sat on my rear wheel, but 1, before passing within inches of my handlebars they were sounding their horns time after time, the one that did try to give me the required space when he went passed, almost caused a collision with an on coming vehicle... I know it's frowned upon, and I don't think it's illegal? But, I did the rest of my ride on the pavement after that. (It's very sparsely populated)
Ordinarily, if I have enough time, I will try and get up onto the pavement when a lorry is approaching, I may be guilty of being in thought yesterday, by the time I registered the lorry I didn't have the time or space to hop up onto the pavement without ending up as lorry lunch. The thing is with these proposed new rules, is they still won't stop that group of pig headed road users, across the scale, acting like complete morons. =/
I've chosen to ride on the pavement for my own safety on occasion. It's all very well people getting upset about that but compliance with the letter of the law doesn't bring you back to life.
"Cyclists are tw@ts"; I read a couple of days ago on Facebook. After a few exchanges, with the man posting, I told the man that if I ever see him, on the road in his car, then I will crash into his car, on my bicycle, and write it off!
He didn't reply 🤔
There’s absolutely no requirement for you to move from the road to the pavement to get out of the way of a lorry. These drivers are well trained in order to gain their licence and fully aware of their responsibilities and the consequences. Sadly a number of them conveniently forget all this and fall on the might is right mindset. Fortunately the numbers of LGV drivers holding “grandfather rights” is shrinking which means we will have better trained drivers out there.
While it is still an offence to cycle on the pavement the Home Secretary a number of years ago issued guidance for the police in dealing with this matter. Basically if you don’t ride like a tool and highlight the reason why you left the road the police officer should use their discretion and allow you to proceed.
@@TheGiff7 I don't see what grandfather rights have to do with it?
@@pussinboots1145 Basically anyone who has been professionally driving LGVs (3.5 to 7.5 tonnes) pre 2009 when the CPC was introduced will have inherited grandfather rights and all they need to do is keep their noses clean. This caveat was put in place to prevent the haulage and logistics industry collapsing due to there being no qualified drivers and only experienced drivers. Anyone now opting for haulage as a career needs to gain a CPC before diversifying to LGV or HGV. They then need to fulfil 35 hours of training every 5 years.
Those in the former group, some of whom will have been driving for decades will most likely have a lot of rough edges with nothing in place to iron out those poor driving habits and the attitudes of ‘I’m a professional driver I know better’. When I’m out in my car on my bike I can pretty much tell if the LGV in front or behind has a driver with a CPC and LGV licence under their belt or not.
This is superb, Ashley, and very well presented. The Dept of Transport should take this up as their publicity vehicle. I am working hard to communicate the changes locally and was considering making a video. I won’t need to now as I will share yours. Thanks again for being the wisest voice of reason for all road users.
🙏
The main issue with these rules, other than the mass confusion going to be caused, is that you are legally liable for other road users.... But not liable for your own safety! So pedestrians are essentially put on a pedestal and can do no wrong.
I think if you consider driving style includes a way to respect others, let a pedestrian cross a road at a junction, you give way to cyclist and give them room cos you respect people, don't park on pavements as you know the problems your disabled daughter has; then this change does nothing. I you drive with the mentality that driving is a competition and pedestrians and cyclist are just there to piss you off, then these changes will really annoy you.
Life many things, the problem might be closer to home than you think.
Hopefully these rule changes might encourage better design of HGV's with regard to sight lines from the cab as there's always going to be more vulnerable road users who for whatever reason are unable or unwilling to take care of themselves.
There is a 'direct vision standard' for HGV's operating in London, so maybe this should become the standard across the country. I understand more than half of cyclist fatalities in London are due to HGV's and the difficulty that drivers have in seeing other road users close to their vehicle must be a major factor. Generally I think cyclists give HGV's a wide berth, but some cyclists are unaware of the dangers.
I must thanks Ashley, as an older driver this was never an issue when I passed, people had accidents and people got on, suing someone was something that happened in America, but now its here we the drivers need to be aware of this. I have never had issues with cyclists, I give them a wide birth, but I have become more observant around corners. my main problem with this proposal is the small amount of bad cyclists and pedestrians that are either impatient or not observant to whats going on or don't care until an accident happens, I would be happy with the proposal as long as there are protections also for the other road users. ie do not undertake on the inside of a car that is indicating, or do not walk off a pavement without first stopping and looking, councils seem to me to be making the roads less safe for pedestrians by bad road layouts, so they need to up there game as well, when you look at other countries that have done this well, they separate the different road users much better and by this exact hierarchy.
Most cyclists are bad and arrogant, failing to obey the Highway Code, I rarely see a bicycle legal for road use and now they will cyc;le all over the place and if they are hit its always someone elses fault.
@@simonjames3845 That may be true in fact I've read that in a very bad year they will kill 1 or 2 pedestrians A close(ish) second to cows , vicious bastards with no tax , mot or insurance who kill around 4 folk a year. Sadly most cyclists are also drivers (87% own cars) therefore road safety isn't a straight forward pick yer team issue which clearly complicates things for the hard of understanding types. Hating on these motorists only when they are pedalling something might work ? Meanwhile if UK drivers could please stop killing 5 people daily that would be great.
These changes have been VERY poorly communicated. Basically a few sites have breathlessly run headlines like "Car drivers to become second class citizens to new cycling overlords" to get clicks, but that's about it. If it takes Ash 3 videos to get through it - then it may be over-complex, too.
I sincerely doubt cyclists and pedestrians will be charging out in front of motorists demanding priority, because that's going to be extremely painful if they don't get it.
My guess is that it's biggest use will be the insurance using it as a way to apportion blame after collisions. It may also be used by the police for similar purposes. I don't think it'll effect road user behaviour much. Unfortunately.
Thank you Ashley, I've seen you around Liverpool and you have a driving school and its great that you do these videos.. I don't drive, just cycle and walk, I've never manage to pass that bloody test lol this subject is highly inflamatory ATM but still I guess this is all about slowing the roads and making them safer
It's good to see truck drivers being put at the bottom of the pile again, it becomes more obvious daily why there is a shortage in the industry.
As an LGV driver myself I have a question about Highway Code Rule 259. Far too many people seem to think it’s acceptable to dawdle along the slip road at a slow speed, look at the last moment and just just expect everyone to jump out of their way. If I find myself in that situation where there’s a queue of dawdling cars on the slip road, I’ll move over a lane if I can. But, you can’t always move across as there’s often something overtaking you.
When I’m in that situation I’m usually on the horn to alert traffic on the slip road to my presence, and quite often met with 2 fingers or a ‘handshake’ gesture from the car/van driver. This is my biggest gripe with other drivers today. Do these people want to get to where they’re going in one piece?
I’ll do everything I can do to avoid a collision in this situation, but at what point am I deemed to have done everything I can possibly do and therefore can’t be held accountable for any collision that may occur?
Am I supposed to brake heavily to allow the other vehicle to pass me and change lanes but risk someone running in to the back of me?
I think that in theory, the changes are a good idea, and they don’t pose an issue to people who care about driving, but the problem is those of us who care are in the vast minority. The majority of road users are, to put it politely, idiots. I can see the majority of road users not even knowing about these changes and the ones who do, misusing them in exactly the same way that 90% of dashcam footage involves people deliberately charging into a dangerous situation because they’re not the one in the wrong.
Encouraging pedestrians to step off the pavement at junctions WILL cause accidents. Lots of junctions have restricted visibility and the majority of people will still go too fast. I’m not sure putting a motorist at fault is worth someone being injured or killed to be honest.
I drive a small van for work that has a huge blind spot, even with added blind spot mirrors (at my own expense, not provided by the company) my concern is situations like waiting for a pedestrian to cross and having a bike sneak into my blind spot as I move off (especially at night) Other vehicles have larger blind spots. Pedestrians crossing already have right of way on side roads so extending that to those that may want to cross (they may just turn and follow the pavement but drivers have to stop anyway) seems excessive while bikes are allowed to undertake waiting traffic, perhaps bikes on the road should overtake on the right if a car is waiting and signalling left
@Wooly Chewbakker cyclists in general these days, I was on my way to a site at 4:45 this morning and a commuter on his bike, all in black, no lights or reflectors was cycling in the middle of the road (the whole road, not the lane) on an unlit 60mph part of the road, made no attempt to get to the side when he heard a vehicle coming… where do they get their brain cell from. Thankfully it’s a very wide road (used to have a shared overtaking lane in the middle) so I passed him on the inside but if one car was passing another…
06:02 "I don't think these amendments will affect me in the slightest." Actually, they will, and they tie into your series about learning to drive an HGV and driving an EV. I've said this elsewhere but it's worth repeating. As someone who has a business vehicle, what are your thoughts on the 2022 Highway Code addition to Annex 6 that instructs "Undertake all aspects of the daily walkaround checks for commercial vehicles as recommended by the DVSA and the Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme"? And as an electric vehicle owner, what are your thoughts on the revised rule #239 which adds rules for parking at EV charge points, including "Display a warning sign if you can." and "minimise the danger to pedestrians"? And as an HGV learner, what are your thoughts on the further Annex 6 change to include audible warning systems as things that you must now check to be in working order?
The liability copout is so true. So many people think they're absolutely right and did nothing wrong just because technically/legally/according to insurance companies they did nothing wrong. I hate this mindset because it misses the point of driving responsibly and using your own skills to avoid an incident, your fault or not. People seem to think just because technically it's not their fault, they don't have any part to play in the situation, and as we know, incidents are very nuanced and can completely be your fault without it "according to the book" be your fault.
My favourite comment of the day Jon. I am not alone 😂
I agree there are essentially 2 levels of driving standard which we should all aspire too. The first is complying to all the rules and the second is driving such that we avoid incidents, by anticipating when other drivers might fail to achieve the first standard. Insurance premiums reflect this, in that if you are involved in an accident which isn't your fault, you are still deemed to be a higher risk than someone who avoids accidents which could have resulted by another driver's error. The benefits of avoiding all accidents is clear for cyclists, as almost always they will be injured.
It seems unlikely to me that pedestrians are now going to start walking out in front of cars. As someone said to me years ago "Pedestrians may have right of way, but cars have greater mass". Only most belligerent of people are willing to be "in the right" from a hospital bed.
... especially as the poorly worded 2021 rule could be read as advising pedestrians to "look out for traffic" only "when crossing", and the 2022 revision changes that to "when crossing or waiting to cross". Pedestrians are also instructed to "cross at a place where drivers can see you", which they were not instructed in the 2021 rule. The pedestrians-will-be-leaping-out brigade haven't actually read what the revised rules tell pedestrians to do.
Indeed, most pedestrians are not in fact actively suicidal. Hell most pedestrians I have seen are like me in that they look to verify approaching vehicles are in fact decelerating even at a pelican crossing. Turns out they generally seem to prefer not to get creamed by an approaching driver that is looking at their phone, sat nav, stereo, or whatever instead of the light.
4:57 - car turning in ON a pedestrian AND cutting up a cyclist. Nicely done.
But the car stopped to let them go.
@@qasimmir7117 true
I totally agree to your attitude to this topic and your opinion it's only the misinformed and selfish that aren't willing to accept these new rules that will have a problem.
So if someone stands on the pavment all traffic has to stop so if your at a crossroad and there is potential of 3 directions going into it so the ehole junction will come to a standstill..that makes sense..
This is going to be interesting!
The narcissists will be sweating!
5:29 this lorry was going way too fast
It's very interesting that The Highway Code states that it applies to "all road users" as I don't think I've ever seen a government information advert telling pedestrians to read it.
I think that if they taught The Highway Code in primary school or secondary school and set out some play roads and gave kids toy cars, toy busses, toy motorbikes, horses and pedestrians, they could instill good behavior at a young age. This would be especially useful for making sure cyclists start off with good habits.
They could probably also get someone like you to make videos aimed specifically at children.
More cycle lanes needed firstly.
I was cycling to work last year on a straight road passed a junction (just like the drawing in the video) a van was waiting to merge but didn't move,i cycled around and when i pulled in again close to the curb a different van rear ended me ( the witness in the car before was going 45mph and saw me thrown 9 foot in the air) the driver was breathalyser and said the sun was in his eyes.
My back was Brocken in 2 place and 4 brocken ribs.
I wont cycle on the public road again.
My advice to anyone who is ,wear high vis use lots of lights,plan your route.
If i was cycling in the middle of the road i would be dead.
In a situation where a pedestrian about to cross a junction is waiting for a turning car, as the turning car I'd be weary of stopping on the main road because the car behind me might not be aware of the new rules and wont be expecting me stop. That's always a risk but I think if the pedestrian is yielding then it's probably safer to just proceed rather than stopping and waiting.
and if one car is intending to turn into a side street, it is polite and courteous for the pedestrian to pause for a few seconds to allow the turn. if I'm pedesting I certainly make an effort to be aware of the potential for that, but on the other hand, if it's a full line of cars, and one pedestrian wanting to cross, then it's polite and courteous to let the pedestrian be on their way. as I've said in multiple other areas of endeavor, you could eliminate all rules if everybody obeyed just one: "don't be THAT GUY."
Page 1 of the Highway Code should say watch Ashley's videos on YT!
This all seems to be a lot of hot air from the DoT. In my line of work I’d be asking: 1) How exactly do you feel these changes will improve safety or courtesy on the roads? The days are gone where it’s acceptable just to write a well meaning policy document and hope for the best. 2) What will you do to ensure the changes are effectively implemented? and 3) How will you ensure compliance? There doesn’t seem to be much there apart from maybe we need to publicise the changes a bit more. 🤷🏻♂️
It's a bit of a stretch to class the Highway Code, which has statutory backing for many rules, as a mere "policy document".
@@JdeBP My understanding is that there’s no statutory underpinning to any of the changes; they are all advisory. We’re firmly entrenched now in the land of wishful thinking from a road safety perspective. We don’t even enforce the laws we do have to any useful degree.
@@David-sw2fn Although the 'should' rules are only advisory, in the event of an accident, failure to observe them will lead to apportion of blame. Drivers who fail to follow these rules can also be prosecuted for inconsiderate or careless driving. e.g. The cycling close pass 'should' rule. I agree though that observance of the rules is limited,as the risk of being caught is low. Speeding and mobile phone use are examples where breaches are commonplace, but prosecutions relatively rare.
Public awareness on this subject is paramount, many thanks for your efforts in ensuring this with your quality videos. As an lgv driver developing good habits as you drive and appreciating other road users including learner drivers (haha) helps to develop understanding, patience and an almost sixth sense of potential driver moves in almost any situation. But accident's will still happen of course......
I find it hard to believe these proposed changes will have a meaningful impact as a whole rather I dare to suggest that in fact professional drivers will be used as Scape goats and operator licenses will be held accountable if accident's should indeed happen.
But having said all that, keep up these outstanding vlogs.
I love the fact you put Hi to the man looking in hahah.
The pedestrian crossing at junctions I think could cause issues, I dont expect drivers to see me at night if I'm wearing dark colours but apparently they should so I should cross the road anyway?
Without rules stating pedestrians should be visible, especially at night, and signal intent to cross as other road users are required to do, I fear this isn't going to work particularly well.
Good work! Hope all gets better. On paper it's perfect, now the drivers.
Not sure how it's here in Holland. Maybe somewhat better, but still. I think this car attitude (me, me, and me) is slowly changing.
I agree with the changes in the Highway Code. As a person who is on the road quite a bit with work and social activities I agree that everyone should be aware of their and others positions on the road. Several clips you showed highlighted the both drivers and pedestrians were neither aware of each other and presumed a right to be on the road or proceed to check their surroundings before turning left or crossing the road. The older gentleman crossing the road when the car turned left for example never checked to see if any vehicles were approaching the junction, just proceeded to walk across the road. The driver just presumed to begin their move to turn the corner and didn’t recognise the fact that none of the people at the junction had turned to check their surroundings. If both parties play by the rules I don’t see there being any problem. The only clip I thought the driver had o control over was the hgv turning left with the mobility scooter. The person in the mobility scooter again never looked or slowed down coming to the junction even after the truck went past him. I fully accept the driver if the hgv is in a very large vehicle and can cause some serious harm or death if things go wrong. Maybe I am wrong but I would like to think that if I was in a mobility scooter and approaching a junction from 20/30 yards away from a junction and a hgv goes by on the road with its indicator on signalling left I would slow down or stop at the junction. If everyone is to behave responsible at junctions then great, the changes will be better for everyone. Unfortunately a lot of entitlement is already in the roads and until that mentality changes things will be difficult. Thank you Ashley great video
I'm looking forward to the changes, I live on a single track white road & walk my dog ever morning up & down the road. I quite often meet horses & riders & other walkers (also a campsite so in the summer can be a lot of people including children) but because its a gradual hill cyclists love to see how fast they can go & as a result it attracts the cyclists who think they rule the road, they don't warn you they are coming or slow down so this means I've had a lot of near misses, my dog is big & on the nervous side so if a cyclist comes past at 30+ mph very close it makes him (& me for that matter) jump out of his skin & he can pull in any direction & at 30kgs I can't stop him. The amount of times me or my dog have nearly been run over by cyclists is ridiculous. I would like to add I've had a couple of near misses with cars driving way to quick too. The funny thing is as a motorist I seem to come across the 90% of good cyclist but as a pedestrian I meet the 10% entitled cyclists. I just wish they made it law to have a bell on your bicycle!!!
And yet the evidence proves that pedestrians are the biggest killers of pedestrians, people on bikes are at fault 50% LESS than pedestrians when they are in collision where a death occurs (as per the 2018 cycling safety report the government had done by a bias motor centric author at that)
It's typical that people exaggerate for effect, a gradual jhill yet you say the cyclists are doing over 30mph, well I know for a fact that you'd have to be absolutely caning it on a slight slope to hit that speed, I can hit 37mph max on a long 7% and I'm fast and I was all out.
So I imagi ne your estimation is well off the mark, the amount of times you've nearly been run over, well I can bank on it that I've been nearly run over/struck by motorists more in a week than you have by cyclists in your life time.
And frankly, if you can't control your dog because of its size an strength, suggest you have a rethink, cos if something attracts it and it pulls you, then that's all on you isn't it?
@@ynotnilknarf39 nonsense ! I’ve clocked cyclists flying down hills at close to 50mph, and “the evidence” you speak of is statistical, so obviously pedestrians are the highest number of road casualty because they’re the highest number of people using the roads, cyclists will never make up more than 2% of road traffic journey in this country EVER not even after hundreds of millions were spent on segregated cycle superhighways, cycle lanes etc
I ride in the countryside a lot and I occasionally see a professional peloton of safe cyclists, always a pleasure to see but quite a rarity, more often than not however I see a load of adrenaline fuelled “furious cycling” riding two or three abreast around corners on narrow lanes and whizzing past vulnerable pedestrians, horses, dogs etc like they’re out to beat their personal best and can’t possibly stop pedalling for a nanosecond
You’ve come at this guy with “if you can’t control your dog” attitude, HELLO!!! Animals are irrational and unpredictable! you need to expect plenty of animals on country roads, some wild, some tame but easily frightened, some defensive and aggressive, you can’t approach these hazards with that belligerent attitude, you’re infinitely more intelligent than an animal so it’s on you to recognise the hazard and not arrogantly believe you have some priority over it
This is why I would put horses riders higher up in this hierarchy than cyclists.
As far as I'm aware the rule about pedestrians walking on the road when there is no pavement hasn't changed so
"Pedestrians are perfectly entitled to walk on country lanes and other roads which have no pavement *however they have a duty to take reasonable care for their own safety*. In other words your nervous dog that you admit to not being able to control is not the cyclists problem now or after the changes.
@@SeanieVoiceOver 50mph LOL cool story bro. Were you following the pro peleton in the TDF?
@@SeanieVoiceOver I never said its not possible. The fact you talk like its a regular thing and not a very, very small amount of near pro level cyclists and act like it's a major problem that needs addressing says all I need to know about you. How exactly did you "clock" those cyclists anyway? Get out your radar gun did ya? LOL you are so full of crap.
Hi Ashley, I have always had a very high opinion of what you do and the way you do it, this one is no exception.
Near the end you show a clip with a large articulated lorry turning left at a tight junction where some one in a motorised wheel chair was going to cross, the truck driver mis-judged the turn and was unable to proceed without the rear wheels crossing the curb, he should have seen that coming and waited for a clearer path to take a wider line with his tractor unit, this might have meant a considerable delay but there is never any excuse for allowing the rear wheels to go on the footpath so far behind the driver's line of sight.
Strict application of the precautionary principle here might mean that such large vehicles would be unable to use that sort of road and only smaller more agile vehicles permitted, while this might cause additional costs to the haulage industry I do not think such savings can be justified when issues of safety are concerned, especially when the costs of such 'accidents' are not borne by the haulage operators.
Cheers, Richard.
As per now is hard to prove who's fault is if you don't have Dash cam in the right places . You can't find Cyclists if they don't have number Plates and are guilty about something on the road.
Anyhow we must prepare to be more often in place of road rage, sadly .
Hardly anyone reads the Highway Code after passing their tests. No one know what a bike box is, nor do they know how to use a yellow box. Bike lanes are just extra parking. No one know hows to join a motorway. And no one understands breaking distances and that a car length gap is safe at 70mph. Changing lanes without looking because theyve indicated is perfectly safe.
You can be sure police, courts and insurers will read it and act upon it
100% agree with that. Technically, anyone who goes into a bike box on a red light has jumped the lights. Despite that, it still happens a lot though. Some divers do seem to get very angry when cycles filter to the front into the bike box, as they seem to think that this is "jumping the queue". I suspect that is why some drivers deliberately go into the bike box to stop cycles from using it.
Sums it up pretty much, and the police generally don't give a shit and won't take things further, IF it gets to CPS they downgrade from dangerous pretty much automatically and then the jurists of which most are shitty drivers find more often than not 'not guilty' and IF guilt found the moton bias judge gives them a slap on the wrist cos of any one of a hundred axcuses.
Even the most heinous scenario's of a death of a person riding a bike with aggravating factors judges still will not hand out the maximum sentences.
@@smiffy925 I use a helmet camera and submit footage to the police. In the case of close passes, the police usually only send a warning letter, as proving exactly how close the vehicle came to the cyclist is difficult. With bike box infringement though, they usually prosecute if the video evidence clearly shows the vehicle drove into the box whilst the light was red. So, drivers who habitually stop within the bike box risk a £100 fine and 3 points on their licence! In most cases a close pass overtake is far more dangerous than blocking a bike box, but it's much easier for the police to deal with an infringement where the evidence is clean cut.
I can see that there is a increased risk of being rear-ended, when turning left off a busy road, especially with the way that some cyclists, and pedestrians conduct themselves.
Sensible speed and breaking distance would stop drivers from being rear ended.
It is not the fault of the pedestrian or cyclist if you get rear ended but the idiot to close behind who can't be arsed to pay attention to their surroundings.
Thank Ashley
Good to get your take on this.
In regards to personal responsibility of those deemed more vulnerable , I hope that they give out plenty of citizens advice over this.
….
My sister in law has always been a timid driver but has now stopped driving altogether due to the teenage school kids across the road from her house.
This is because when she drives past the school the school boys step out into the road in front of her as a deliberate wind up in an attempt to assert their control over the road space, she finds this so intimidating that she now refuses to drive altogether.
Because it is a 20MPH zone they feel no fear in stepping out infront of an approaching car. [they wouldn’t dream of doing this on the main road the other side]
…
I agree with the hierarchy but the public need constant reminders of how dangerous roads and streets are, and must maintain personal responsibility.
the last thing they need is a sense of entitlement.
Very welcome changes in my opinion. However some aspects concern me:
What is being done to make EVERYONE aware of the changes?
With so much careless driving on the roads at present how do they propose to make people comply with tighter legislation?
Is there a move to step up the conviction rate when video evidence is available?
In short, it’s all empty words without active and widespread enforcement.
It's unfortunate that most drivers have never undertaken any form of development other than instruction on how to pass a test. Bad habits and oblivion prevail. To have to highlight dangers and risks in this manner demonstrates the latter.
This will be a great series of Videos and is well needed! Ashley can you in addition to all the details try and give an idea of what it means in practice as simply as possible.
Great detail Ash shared it on Reddit
As if anyone's even going to pay attention. Most drivers I come across on my way to work (particularly through Radford and Hyson Green in Nottingham) have never even heard of the highway code.
With pedestrians crossing does this include roundabouts, controlled by lights junctions and turning right?
I can’t help but feel the lorry driver could have prevented the accident at 5:27
The mobility scooter user could (I’m fairly sure) be easily seen out of the lorry’s left window for a fair bit of time prior to the lorry making the turn. Hence the lorry driver should have been aware of them and not actually crossed their path until they were sure where they were going.
They could have begun the turn and then stopped before entering the side road to check that it was safe.
I’d be interested to hear from any actual HGV drivers about what they think of what I’ve said. Would the mobility scooter user have been easily visible to the lorry driver prior to the lorry’s turn? As someone who isn’t an HGV driver it’s hard for me to say with certainty.
I think the scooter became invisible when the lorry was about 30 feet from the turn. conversely, the lorry was visible to the scooter driver, assuming the scooter driver was not blind, throughout the entire collision. UK rules may differ, but where I live, the rules state that if a person has the ability to avoid a collision and chooses not to, they become liable. that rule was specifically written to prevent abuse.
@@kenbrown2808 surely the lorry driver can see the mobility scooter user at 5:28 ?
@@augustvonmackensen3902 you can hide a transit in that spot, and don't call me shirley.
Agreed. The lorry driver fully at fault in my view. The lorry came up from behind the scooter, so would have been visible for a long time to the driver. The lorry had to perform a strange manoeuvre to make the tight turn, which made them appear to be going in the other direction initially. They were more concerned with not holding up the car ahead, than watching out for the vulnerable person on the pavement and took the turn way too quickly.
@@kenbrown2808 wow, blind spots on lorries are even worse than I thought in that case (and I already thought they were pretty bad)
It's getting very difficult in some places now. I'm an experienced driver and have ridden motorbikes and driven lorries but on a recent trip to London turning left off the Whitechapel road meant I had to pause and check for cyclists in the cycle track, buses in the bus lane, and a poorly placed zebra crossing at the junction of the road I was turning into. Anyone remember Frogger from the 80s. Same.
It’s always been like this??? Are you trying to tell me it was legal to cut off cyclists?
The changes I feel are highlighting and enforce what road users should have been doing anyway.
I like the proposed changes, I also have adopted the proposed changes many years. But honestly until they remove the attitude from peoples driving, I fear nothing will change.
Iv already had two predestinations walking out without warning as if you must read there mind . On both occasions I was able to stop in time but I think entitled people may get hit and driver punishment increasing.Fine if I do an emergency stop but it increases the risk of an accident and we are all human not machines .
Taking into account the proliferation of scooters that are on our paths and roads, (I know they shouldn't be on the paths) I would have thought the highway code would have either held off until legislation is finalised with these, or included them already. We have had the "Bird" scooters on trial here for more than a year, and they are a risk to pedestrians, and cars are a risk to them, I'm not sure if they should fit between bikes and horses, or actually alongside motorcycles. The thing is though, if we are going to have a hierarchy, they need to have a place in it.
This hierarchy is almost impossible driving large vehicles, we can’t predict stupid drivers!
i had a woman in lane two the other day passing me i was doing 25mph in my bus. the bell went i did an internal mirror check to have this woman turn into me she got as far as her wing mirror and turned with no signal, I pushed her up the road a few meters until she turned off me. She then stopped in lane two blocking the road I moved forward less than 100yards to the bus stop as it was the safest space for both she sat there.
I was on the radio to report my accident a woman came over started having a go at me telling me i rammed a car and caused damage as if I didn’t know?
I got out the bus to exchange insurance details she had left the scene, I found out yesterday that she went straight to the depot and went absolutely insane at staff?
Hopefully my company forwards the cctv of her to the police for dangerous driving and leaving the scene of an accident!
I’m Fine with cyclists, the pedestrians are my main concern, As the majority in my area don’t know what a zebra crossing is, Or don’t use them properly. And now they want me to give them priority. I Think this is Pathetic and I will not give them priority if they walk out without any warning, if they wait to cross fair enough.
Thank you for showing this