I always remember some advice my father gave me, when I was learning to drive. If you've indicated and initiated a turn, then discover you've made a mistake, stick with it and complete the turn. Then find somewhere to turn around. Never, ever change your mind and try to correct it.
was told the same when i did my motorcycle CBT, and if the lead bike goes the wrong way just follow them, and if your the lead bike follow through and we'll work out a route later, you can always turn around, correcting too late can get yourself killed
As you enter Swindon from most directions, you're presented with a sign that says, "For Town Centre shopping, follow Town Centre." That shows the calibre of the expected visitors to Swindon.
8:40 I had this convo with my older sister. Even if you are turning left, always have a quick glance to the left to see if your road is safe to enter. The response "No-one should be in that lane coming towards me" Exactly SHOULD. You can never wholeheartedly trust humanity to not do dumb things! Also could be emergency services, overtaking a broken down or parked car. But usually overtaking stupidly, hense the clip!
In fairness to the cammer in the clip, The fact that the cammer saw the vehicle before emerging, and was still safely behind the Give Way lines when she stopped, shows that she did look left as you suggest. It doesn't detract from your point though: I've had exactly the same conversation with people as you had with your sister and they just don't seem to get it: It's essentially a variation on the "But it was my right of way!" epitaph on a tombstone.
I have known a situation where I was going straight ahead at a road junction where priority was the left hand turn. Buildings made it a blind turn so I was approaching it carefully. a car came round the corner completely on the wrong side. Ever since I have been even more careful, you don't forget that in a hurry.
It's not even a 'should' in most situations. The law says when joining a road you must give way to traffic on the road you are joining. Full stop. So that includes overtaking vehicles, and anybody on the 'wrong' side of the road for whatever reason. People on the road you are joining have priority. Full stop. The highway code advises against overtaking near a junction , but that's only advisory, where the requirement to give way is a MUST and is law. Too many people (including your sister) don't seem to realise this. You must give way to both directions. Perhaps have another chat with your sister to make sure she is aware of her obligations to give way to overtaking vehicles.
@@ryanmitcham5522 The reason why people wont do it, is because if they had an accident then it is down to the fact whether or not the overtake was needed, which you would see this on approach to said junction and on this metaphorical situation there was no hazard in the way, then the overtaking car will have to pay for the damages. Its a really stupid mentallity but i see it all too often. Hense the saying "i have right of way!" The constant circle of stupidity. She's been passed for a couple of years now and im so tempted to ring her driving instructor so he can have a word with her!
@@ryanmitcham5522 I hope this clip went to the Police as overtaking within the confines of a Pelican/Zebra crossing is an offence that carries 3 Penalty Points and £100 fine, and even up to £1,000 if it goes to Court. It is important to look left as well as vehicles may be on that side of the road when passing parked vehicles.
Hey Ashley! Your clip at 7:21 is in a town in Scotland called Kirkintilloch. The area in question was revamped a few years ago as a "shared space" scheme with many locals protesting against it. That is not a traffic light controlled junction. It is a 4 way, busy, unmarked and unsigned junction. I had actually previously considered asking your opinion on it because it causes so many issues (I work in a building on the corner and hear the horns going every day). Drivers from all sides assume priority because of the no signs and tend to drive straight through without looking if they're not familiar with the area.
@@lokedemus7184 They aren't speed humps though really, they're just crossings. That's a terrible design for a busy intersection which could be easily solved by just setting one direction to have right of way and stop lines on the other direction..
@@lokedemus7184 No there's only 2 traffic light controlled crossings (one where the cammer is driving and another further in the distance). There are paved "courtesy crossings" where it is expected pedestrians and drivers should make eye contact and give way to each other... This is why the lights were put in as the local blind community were put in danger with no where safe to cross.
I thought the lights were too far from the junction. Thanks for clarifying. I think the idea of these junctions is to slow everyone down by confusion but it appears the car from the left didn’t get the memo and the car at the front didn’t fully check left.
A pillar blind spot: That genuinely baffles me, if I am looking in the A pillar direction I move my head from side to side to see around it, cos it's in the way, I don't just abandon checking there and go for it anyway, people amaze me
Have to agree. It just takes a slight movement of the head. You have to move your head to check to your left and right, yet they are not called blind spots.
@@billyporter1389 my understanding of the blind spot is that the driver wasn't stationary and didn't factor it in so didn't check because they could see the other parts of the road- it was also night and they may have been relying on a bright headlight beam from a vehicle That said I would always try to check my a pillar in a situation like that, agreed, but we all make mistakes 👍
I know, I'm not really sure what cyclists are supposed to do. Even riding primary here doesn't stop the A-pillar blindspot if a driver is not going to look around it properly, just gives you a bit more space if they do pull out. Maybe weaving all over the road when approaching a junction? At least there's a chance you might find a bit of road that's not in the blindspot?!
@@shm5547 all a cyclist can do is make sure they are as visible as possible (high vis and lights) move out a little, try to check for eye contact, try to read the body language and try to be ready for the unexpected. Eye contact is a little difficult in poor light though, especially with some window tints. Could also use the bell although it likely not be heard. it's difficult and can be painful when it goes wrong. I wouldn't weave about though.
@@shm5547 tbh as a qualified response cyclist myself (as well as a professional driver! That's where the qualifications end though 😉) my usual strategy is to make sure I can see the drivers face and lock eyes with them- if I can't, I'll slow and prepare to stop. At night, as well as a main lamp on my bike I also wear a helmet light so if I look up at a driver the light will shine in their direction, which can obviously aid in attentiong grabbing if I don't think they can see me
6:33 Very nice save from the private hire driver, Focus seemed totally oblivious to what was happening in lane 2. They braked just before the van comes into shot, probably because they'd seen the van, but still moved over to lane 2.
I'm in two minds tbh. It was a great save but at the same time you should try read people's wheels on motorways because those don't lie. Hindsight is 20/20 and the driver did well to avoid contact and keep control. And without being there I can't say what the driver saw at the time. The driver may have had an obstructed view from traffic behind blocking emerging traffic. The white focus needs their license taking from them. They braked half way through the change rather than revert back to their original lane they made things 10 times worse.
Seems to be a lot of donkeys on the roads these days. Oh, and your cammer saw the car go down the railway track but then drove past rather than letting it back out. Presumably there wasn't a train coming, but still potentially dangerous.
Ashley, the clip at 07:24 is, in fact, an unmarked crossroads. I recognised this as my hometown of Kirkintilloch, Glasgow. The lights seen in the video are for pedestrians, seperate from the junction itself. It is often chaos trying to maneuver through this junction, especially at peak times, and at night, where this sort of thing can happen. I try to avoid it altogether. I'm honesty not that surprised to see a clip of this junction make an appearance on your channel in this manner. Edit: I see that someone else has already informed you about this junction in the comments!
The left turn onto a railway track brought back memories (now funny but at the time terrifying). My late father was driving, with me navigating, "take the next right" says I. So the next thing I knew, we were pulling into South Woodham Ferrers station. With a packed platform, my father froze, I literally had to drag him from the car so I could reverse back to the road. We later realised that dad had early stage dementia. Scary!
The scenarios where a driver exiting a roundabout and giving way to pedestrian traffic before the driver leaves the roundabout and expecting a chain of up to a dozen or more people react to a probably unseen scenario whilst checking primarily to their right leaves me raising an eyebrow to the common sense of a flat out "ALWAYS give way to pedestrian traffic", especially on roundabouts and especially when exiting a roundabout. I really think this particular scenario needs addressing.
The rules now make it law for all drivers to give way to pedestrians at such junctions! Lowered pavements at such junctions also indicate to the pedestrian he has priority. All drivers need to catch up fast not only to prevent ‘injuring’ let’s say, a pedestrian when the pedestrian now knows he has priority, and he does, ventures out to cross. If a car hits the pedestrian will in no way mitigate the drivers likely prosecution. I am quite shocked however as I watch drivers drive in to junctions fully intending the pedestrian has to wait for him to manoeuvre as if there was no new HC. What happens when the driver fails to give way? Let me tell you, the driver strikes the pedestrian and in my case, it was a hit and run. I was well on to the road crossing, driver had no excuse not to see me! At 65, I was quite unable to avoid being struck! Even under the old HC. When a pedestrian has stepped on to the road to cross, the driver MUST give way. Now the driver must give way BEFORE the pedestrian steps on to the road to cross: at all junctions. I’ve been shouted at with comments like, “it’s not a zebra crossing”. Such ignorance where it isn’t selfish pigheadedness is not only dangerous, clearly it is, but I can foresee many getting hospitalised simply because drivers want to keep pedestrians out of their way while they assume the hierarchy remains unchanged. On roundabouts drivers behind a stopping vehicle must immediately lean now to be aware that there’s very important reason why the driver in front may slow and then stop. It’s that awareness that is so poorly being understood and taken up in practice. This would be a rear end collision that the back driver will be prosecuted for as well as endangering the pedestrian should he ‘shunt’ the stopping vehicle in front of him! There have been strenuous efforts in advertising the incoming changes prior to 29/1/22 and still this needs to be emphasised as if drivers didn’t know! But they certainly do know if police are watching! Yeah, they are all about giving way then. Totally selfish drivers who ignore pedestrians safety and well-being so they don’t have to now give way to them.
@@KayMac1 Hi Kay, on reflection, it really is very long indeed a very long sentence, to the point one could very easily lose the thread of what one was commenting on but I’m so relieved that you persevered through to the logical conclusion and then getting the gist of what the danger was all about but yes, I’ll need now review how I curtail the points I make far more succinctly from now on but I do very much thank you dear sir: if you identify as a man, or madam if a woman as I don’t want to get that wrong, but I probably will offend you if you’re neither or but are in fact ‘non binary’! Many thanks Kay🥹
@@archangel6415 hahahahaha 😂 funny. Ironically even funnier was the fact my comment was aimed at the OP and not your reply 😅 I'm glad you take good care coming off roundabouts for pedestrians even with ignorant drivers behind you nonetheless. Same thing happens to me where you get hooted at
I have been driving for 57 years. I was an HGV driver and also a coach driver. I have managed to get through those years without an accident that was my fault. I am shocked at the standard of driving these days. Bully boys trying to push you on and hugging your backend. No courtesy by most drivers. The driving test is not strict enough and just covers the basics.
my father always used to say 'driving is a privilege boy, not a right.' I think too many people today think it is their God-given right to be on the road.
@Jack Duckworth there's no point looking right again if you've already looked and seen that it's clear and have proceeded to set off... at that point, your only focus should be on what is ahead of you whilst keeping an eye out for cyclists coming up on the inside of you since you're exiting left.
@@Lostachilles and thats the issue when exiting you checking left mirror and quick shoulder check left to make sure its safe to merge over just at the same time the car in front slams on the brakes. dam dangerous rule, but at least its a should and not a must
1:18 The road markings on the approach to Princes street from Hanover Street in Edinburghh are appalling. There are road markings when coming down Hanover Street saying "Ahead Only", yet there is no "Ahead" except into the art gallery. I assume that it means non-bus motor traffic must jiggle up The Mound, with no left or right turn allowed into Princes Street. The road markings at 1:27 are terrible - no wonder the two front vehicles got confused. This is another example of poor road signage. It is not always the driver who is to blame.
There is a large sign on the left on hanover ST that illustrates the staggered junction from above highlighting the turns you cant make and the exit up the mound. After that though was there also something confusing with the illuminated no entry signs? usually they are fairly straight forward they mean do not enter.
@@andyp315 Get rid of the "Ahead" road markings, which conflict with the sign. And the road markings in the junction are ultra confusing. The road sign you mentioned indicates no right or left turns, but the sign does not fit in with road-sign rules. It also indicates no turns for _any_ vehicle, so the simplest thing would be to change the junction so it followed the rightward curve into the junction, and rather than painted lines have coloured slightly raised setts to guide vehicles.
I am not sure if I've said this before... but The Highway Code has a separate set of rules for 'Road junctions' (170 to 183) and 'Roundabouts' (184 to 190) and the new H2 rule says to give priority to pedestrians 'at a junction' + it was added to rule 170 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'road junctions'), but not to rule 187 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'roundabouts'). Road junctions: Rule 170 You should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way (see Rule H2) Roundabouts: Rule 187: In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads
@@elliotpollard9083 a motorway is one big junction by that logic then 🤣? They made a specific rule for roundabout so I’d say stick by them rules when on roundabouts. It says watch out for people crossing, and give necessary space ( e.g stop ) if someone is crossing at a roundabout
I'd be interested in your take on touch screen dash operation, on the move. Removing the option of finding controls intuitively by feel, (as in knobs and dials), means you spend more time with your eyes off the road. I've noticed exponentially more instances or cars wandering into the kerb or towards the crown of the road in recent years, invariably recent models. This goes on for a mile or so in some instances. Either they're trying to compose text messages on their smartphone. or scrolling the dash menu.
Clip 19 is a corner well known for accidents in Hull, on Springbank, including fatalities. It demonstrates why both those turning across traffic and those driving straight on in this situation need to exercise caution.
Thank you Ashley as a ex advanced / blue light driver you have shown me not to rest on my laurels especially how I can try to make things better in a bad situation from other drivers. Every day is a school day.
Not waiting for the foolish turner onto the railway to reverse out of danger is potentially as bad as the original error. Suprised you didnt mention that Ashley. Incidentally, I enjoy your vids and they have made me enjoy driving again!!
4:10 To be honest, if they struggled seeing them, it suggests it's a situation where you need to spend a little extra time looking to be sure you can emerge safely
Yeah, I think it was less the shaded area and more just a poorly timed combination of the traffic going the other way (and probably sun glare of the back off them) then the A pillar obscuring the BMW's view and the BMW not taking the time to check.
At 10:28 was the perfect time for that cyclist to be taking primary position. There was no-one behind, nontheless there was no way anyone should be overtaking on that bend, it makes clear they aren't turning left, they would be in the field of view for where motorists look for cars and if you need to change position to ensure you can be seen then primary to secondary is safer than secondary to primary.
Also, he had lights on. If they can't see lights (which we all know what drivers are looking for at that time of night - i.e. headlights of other cars), they aren't going to notice high vis when it doesn't have lights shining on it until too late. As you said CycleCam, the he should have been in primary and that would have prevented being hidden behind the A pillar at that point. That said, I'd also add a flashing white light onto the front, alongside his solid beam. Yes, I know some drivers dislike them because they draw attention, but it's tough - that's what they're designed to do, and how they keep cyclists safe. A flashing light would have likely drawn more attention earlier to the driver that there was a cyclist approaching.
I was given an interesting perspective a few days ago. I was told by a friend that sounding the horn at someone who has been daft is minimum unproductive and could be dangerous and illegal. His reasoning was that there are very few people that will respond to the sound of a horn with "Yes, that was daft of me, I must try to be better", most will get angry and drive worse, and you may even be subject to road rage. His reasoning on it being possibly illegal is that the use of the horn is to let other road users know you are there. If they already know and just don't care, then your use of the horn could be seen as retaliatory, and thus illegal. Does this reasoning hold any merit?
4:24 Yes, this is a huge issue in Bristol from my experience. It’s a toxic combination. Inexperienced, unqualified riders, staring at their phone in the cradle for directions, often riding somewhere unfamiliar whilst under huge time pressure from their employer. There have been accidents and there will be more. Personally I think delivery riders should at least need a full license to use a moped for their deliveries. I hate to make earning a living more difficult for them, but at the minute I just don’t think it’s adequately safe.
Agree that delivery riders should require a full licence (but then they'll probably just leave the L plates off...a bit like DPD drivers and the like, judging by their driving!). I've yet to see an HGV learner (albeit accompanied) delivering 44 tons of goods...
My mate who works in KFC was telling me that JustEat drivers (could be one of the others?) now get paid an hourly wage rather than paid per delivered and they are noticeably in less of a huge hurry compared to the other food delivery service workers. I think you're right about them having a license and also more places need to adopt an hourly pay, incentivising these people to rush surely makes them more dangerous. Just an interesting point I thought I would mention :) edit: This is in Nottingham, not sure if it applies to everywhere
Honestly I am utterly amazed at the lack of regulation there is governing target setting and piecework-based-pay on the roads. The drivers/riders have a massive incentive to go fast to deliver as much as possible, it's no wonder they do mental things. Had one today, this guy got very angry at myself and an SUV slowing and pulling to the side on a residential street in S Wimbledon, because a car was coming the other way. When we saw the car was not coming, we (still rolling) moved back to the middle of the road and proceeded along it. The SUV driver obviously was not expecting a moped to come flying past into oncoming traffic so I think scared the shite out of him. I honestly was also not expecting it either, but the beeping and swearing he gave the SUV saved my bacon. Man had no idea what we were doing, he was just suicidally focussed on getting that delivery done.
Absolutely agree. Actually just ten minutes ago I was nearly run over by a delivery rider who unexpectedly turned right by skipping the traffic in the left lane and using the right lane to turn (almost a Birmingham Gandalf Corner). The rules are crazy - 90% of riders here in Birmingham city centre seem to have L plates and yet are clearly on the roads more than me. I don’t like over regulating these things, but agree this is a fairly significant safety issue. Even the pedestrian areas aren’t safe due to the cyclists zipping round at speed whilst staring at their phones and not paying any attention . Oh well, as long as people don’t actually have to walk anywhere to pick up their food 🤷🏻♂️. I may sound like a grumpy middle aged man (I am), but I just think the delivery situation has become ridiculous.
4:05 Very bright days can be problematic for visibility just as dark days can be. The human eye can only handle so much contrast before it can’t make out shapes properly. It’s why I always have my dipped lights on these days, regardless of the conditions. They’re as useful for being seen as they are for seeing.
Good shout. I’m it was my clip (down in Cornwall) -I did have a 67 reg fiesta so it did have those automatic driving lights on, but probably not as good as dipped headlights.
@@lordnick1575 thanks for sending the clip in. It’s an unorthodox situation many may not encounter until they have an accident in such a situation. Sending clips in like this helps us all learn.
Great footage given in, not sure if people are aware of dashcams and how frequent they are used these days but they get the most interesting, stupid but also extremely dangerous moves done by drivers. I love both styles of content, with driving tips and advice and also driving fails and they both help with what to do and not to do when learning to drive. Thanks Ashley.
Clip 5 confirms my belief that there newly qualified drivers can in some ways be better than experienced ones because they have not spent years practising bad habits
When first started driving on my own, my dad told me it was at this point I would actually learn how to drive. But it never felt like that to me, it felt the same as a lesson, I just didn’t have anyone with me and I could go wherever I wanted.
I tend to feel i was a better driver in the years just after passing my test. I did drive a bit too fast, but my observation and anticipation skills were quite a lot better.
@@georgecromar4094 I didn't say i was a bad driver, i said some of my skills were better when i was younger. And i don't live in the UK, so RoSPA/IAM are somewhat irrelevant to me :)
Yes, which is why legally mandated continual driver education throughout drivers’ driving lives is very important and something that should be introduced. Easier to iron out 1 bad habit soon after it’s developed than a dozen after 30 years.
I think the new rules for pedestrians are crazy. I try to always be aware of people dogs and children on roadsides but I think the new rules are scary and I’m old and slow and instructor trained too
09:00 I'd have said both were at fault here 50/50. Saab was going too fast based on conditions and pickup truck didn't look at both lanes, assuming that because one lane was stationary it was safe to go.
In situations like that you shouldn't bomb down the empty lane. Peds and other traffic can and WILL assume both lanes are stationary. Even if they don't assume, for that pickup it would have seemed clear, as they can only see a little way up there, then as they move off, the Saab comes from nowhere at about 40mph. Imagine it that was a mother and kids walking between the stationary vehicles (An appeal to emotion I know.. But still. I had this happen at a crossing, right lane stationary, I was going down the left in a clear lane and a 20ish year old lass came across the crossing bold as brass straight out from infront of a van. That was a 40 limit dual carriage way. Lucky I was doing 30 as I stopped about a foot off her with her square in the middle of my bonnet. At 40 she'd have been F*ed... Never apologised or anything either, never even flinched out of the way, just carried on walking oblivious... Almost got rear ended as well by the tw@ tailgating behind probably thinking "what's this mong doing 30 in a 40 for", I could see the whites of his eyes in my mirror. If his number plate screws had been a quarter turn further out he's have touched my car lol) Anyway... The Saab driver was progressing at an inappropriate speed and displaying a lack of situational awareness. All could add up to driving without due care IMO. He should be required to attend a driver awareness course as if he makes a habit of driving like that, it's only a matter of time before he causes a more serious incident, The arm gestures also suggest he has zero self awareness and 100% believes the pickup is at fault and he wasn't doing anything wrong. Pickup driver likely had a poor view, and should have crept out a little rather than just going for it. Doing so may have caused the Saab to slow, and would have provided a better view potentially allowing the Saab to be seen before fully committing. This does also display a lack of proper care. However there is a stronger case that the pickup did creep at first and felt he could see far enough up the road to be sure it was clear, and that the Saab was likely speeding, if not certainly traveling much faster than one could reasonably expect. I'd have a harder time arguing the pickup was driving without due care, unless there's other cameras that show they didn't creep at all and just went for it. From the insurance perspective it's an easy 50/50 settlement as insurers don't like to argue back and forth. and with no clear blame they would likely both want to settle for 50/50 unless either policy holder insisted to push it further.
Hang on... just watched again a couple of times, the pickup doesn't creep at all, I realise you do actually see them on the oncoming lane and they just go for it... So that even more firmly puts it 50/50, neither sides case is winnable, and any attempt to take it to court should be laughed out. Take either one, or both of those away and replace them with a competent and careful driver and the collision doesn't happen. So yea... throw the book at both drivers, both driving without due care and attention, put both of them to driver awareness courses (of course that also includes the possibility of points if they have a history of such offences). If either admit to, or are suspected of being distracted or influenced by something, such as the pickup has a great big sat nav in the middle of the windscreen obstructing visibility, or the Saab was showing off for a passenger or dashcam, then the possibility of elevating to dangerous driving emerges also.
Clip 17 - That happens all the time near me. Section of road that regularly floods, not with too much water, but enough that you need to slow going through it. Always some numpty coming in the opposite direction who doesn't slow, makes it a close call and covers your car with disgusting water. Cheers mate.
I have a fear about Pedestrian rules on a roundabout. I always think someone behind not paying attention or know the new rules will plow into the back of me. I think your white lines idea for a crossing will rectify this
@@elliotpollard9083 but your insurance will still cost more too even tho not a fault, reason at any risky areas i refuse to stop unless they are already in the road crossing. not adding extra risk of being in another crash what is not driver fault and injury's
2:12 & 2:40 perfectly show why I haven't been following the change where cars should give way to pedestrians wanting to cross at junctions. It's dangerous. If a pedestrian wants to cross the road which is designed for cars, they should pick their moment. Having this rule in effect and people following it like on these two junctions is just plain dangerous. A large heavy lorry is expected to stop on a roundabout to give way to 1 pedestrian? Meanwhile it blocks the roundabout, people aren't expecting this large vehicle to come to a sudden stop and just generally interrupts the flow of traffic for 1 person that could probably have picked a gap to cross 30 seconds later.
I agree with you, more often than not I see drivers NOT following the rules too. But I don't know if that's because they are choosing too or they don't know about the changes
@@cycloactive5858 Well there are people in the motor vehicles, people that don't want to walk or cycle, its personal choice and no one else's business, and with the rise of electric cars the green lobby have less ammo to throw at drivers. As for crossing the road, its not gonna kill people to cross in a more appropriate and safer place, when I'm a pedestrian I do not cross the road in silly places.
@@cycloactive5858 for me its not about a hierarchy, its about what is logical in a given situation. If there is one pedestrian waiting to cross a road but seven cars would all have to come to a stop to let the one person cross, who should wait? It makes no sense to make at least seven people wait for one person. And lets not forget about wear and tear on the brakes and extra fuel consumption when getting back up to speed.
I tried to do it while turning left.. Allowed a pedestrian across. Cars turning right from the opposite direction cut in front of me and nearly took the pedestrian out. I'm done with it. It's a stupid rule and until it's better educated or enforced, it's nothing but dangerous for everyone involved. Many incidents where I've had a horn blasted at me too. I'll proceed cautiously and if they look to be stepping out, I'll of course stop. Strangely this seems to be better adhered to in London of all places where I was visiting yesterday. Most seem to stop and give way, but not where I am.
The clip at 1:15 is the junction of Hanover Street and Princes Street in Edinburgh. You are only permitted to go straight ahead at this junction - the no left turn is on the traffic lights at the stop line, and the no right turn is on the distant signal. The road which runs perpendicular to the direction of travel - Princes Street - is restricted to buses, taxis, cycles and trams, hence the bus driver's frustration behind.
Re: overtaking I've noticed one big change in the last 43 years--when I started driving, most people knew how to change down a gear and get a move on! That was despite many cars having worn out (or NO) synchromesh back then, so they had to double-declutch just to get into gear. Obviously, if you want to overtake, you need to see you have room and a place to move into before you start. But once you decide to go, don't waste time labouring the engine in top gear. Change down and finish the overtake in good time! Either that, or accept that it's time to chill, 'cos the queues mean overtaking is pointless :-)
But. If on a left hand bend, as you progress your view becomes extended. This means that in the beginning of the overtake you have, say a confirmed landing spot 1 or 2 cars ahead. As you progress you can see that you have room for another, then another, and so on. In these scenarios it is not prudent to be roaring past the line, it is safer to be aiming to match speeds for the next gap each additional car you pass
Most people overtake straight after tailgating and end up doing most if not all acceleration during the overtake, rather than keep a 2sec gap then build up speed towards them and overtake. Something else that makes me want to put my brains in a blender is when someone overtakes into a queue of traffic. Like they want to move up the one position for all 0.039 seconds it will save their trip home. On a national road with no traffic ahead its understandable
Used to drive that please drive carefully road everyday into Wilmslow, its a terrible bit of road loads of nobs that do stuff like that. But TBF the speed limit is 50 so 30 is a bit low. It changes to 30 towards the end of the clip though IIRC.
Dash Cam Hull is fantastic! Hahaha. Some absolute wonderful commentary. You definitely saved the worst for first, that van was lethal. They will be in an accident before long if they haven't been already. 5:28 - not paying attention rather than drunk. The motorist decides, after clonking the kerb, to give it the widest berth imaginable. The telltale sign of "I'm guilty for dozy driving". Love how you admonished viewer #5 for submitting in that nonsense. Behind someone with P plates too!
Worse thing is I see it on the motorway loads, HGVs too... leaving at the wrong exit and then dangerously swerving through back to live lanes at the last minute. The worse things is in 95% of the cases I see this, there's a roundabout at the exit that you can go straight through.... back onto the motorway.
This probably means I'm the worst driver, but I watched the clip from 5:00 a few times and I didn't see the second incident after the first. What's he saying 'oh my god' to? Are they red light jumpers is that it?
2:20 Any drivers that get caught out like that cannot blame it on the HC update. Before it came out, those pedestrians could have stepped out even if they shouldn't and you'd still be expected to stop. The updates don't change anything in terms of what you should be able to anticipate
@@RichO1701e the lorry had gone passed. The new rules should include no crossing zones for pedestrians. That's not a safe place to cross. At the very least this should have a pelican crossing with lights.
@@KLiCuk1 Your definition of gone past is creative. Is that you just meant the cabin, because that would make sense. Problem was that the giant trailer hadn't made it past
Clip 9 is a good example of why I think keeping your lights on even during the day is a good idea. It tremendously helps your visibility for others even in bright daylight.
2:47 Regardless of the new rules, that’s dangerous in every respect. The viewer is travelling too close to the vehicle in front, but stopping on the exit to an island is equally dangerous and ridiculous. Whoever thought up this new rule was probably being paid by the auto repair and parts industry and insurance companies. They are all going to make millions out of this.
Clip 4 didn’t appear to be a pedestrian crossing point, it might be the resolution on my phone, but I didn’t see a pedestrian footpath there. I was under the impression the new rules were for ‘proper’ pedestrian crossing areas ie dropped kerbs at the road crossing of footpaths?
Not to mention, instead of waiting for the person to fix their mistake. They instead decide to put themselves in danger, by blocking them and driving behind them
I once did miss my turn off on the motorway, ended up doing a twenty mile round tour, you should just suck it up, and accept it, glad to say its the sort of decisions that keep you, and others alive
I've been a follower of yours for some time now Ashleigh and love your content and your calm approach. I now don't flash other drivers after seeing the havoc it can cause. Best regards from another scouser.
Clip 19: the amount of accidents at that junction is ridiculous, I'm a bus driver and had several near misses there, just wish I could get the buses dash cam footage for you Ashley you would be able to do a full 10 minute episode out of stuff captured there.
Glad I'm not the only one! All I can see is some of the vehicles turning right across the cammer's route look to have jumped the red light. It doesn't appear to cause enough of a problem to explain the cammer's language though.
I personally think that applying rule 170 to roundabouts is stupid there are no markings on that exit so it is just a part of the carriageway and pedestrians should wait until it is clear
the extremely confusing (and annoying because of the lack of thought in preparing the guidance) is that roundabouts have their own section in the Highway Code, starting at Section 184 and nowhere does it mention giving way to pedestrians waiting to cross. Section 187 is particularly relevant - see where is says look out for "Pedestrians crossing the approach and exit roads" - not "waiting to cross"
Yes, some elements of the Highway Code do not appear to have been thought through particularly well.... people make genuine mistakes and are not machines. That said, the delivery scooter is a classic, the "lad" won't know better or have any fear until he's (usually male, but not always) had a bad accident. The white van driver pulling across a solid hatch - completely wrong, but he/she made a mistake - at least they indicated and used hazards to acknowledge the driver behind, still no excuse though. Jumping red lights is the most onerous as the drivers are fully aware of what they are doing. So, my view has always been - people make mistakes, be prepared for them, and that's from a biker where you don't get a second chance and always come off worse. Great video.
2:45 I'm still a recent(ish) P-plate pass and if it's not cars it's pedestrians that get cross when I follow this new highway code...it's caused so much bother! Even just last week gave priority to a person waiting to cross before a roundabout and they shook their head like I was in the wrong for giving way? I must admit though when I've been walking as a ped myself at times I forget the code because it's instinctual that I see a car and stop to wait because it's bigger. At the same time it's not like I freely walk out onto the road expecting people to stop😵💫
Don’t stop for pedestrians if you don’t want to. the highway code implementations are only advisory and won’t get you in any trouble if you don’t follow them. It’s dangerous for that lorry on the clip prior to stop in the middle of a roundabout
When a pedestrian I give way to anything that can cause me injury, in other words everything. New HC is catering to the green brigade,it’s not about safety , pedestrians walking out because the think a vehicle can instantly stop or cyclists weaving about in road not moving over when approached by faster vehicle.
I would shake my head too, and also facepalm and roll my eyes with my mouth wide open while screaming at you to read rule 187 which applies to 'roundabouts' rather than rule H2/170 which applies at regular junctions. 😲🤦🙄
6:40 that merc van did very well, I hope the focus stopped as hitting the curb at that speed would've done some damage I imagine, but the merc driver had no choice but to go on the curb
He learned the rules watching UA-cam videos rather than reading the Highway Code. The H2 rule says to give priority to pedestrians 'at a junction', but while a roundabout is a type of junction too, the Highway Code has a separate set of rules for 'Road junctions' (170 to 183) and 'Roundabouts' (184 to 190) and also the H2 rule was added to rule 170 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'road junctions'), but not to rule 187 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'roundabouts'). Road junctions: Rule 170 You should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way (see Rule H2) Roundabouts: Rule 187: In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads Obviously rule 187 applies here, not H2/170.
1:30 - yay a place I recognise! The mound in Edinburgh. I've seen a few people get confused there as well. It is an 'offest striaght on' - but what confuses tourists/people less familiar with it, is that it has a "no right turn" symbol. now this is correct, because - as noted by the graphic highlighting the 'no entry' sign - you can't turn right, you have to go 'straight'. but because that involves the right/left move as seen in the clip, tourists/people less familiar with it get to that point on the right/left move and go "wait, where am I supposed to go".
I thought we had to give them priority if they are at a designated crossing point and not just any part of the road/pavement? Is this not true and someone standing anywhere has priority to cross?
@@peterjames6607 I nearly failed my recent test because of this nonsense. You’re right, priority if waiting but not like the lorry in that clip. Absolutely ridiculous.
Do we need to give way upon exiting a roundabout to pedestrians? Seems super dangerous - in both clips I wouldn’t expect a lorry/car to stop unless there is a ‘proper crossing?
Seeing the driver turning on to a railway track. My local mainline station in the New Forest, with an 86 year old lass was driving her 20 year old companion, turned onto the railway track at. the level crossing with live 3rd rail, and somehow managed about 80 yards along the tracks before coming to a halt. They even nearly managed the station platform in January 2012. To recover the car, a car recovery crane was used to reach over to recover the car. I was surprised the companion did not point the mistake out as soon as the car entered the tracks. Also a friend of mine was training a pony in a cart, and the pony started to try and go up the tracks, and he managed quickly stop the pony from going along the railway.
If you choose to stop to offer to share footage of an incident, please do so in a safe place, even if it means driving down a way to park up. Don't sit in a live motorway lane to do so as I have seen in the past.
Watching clip 3 reminded me of an incident that happened many years ago, on the mainline just outside Edinburgh. An older driver turned onto, and continued for a distance along the track, from a level crossing. Unfortunately he was not as lucky as this particular individual, and met up with a large train that claimed right of way further along the line. Your brain can never be in neutral around level crossings, regardless of mode of transport. Trains will never be able to stop in time, they cannot swerve, and unless you're in a main battle tank, you WILL lose the argument.
@@marklittler784 If thats the case then the Bus driver should have slowed down to an appropriate speed or held back from overtaking in such a precarious road position! Any junction magnifies the dangers of any road. The Bus driver is a blinkin idiot!
@@marklittler784 The thing is the minibus passed 3.5 dashes in approx 1 second. With dashes at 9m centres on a road like this, that puts their average speed at 31.5m/s; 70mph. Given that they're already hard on their brakes with the nose of their vehicle dived down when they come into shot they were clearly well in excess of the speed limit beforehand. They actually lack the experience required to show a suitable degree of caution at slip roads, hence the near crash.
@@roaduser6438 It's all this nothing to do with me I have the right of way monkey business, look where I'm going but not where everyone else is coming from.
@@thelondondashcam Can't see the path or pavement because it's a few yards up the road and Ashley faded the clip a bit quickly, close enough to count though. GPS 52.310025, -1.904680
@@thelondondashcam Do car drivers do things they should not, do cyclists do things they should not, do lorry drivers do things they should not, is the madness only pedestrians? I see a pavement with a car parked on it, I see a path with a cyclist on it.
2:15 Stopping for Pedestrians when leaving a Roundabout has always been the law here in Germany, but there is no way that Lorry had to Stop there. No way you'd have to stop in a Roundabout like that. There is no Pavement or anything. This was a completely unnecessary and dangerous move by the Lorry.
While I don't like the rules suggesting giving way in that scenario, the lorry was simply following the rules, not doing something dangerous. The rules don't make any mention of pavements or anything, and in any case, the pedestrians are following a path and have to cross there.
I had an incident of my own this morning, was doing 30 mph in a 30 zone (near a shopping centre) and there was a 50 ton mobile crane riding my arse who then went on to overtake at a busy crossroads. You'd think people driving heavy machinery like that would show a higher level of patience and professionalism, not drive it like a white van.
Some of these clips really show why these new rules are so dangerous. The cars behind may not see the pedestrians at the crossings and are not expecting the car in front to brake all of a sudden.
Counter argument would be that cars need to leave more space between them and the car in front. And that cars shouldn't be stopping to give way if a car is right on their behind.
@@TheDAMeaning I know what you mean but we shouldn't be giving people more reasons to stop suddenly. 2:15 With the old rules the trucks casually exits and the pedestrian crosses safely.
@@TheDAMeaning unfortunately very few do :( , I sometime wonder if I'm only one where I live that actually sticks to the speed limit, and often have some one right on my bumper as if I am an inconvenience by doing 30mph in a 30 zone, feeling comfortable that I can stop quickly if I need to, but not feeling the person behind will.
@@Tazinio01 This is why i think the new rules are bad. the only thing they do is increase traffic. It takes more time for cars to stop and let the pedestrians out than it does for them to drive past and then the pedestrians cross. It increases the risk of an accident that could push a car into a crossing pedestrian which doesn't make a pedestrian safer at all. I just cannot see the point in them.
That Toyota Corolla overtake at 5:46. As a Guernsey resident who gets around mainly by bicycle, overtakes like that, leaving little room to tuck back in for oncoming traffic, are shockingly common. I'm surprised there's not more crashes and it's just as well that the max speed limit here is 35mph.
The final clip was not the only one with an ass in it! More seriously, why is it legal for unqualified motorcyclists to be delivery drivers. Those boxes make the bike top heavy and can easily catch a crosswind.
Because nothing would get delivered if you had to pay for a full bike test? I was a delivery driver for years, did my CBT three times because I couldn't afford to do my full test on the wages. Some are very experienced, 40+ deliveries a night, 6 nights a week... we rack up some serious miles and knowledge but sadly no danger money. Luckily I was only knocked off a few times by drunk drivers.
I’m not an expert so correct me if I’m wrong. Once you have taken an introductory course, you can ride a 125cc motorbike up to 2 years with L plates, after 2 years you have to take that course again or you get your full motorbike licence. So a lot of “learner” riders can in fact be quite experienced
3:10 and the car felt forced to not yield to the pedestrian pushing his bike across the side road… all that because someone felt that being nice was better than merely following the rules !
7:45 I have a colleague that has argued with me on multiple occasions saying that you’re supposed to drive as fast as possible through floods and driving slow and steady damages the engine. No amount of referencing the Rufford Ford channel or the fact that I’ve traversed multiple floods and Fords without a hitch will convince him otherwise. This guy also thinks he’s the best driver in the world because he’s willing to drive everywhere at Mach 2, he really should donate his brain to science to see what on earth is going on in there.
sounds like he's heard the old "water will sneak up your exhaust and put out your fire" myth. have you pointed out that water splashes just as high inside the bonnet as it does outside the car? and that unlike the exhaust, the intake is constantly drawing whatever is in the bonnet into the engine?
@@kenbrown2808 No it chokes the engine if revs aint kept up enough, because it cant breathe. Been through in diesels coming up windscreen, far deeper than the Rufford though it did rip front lower grill off.
@@jhareng you know what really chokes the engine off? Inhaling water. I've seen engines both gas and diesel sittimg idling and being shut down and restarted with the exhaust completely under water. I've also seen engines get hydrolock and crack components from having water splashed into the intake. So yes, if your engine doesn't have enough torque to walk the car through standing water, you have to give it throttle, to keep it from stalling, but otherwise, more throttle just pulls more air and increases the chance of breathing water.
@@ChrisCaaa it comes from the same place as the myth that putting a banana in the tailpipe will stop the engine from starting. People who don't understand that the compression stroke of an engine is a much higher rate of compression than any blockage of the exhaust, and both the firing stroke and the starter have no trouble overcoming that. For that matter, mobile air compressors are just a standard gas engine with half the cylinders converted to air compressor cylinders. An engine can overcome a lot of exhaust back pressure and keep running.
I used to hold a driver's license until a routine eyesight test barred me from driving a motor vehicle. So now I am learning how to "drive" a Yamaha NP-12 piano. And one day after passing my mysic grades I would love to be seated on the seat of a 9 foot long Yamaha grand piano. As a pedestrian I always take the safest option and wait for motor vehicles to pass me and get out of the way.
Clip 5. The new rules don't tell you to give way to pedestrians on the exit of a roundabout though. I'd be happy to be pointed to the rule that states this.
Rule H2: At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. When existing a roundabout you are turning into a road. Also Ashley emailed the DFT for clarification and they confirmed this would include roundabouts.
@@ryanmitcham5522 That rule refers to junctions, not roundabouts. Rule 184 to 190 are for roundabouts and there's nothing there about giving way to pedestrians who are waiting to cross your exit.
The clip with the lorry stopping for pedestrians makes me wonder if you should be expected to stop when there is no clear crossing for them. No path, drop kerb or anything it looks like somewhere you shouldn’t be crossing from?
02:21 Noted that there is No assigned Pedestrian crossing yet the truck was required to Stop according to your statement as to "New Code Rule". For mine waiting till at least the large vehicle passed would be the sensible thing to do. If this rule gives Pedestrians "Right of Way" everywhere and anywhere, it is going to cause a lot more accidents as people will almost certainly go the "entitled" route and start wandering across roads with oncoming vehicles travelling at speed. Add in a bit of rain\snow\ice and the results are not going to be pretty. 02:43 Another example of issues where there the combination of poor visibility due to sun position and shadows combined with focusing on traversing a roundabout being made more dangerous to all due to the same rule. Commonsense SHOULD be implemented in situations such as these where drivers attention is being split by road circumstances (such as a sign for the PEDESTRIANS informing them to "Cross when safe to do so".)
@@andyalder7910 agree with you here Andy! ;) But I would say to David that it's immaterial whether there's a dropped kerb or not, the rule still applies.
Ought to be fun when a lorry stops like that and a car overtakes it, that’s a worse outcome for the pedestrians than having to wait until the road is clear or, shock horror, having to walk a few metres and find somewhere that’s actually safe to cross.
Clip 20, the vehicle who came back across the hatched markings at the last second, if that's a standard motorway exit then all they'd have needed to do was go straight over at the roundabout and rejoin the motorway. Saved themselves about a minute.
"Cyclists need to do better" yet another dumb comment from Ashley who really should desist. It doesn't matter what cyclists do in some situations .. a motorist could be staring at you and still pull out and once you are past the point of no return an accident is inevitable.
@@ashley_neal 10.33 tell me what more the cyclist could have done at that point. The motorist should not have emerged as his exit route has blocked by vehicles in lane he was heading for. Unfortunately short of stopping at every situation like this there are always points of no return where an idiot motorist will cause an accident irrespective of what cyclist or motorcyclist does. Some folks have commented that the rider should have been in primary position - but if the cyclist was half a second later and in primary position the incident would likely still have happened. The reason the cyclist was not in primary position was that he correctly steered left of manhole cover (manhole covers are dangerous for cyclists) just before junction. A good idea for a video for yourself would be to illustrate the dangers of bad observation due to blind spots cause by vehicle pillars e.g. emerging right onto a road it is quite possible for a cyclist to be in left pillar blind spot during whole of emerge.
I regularly drive coaches down princess street as seen in clip two and that junction is an absolute NIGHTMARE. I can't remember the last time I got through those lights cleanly. The cars will q in the yellow box meaning we can't get through and then the trams will stop in the middle too. All because the pedestrians crossing isn't propperly times which causes people to make the decision to wait in the middle of the junction
If everyone followed the rules correctly then it would work just fine. It would flow so much better for everyone. But just like how people act at merge in turns, I know people will never follow the rules like how they should be.
7:26 this is actually where I’m from, Kirkintilloch and there is actually no traffic light on the left. It is a controversial new pedestrian and cars ‘shared space’ junction. That driver was still going way too fast though
2:38 And this is why the changes are placing everyone in danger. And if you're going to say "it's only because drivers don't know them or are ignoring them" then you might as well admit that a few collisions and a bunch of pedestrians being hit by cars is a small price for other people to pay for you to get your way. There is nothing to be gained from this in the long run. At best, things will be just as they were. But in the meantime, people will get hurt. How is that a sensible rule change?
I think part of the problem is people tailgating so cant anticipate in time a stop for car in front, cara that dont look left when entering a roundabout... Already a casue for so many rearendings when the car in front has chosen not to go or stopped unexpectedly... And also people. Slamming the brakes on to gove way to a pedestrian without checking their mirror. Some common sense is needed on a situational basis.
@@dalemr2 Funnily enough, I have been following the "new" rules since I learned to drive decades ago, I now train specialist drivers who are among the best in the country, if not the world. Common sense includes, to me at least, observing that people are waiting to cross, that there is a vehicle in front of me who may stop, and there is no need to exit a roundabout that quickly, or that close to the vehicle in front.
@@nahadoth2087 Attitude is more important than infrastructure. Infrastructure can actually increase the dangers. When everyone takes everyone else into account, there is actually no need for infrastructure. Experiments in both Holland and the UK demonstrate that removing entirely what is usually considered infrastructure tends towards safer highways for all users.
@@stevesmith7530 in a perfect world that's fine. But it's not a perfect world. If someone stopped in front of me to let someone cross then it wouldn't be an issue, because I'm aware and I don't tailgate. But you have another thing coming if you think I would ever be that person in front to let someone cross, not a chance, because of tailgaters! It's a huge risk that I'm not prepared to take, the person crossing can wait and use their own judgement when to cross safely without me putting pressure on them. It's the same as these idiots who flash people out for junctions without being aware of going on around them, clear the road, get on with it and let everyone else make their own decisions.
At 1:49 that car is a private hire car(booking only taxi) so that is quite a surprise that he did not know that junction in Edinburgh as it is the city centre and a route that they often take if they work in the area. I would think he was maybe preoccupied with something else behind the wheel. I thought I would mention it as you used to have a lot of videos about taxi drivers:D
Clip 21 reminds me of something i got told years ago: "Pedestrians (and cyclists) may have right of way, but cars have greater mass". It's all well and good to be in the right, but it's better to not be in the hospital.
Exactly why I don't stop for pedestrians when there are national speed limits. Would you be able to live with yourself having just witnessed the death of a pedestrian, knowing you 'did the right thing' by stopping for them
Or you could just drive carefully and not be an entitled driver who thinks the road belongd to them alone as they mistakenly believe they pay road tax.
New highway code rule, I see, continues to cause dangerous situations on the road... Is there any info/stats on actual accidents because of the change yet?
I don't abide the new changes I will continue not to, not because I'm being ignorant but unfortunately it's one of those changes where unless everybody abides by it then it's just too dangerous
I am still not used to or understanding the interpretation of the rules, a lot of scenarios i have been in with the rule have likely been too dangerous to stop or inconvenient (Ie no one behind me) but may not be in accordance with the rule.
@@frazermountford Agreed - like with the lorry clip around 2:18 . If the lorries arse end is going to be blocking a lane on the roundabout, then it doesn't seem like a particularly safe place to stop. People entering the roundabout also would be unlikely to be looking for pedestrians on an exit they aren't planning on taking.
@@TheBigRab yes the lorry example looked like it was on a National Speed limit road not where you would expect very many pedestrians to be. It would seem that the new rule is better placed in for example
On Sunday I watched a driver following a tram track through a no entry sign and into a one way street. The driver did stop and pull off to the side of the road when he passed the second vehicle coming in the other direction.
Disagree with Ashley @10:30, there was literally nothing the cyclist could have done “better” to avoid that situation other than let every car out on junctions. Totally the car driver’s fault and suggesting cyclists could do more in such situations is ridiculous.
4:05 Whether they had poor vision or not, when actually making the move to pull out you still need to do the additional checks. Had they done so it would have been very obvious a car was coming.
I always remember some advice my father gave me, when I was learning to drive. If you've indicated and initiated a turn, then discover you've made a mistake, stick with it and complete the turn. Then find somewhere to turn around. Never, ever change your mind and try to correct it.
Or as the modern person would say, "take the L" and rectify the problem after the fact.
My dad taught me the same thing
was told the same when i did my motorcycle CBT, and if the lead bike goes the wrong way just follow them, and if your the lead bike follow through and we'll work out a route later, you can always turn around, correcting too late can get yourself killed
That's what they teach at every driving school.
Yeah, thats the way I do things.
Some of these ‘drivers’ need to have their licences taken away permanently.
And a number of them should also have their freedom taken away for a period of time.
@@cactusbase3088 that van driver in clip 1 how the heck he didn't cause a head on collision I'll never know
Some of these drivers probably dont have a licence to take away!
@@georgecromar4094 In a nut shell
Probably already have 😃😄😀
"What's the first thing that shouts "DANGER" to you in this clip?"
*Drives past "Welcome to Swindon" sign
That! Right there!
An I thought you were going to say audi drivers!! Lol
lol 😅
Great minds think alike!
😃😀😄😃😀😄
As you enter Swindon from most directions, you're presented with a sign that says, "For Town Centre shopping, follow Town Centre." That shows the calibre of the expected visitors to Swindon.
8:40 I had this convo with my older sister. Even if you are turning left, always have a quick glance to the left to see if your road is safe to enter. The response "No-one should be in that lane coming towards me" Exactly SHOULD. You can never wholeheartedly trust humanity to not do dumb things! Also could be emergency services, overtaking a broken down or parked car. But usually overtaking stupidly, hense the clip!
In fairness to the cammer in the clip, The fact that the cammer saw the vehicle before emerging, and was still safely behind the Give Way lines when she stopped, shows that she did look left as you suggest.
It doesn't detract from your point though: I've had exactly the same conversation with people as you had with your sister and they just don't seem to get it: It's essentially a variation on the "But it was my right of way!" epitaph on a tombstone.
I have known a situation where I was going straight ahead at a road junction where priority was the left hand turn. Buildings made it a blind turn so I was approaching it carefully. a car came round the corner completely on the wrong side. Ever since I have been even more careful, you don't forget that in a hurry.
It's not even a 'should' in most situations. The law says when joining a road you must give way to traffic on the road you are joining. Full stop. So that includes overtaking vehicles, and anybody on the 'wrong' side of the road for whatever reason. People on the road you are joining have priority. Full stop. The highway code advises against overtaking near a junction , but that's only advisory, where the requirement to give way is a MUST and is law. Too many people (including your sister) don't seem to realise this. You must give way to both directions. Perhaps have another chat with your sister to make sure she is aware of her obligations to give way to overtaking vehicles.
@@ryanmitcham5522 The reason why people wont do it, is because if they had an accident then it is down to the fact whether or not the overtake was needed, which you would see this on approach to said junction and on this metaphorical situation there was no hazard in the way, then the overtaking car will have to pay for the damages. Its a really stupid mentallity but i see it all too often. Hense the saying "i have right of way!" The constant circle of stupidity. She's been passed for a couple of years now and im so tempted to ring her driving instructor so he can have a word with her!
@@ryanmitcham5522 I hope this clip went to the Police as overtaking within the confines of a Pelican/Zebra crossing is an offence that carries 3 Penalty Points and £100 fine, and even up to £1,000 if it goes to Court. It is important to look left as well as vehicles may be on that side of the road when passing parked vehicles.
Hey Ashley! Your clip at 7:21 is in a town in Scotland called Kirkintilloch. The area in question was revamped a few years ago as a "shared space" scheme with many locals protesting against it. That is not a traffic light controlled junction. It is a 4 way, busy, unmarked and unsigned junction. I had actually previously considered asking your opinion on it because it causes so many issues (I work in a building on the corner and hear the horns going every day). Drivers from all sides assume priority because of the no signs and tend to drive straight through without looking if they're not familiar with the area.
The green light for the crossing on approach did fool me when I watched that clip. And Ashley it seems too. That looks like a very poor design.
Do all directions have these conveniently placed light-controlled pedestrian crossings shortly before the intersection?
@@lokedemus7184 They aren't speed humps though really, they're just crossings.
That's a terrible design for a busy intersection which could be easily solved by just setting one direction to have right of way and stop lines on the other direction..
@@lokedemus7184 No there's only 2 traffic light controlled crossings (one where the cammer is driving and another further in the distance). There are paved "courtesy crossings" where it is expected pedestrians and drivers should make eye contact and give way to each other... This is why the lights were put in as the local blind community were put in danger with no where safe to cross.
I thought the lights were too far from the junction. Thanks for clarifying. I think the idea of these junctions is to slow everyone down by confusion but it appears the car from the left didn’t get the memo and the car at the front didn’t fully check left.
A pillar blind spot: That genuinely baffles me, if I am looking in the A pillar direction I move my head from side to side to see around it, cos it's in the way, I don't just abandon checking there and go for it anyway, people amaze me
Have to agree. It just takes a slight movement of the head. You have to move your head to check to your left and right, yet they are not called blind spots.
@@billyporter1389 my understanding of the blind spot is that the driver wasn't stationary and didn't factor it in so didn't check because they could see the other parts of the road- it was also night and they may have been relying on a bright headlight beam from a vehicle
That said I would always try to check my a pillar in a situation like that, agreed, but we all make mistakes 👍
I know, I'm not really sure what cyclists are supposed to do. Even riding primary here doesn't stop the A-pillar blindspot if a driver is not going to look around it properly, just gives you a bit more space if they do pull out. Maybe weaving all over the road when approaching a junction? At least there's a chance you might find a bit of road that's not in the blindspot?!
@@shm5547 all a cyclist can do is make sure they are as visible as possible (high vis and lights) move out a little, try to check for eye contact, try to read the body language and try to be ready for the unexpected. Eye contact is a little difficult in poor light though, especially with some window tints. Could also use the bell although it likely not be heard. it's difficult and can be painful when it goes wrong. I wouldn't weave about though.
@@shm5547 tbh as a qualified response cyclist myself (as well as a professional driver! That's where the qualifications end though 😉) my usual strategy is to make sure I can see the drivers face and lock eyes with them- if I can't, I'll slow and prepare to stop. At night, as well as a main lamp on my bike I also wear a helmet light so if I look up at a driver the light will shine in their direction, which can obviously aid in attentiong grabbing if I don't think they can see me
6:33 Very nice save from the private hire driver, Focus seemed totally oblivious to what was happening in lane 2. They braked just before the van comes into shot, probably because they'd seen the van, but still moved over to lane 2.
I'm in two minds tbh. It was a great save but at the same time you should try read people's wheels on motorways because those don't lie. Hindsight is 20/20 and the driver did well to avoid contact and keep control. And without being there I can't say what the driver saw at the time. The driver may have had an obstructed view from traffic behind blocking emerging traffic. The white focus needs their license taking from them. They braked half way through the change rather than revert back to their original lane they made things 10 times worse.
That focus was too impatient to merge. If it just slots in behind the first car then that never happens
What do you think of the overspeed of the cars and van in lane two? I don't think I'd feel comfortable passing cars that fast.
@@ChrisCaaa Yeah I think the private hire car/van could have reduced their speed more in anticipation
Pure Impatience. See it all the time sadly. Driving at 70+ less than a cars length last minute overtaking
That Hull dashcam clip is almost slapstick!
"There's gonna be a crash! There's a crash."
"What's everybody doing going through a red light?!"
Seems to be a lot of donkeys on the roads these days.
Oh, and your cammer saw the car go down the railway track but then drove past rather than letting it back out. Presumably there wasn't a train coming, but still potentially dangerous.
Yeah there was defintiely something wrong with that aspect as well.
'these days' like that's not always been the case!
I don't blame him/her for that too much, highly possible that car would have just reversed back into them.
@@johnthebomb06 exactly! If they’re like that going forward what are their reversing skills going to be like lol
Agreed. I would have let the car back out.
Ashley, the clip at 07:24 is, in fact, an unmarked crossroads. I recognised this as my hometown of Kirkintilloch, Glasgow. The lights seen in the video are for pedestrians, seperate from the junction itself. It is often chaos trying to maneuver through this junction, especially at peak times, and at night, where this sort of thing can happen. I try to avoid it altogether. I'm honesty not that surprised to see a clip of this junction make an appearance on your channel in this manner.
Edit: I see that someone else has already informed you about this junction in the comments!
The left turn onto a railway track brought back memories (now funny but at the time terrifying). My late father was driving, with me navigating, "take the next right" says I. So the next thing I knew, we were pulling into South Woodham Ferrers station. With a packed platform, my father froze, I literally had to drag him from the car so I could reverse back to the road. We later realised that dad had early stage dementia. Scary!
The scenarios where a driver exiting a roundabout and giving way to pedestrian traffic before the driver leaves the roundabout and expecting a chain of up to a dozen or more people react to a probably unseen scenario whilst checking primarily to their right leaves me raising an eyebrow to the common sense of a flat out "ALWAYS give way to pedestrian traffic", especially on roundabouts and especially when exiting a roundabout. I really think this particular scenario needs addressing.
especially when the pedestrians are crossing from an unexpected area
The rules now make it law for all drivers to give way to pedestrians at such junctions! Lowered pavements at such junctions also indicate to the pedestrian he has priority. All drivers need to catch up fast not only to prevent ‘injuring’ let’s say, a pedestrian when the pedestrian now knows he has priority, and he does, ventures out to cross. If a car hits the pedestrian will in no way mitigate the drivers likely prosecution.
I am quite shocked however as I watch drivers drive in to junctions fully intending the pedestrian has to wait for him to manoeuvre as if there was no new HC. What happens when the driver fails to give way? Let me tell you, the driver strikes the pedestrian and in my case, it was a hit and run. I was well on to the road crossing, driver had no excuse not to see me! At 65, I was quite unable to avoid being struck!
Even under the old HC. When a pedestrian has stepped on to the road to cross, the driver MUST give way. Now the driver must give way BEFORE the pedestrian steps on to the road to cross: at all junctions. I’ve been shouted at with comments like, “it’s not a zebra crossing”. Such ignorance where it isn’t selfish pigheadedness is not only dangerous, clearly it is, but I can foresee many getting hospitalised simply because drivers want to keep pedestrians out of their way while they assume the hierarchy remains unchanged.
On roundabouts drivers behind a stopping vehicle must immediately lean now to be aware that there’s very important reason why the driver in front may slow and then stop. It’s that awareness that is so poorly being understood and taken up in practice. This would be a rear end collision that the back driver will be prosecuted for as well as endangering the pedestrian should he ‘shunt’ the stopping vehicle in front of him!
There have been strenuous efforts in advertising the incoming changes prior to 29/1/22 and still this needs to be emphasised as if drivers didn’t know! But they certainly do know if police are watching! Yeah, they are all about giving way then. Totally selfish drivers who ignore pedestrians safety and well-being so they don’t have to now give way to them.
That was one hefty first sentence. Had to read it a few times before I understood.
@@KayMac1 Hi Kay, on reflection, it really is very long indeed a very long sentence, to the point one could very easily lose the thread of what one was commenting on but I’m so relieved that you persevered through to the logical conclusion and then getting the gist of what the danger was all about but yes, I’ll need now review how I curtail the points I make far more succinctly from now on but I do very much thank you dear sir: if you identify as a man, or madam if a woman as I don’t want to get that wrong, but I probably will offend you if you’re neither or but are in fact ‘non binary’!
Many thanks Kay🥹
@@archangel6415 hahahahaha 😂 funny. Ironically even funnier was the fact my comment was aimed at the OP and not your reply 😅 I'm glad you take good care coming off roundabouts for pedestrians even with ignorant drivers behind you nonetheless. Same thing happens to me where you get hooted at
I have been driving for 57 years. I was an HGV driver and also a coach driver. I have managed to get through those years without an accident that was my fault. I am shocked at the standard of driving these days. Bully boys trying to push you on and hugging your backend. No courtesy by most drivers. The driving test is not strict enough and just covers the basics.
my father always used to say 'driving is a privilege boy, not a right.' I think too many people today think it is their God-given right to be on the road.
@@bellerophonchallen8861 Your father was right.
The standard of driving instructors has declined!
@@bellerophonchallen8861 most of us don't have a choice with so many railways, tramways and bus routes being destroyed :(
I've said it since before the new rules came in. Giving priority at roundabouts is dangerous. You're looking right.
I'm looking in the direction of travel...
@@elliotpollard9083 You’ll be hit by someone already on the roundabout then.
Should be looking at both.
@Jack Duckworth there's no point looking right again if you've already looked and seen that it's clear and have proceeded to set off... at that point, your only focus should be on what is ahead of you whilst keeping an eye out for cyclists coming up on the inside of you since you're exiting left.
@@Lostachilles and thats the issue when exiting you checking left mirror and quick shoulder check left to make sure its safe to merge over just at the same time the car in front slams on the brakes. dam dangerous rule, but at least its a should and not a must
1:18 The road markings on the approach to Princes street from Hanover Street in Edinburghh are appalling. There are road markings when coming down Hanover Street saying "Ahead Only", yet there is no "Ahead" except into the art gallery. I assume that it means non-bus motor traffic must jiggle up The Mound, with no left or right turn allowed into Princes Street. The road markings at 1:27 are terrible - no wonder the two front vehicles got confused. This is another example of poor road signage. It is not always the driver who is to blame.
This junction is such a pain. Cars get stuck in the middle way too much, holding up the buses and trams on Princes Street.
Whilst i agree with you it doesnt take a rocket scientist to realise that ahead only means straight on and not turn left or right.
There is a large sign on the left on hanover ST that illustrates the staggered junction from above highlighting the turns you cant make and the exit up the mound.
After that though was there also something confusing with the illuminated no entry signs? usually they are fairly straight forward they mean do not enter.
@@Mantolwen Yeah is fairly constant
Seems like a prime place for a camera to enforce the box junction...
@@andyp315 Get rid of the "Ahead" road markings, which conflict with the sign. And the road markings in the junction are ultra confusing.
The road sign you mentioned indicates no right or left turns, but the sign does not fit in with road-sign rules. It also indicates no turns for _any_ vehicle, so the simplest thing would be to change the junction so it followed the rightward curve into the junction, and rather than painted lines have coloured slightly raised setts to guide vehicles.
I am not sure if I've said this before... but
The Highway Code has a separate set of rules for 'Road junctions' (170 to 183) and 'Roundabouts' (184 to 190) and the new H2 rule says to give priority to pedestrians 'at a junction' + it was added to rule 170 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'road junctions'), but not to rule 187 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'roundabouts').
Road junctions:
Rule 170
You should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way (see Rule H2)
Roundabouts:
Rule 187: In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads
A roundabout is a series of junctions in a circle, though?
@@elliotpollard9083 a motorway is one big junction by that logic then 🤣? They made a specific rule for roundabout so I’d say stick by them rules when on roundabouts. It says watch out for people crossing, and give necessary space ( e.g stop ) if someone is crossing at a roundabout
"should" is not "must" - in other words if it is safe, ie. there's no-one behind you, give way. I have no idea what "plenty room" means.
Clip 5... Even the pedestrians are puzzled by the smartness of the new rules.
I'd be interested in your take on touch screen dash operation, on the move. Removing the option of finding controls intuitively by feel, (as in knobs and dials), means you spend more time with your eyes off the road. I've noticed exponentially more instances or cars wandering into the kerb or towards the crown of the road in recent years, invariably recent models. This goes on for a mile or so in some instances. Either they're trying to compose text messages on their smartphone. or scrolling the dash menu.
That's my main reason for not wanting a Tesla. Too many primary and secondary controls via the touchscreen dash.
Clip 19 is a corner well known for accidents in Hull, on Springbank, including fatalities. It demonstrates why both those turning across traffic and those driving straight on in this situation need to exercise caution.
Thank you Ashley as a ex advanced / blue light driver you have shown me not to rest on my laurels especially how I can try to make things better in a bad situation from other drivers. Every day is a school day.
Not waiting for the foolish turner onto the railway to reverse out of danger is potentially as bad as the original error. Suprised you didnt mention that Ashley. Incidentally, I enjoy your vids and they have made me enjoy driving again!!
4:10 To be honest, if they struggled seeing them, it suggests it's a situation where you need to spend a little extra time looking to be sure you can emerge safely
A good reminder to drivers (least those of us who don't have fancy cars) to put sidelights on when going through dense woodland like that
Yeah, I think it was less the shaded area and more just a poorly timed combination of the traffic going the other way (and probably sun glare of the back off them) then the A pillar obscuring the BMW's view and the BMW not taking the time to check.
The camera guys car was blocked from the guy pulling out, he should have just waited a few more seconds and checked properly. Just bad driving tbh
At 10:28 was the perfect time for that cyclist to be taking primary position. There was no-one behind, nontheless there was no way anyone should be overtaking on that bend, it makes clear they aren't turning left, they would be in the field of view for where motorists look for cars and if you need to change position to ensure you can be seen then primary to secondary is safer than secondary to primary.
Also, he had lights on. If they can't see lights (which we all know what drivers are looking for at that time of night - i.e. headlights of other cars), they aren't going to notice high vis when it doesn't have lights shining on it until too late.
As you said CycleCam, the he should have been in primary and that would have prevented being hidden behind the A pillar at that point. That said, I'd also add a flashing white light onto the front, alongside his solid beam. Yes, I know some drivers dislike them because they draw attention, but it's tough - that's what they're designed to do, and how they keep cyclists safe. A flashing light would have likely drawn more attention earlier to the driver that there was a cyclist approaching.
Spot on.
Whenever Ashley thanks the viewers for sending in the clips, you know he will roast a viewer next :D
Haha...not wrong! 👊
I was given an interesting perspective a few days ago. I was told by a friend that sounding the horn at someone who has been daft is minimum unproductive and could be dangerous and illegal. His reasoning was that there are very few people that will respond to the sound of a horn with "Yes, that was daft of me, I must try to be better", most will get angry and drive worse, and you may even be subject to road rage. His reasoning on it being possibly illegal is that the use of the horn is to let other road users know you are there. If they already know and just don't care, then your use of the horn could be seen as retaliatory, and thus illegal. Does this reasoning hold any merit?
4:24 Yes, this is a huge issue in Bristol from my experience. It’s a toxic combination. Inexperienced, unqualified riders, staring at their phone in the cradle for directions, often riding somewhere unfamiliar whilst under huge time pressure from their employer. There have been accidents and there will be more. Personally I think delivery riders should at least need a full license to use a moped for their deliveries. I hate to make earning a living more difficult for them, but at the minute I just don’t think it’s adequately safe.
Agree that delivery riders should require a full licence (but then they'll probably just leave the L plates off...a bit like DPD drivers and the like, judging by their driving!). I've yet to see an HGV learner (albeit accompanied) delivering 44 tons of goods...
My mate who works in KFC was telling me that JustEat drivers (could be one of the others?) now get paid an hourly wage rather than paid per delivered and they are noticeably in less of a huge hurry compared to the other food delivery service workers. I think you're right about them having a license and also more places need to adopt an hourly pay, incentivising these people to rush surely makes them more dangerous. Just an interesting point I thought I would mention :)
edit: This is in Nottingham, not sure if it applies to everywhere
@@CaseyJonesNumber1 Not just a full licence, but a full licence including a motor cycle test pass.
Honestly I am utterly amazed at the lack of regulation there is governing target setting and piecework-based-pay on the roads. The drivers/riders have a massive incentive to go fast to deliver as much as possible, it's no wonder they do mental things. Had one today, this guy got very angry at myself and an SUV slowing and pulling to the side on a residential street in S Wimbledon, because a car was coming the other way. When we saw the car was not coming, we (still rolling) moved back to the middle of the road and proceeded along it. The SUV driver obviously was not expecting a moped to come flying past into oncoming traffic so I think scared the shite out of him. I honestly was also not expecting it either, but the beeping and swearing he gave the SUV saved my bacon. Man had no idea what we were doing, he was just suicidally focussed on getting that delivery done.
Absolutely agree. Actually just ten minutes ago I was nearly run over by a delivery rider who unexpectedly turned right by skipping the traffic in the left lane and using the right lane to turn (almost a Birmingham Gandalf Corner). The rules are crazy - 90% of riders here in Birmingham city centre seem to have L plates and yet are clearly on the roads more than me. I don’t like over regulating these things, but agree this is a fairly significant safety issue. Even the pedestrian areas aren’t safe due to the cyclists zipping round at speed whilst staring at their phones and not paying any attention .
Oh well, as long as people don’t actually have to walk anywhere to pick up their food 🤷🏻♂️. I may sound like a grumpy middle aged man (I am), but I just think the delivery situation has become ridiculous.
4:05 Very bright days can be problematic for visibility just as dark days can be. The human eye can only handle so much contrast before it can’t make out shapes properly. It’s why I always have my dipped lights on these days, regardless of the conditions. They’re as useful for being seen as they are for seeing.
Good shout. I’m it was my clip (down in Cornwall) -I did have a 67 reg fiesta so it did have those automatic driving lights on, but probably not as good as dipped headlights.
@@lordnick1575 thanks for sending the clip in. It’s an unorthodox situation many may not encounter until they have an accident in such a situation. Sending clips in like this helps us all learn.
Great footage given in, not sure if people are aware of dashcams and how frequent they are used these days but they get the most interesting, stupid but also extremely dangerous moves done by drivers. I love both styles of content, with driving tips and advice and also driving fails and they both help with what to do and not to do when learning to drive. Thanks Ashley.
Clip 5 confirms my belief that there newly qualified drivers can in some ways be better than experienced ones because they have not spent years practising bad habits
When first started driving on my own, my dad told me it was at this point I would actually learn how to drive. But it never felt like that to me, it felt the same as a lesson, I just didn’t have anyone with me and I could go wherever I wanted.
I tend to feel i was a better driver in the years just after passing my test. I did drive a bit too fast, but my observation and anticipation skills were quite a lot better.
@@15bit62 Then please go and get some extra training from RoSPA/IAM
@@georgecromar4094 I didn't say i was a bad driver, i said some of my skills were better when i was younger. And i don't live in the UK, so RoSPA/IAM are somewhat irrelevant to me :)
Yes, which is why legally mandated continual driver education throughout drivers’ driving lives is very important and something that should be introduced. Easier to iron out 1 bad habit soon after it’s developed than a dozen after 30 years.
Gotta love the driving in Hull, this exact same scenario happened in front of me there last year..
I think the new rules for pedestrians are crazy. I try to always be aware of people dogs and children on roadsides but I think the new rules are scary and I’m old and slow and instructor trained too
I think all your viewers did a fantastic job avoiding collisions in this episode! Well done everyone!!!!
09:00 I'd have said both were at fault here 50/50. Saab was going too fast based on conditions and pickup truck didn't look at both lanes, assuming that because one lane was stationary it was safe to go.
In situations like that you shouldn't bomb down the empty lane. Peds and other traffic can and WILL assume both lanes are stationary. Even if they don't assume, for that pickup it would have seemed clear, as they can only see a little way up there, then as they move off, the Saab comes from nowhere at about 40mph.
Imagine it that was a mother and kids walking between the stationary vehicles
(An appeal to emotion I know.. But still. I had this happen at a crossing, right lane stationary, I was going down the left in a clear lane and a 20ish year old lass came across the crossing bold as brass straight out from infront of a van. That was a 40 limit dual carriage way. Lucky I was doing 30 as I stopped about a foot off her with her square in the middle of my bonnet. At 40 she'd have been F*ed... Never apologised or anything either, never even flinched out of the way, just carried on walking oblivious... Almost got rear ended as well by the tw@ tailgating behind probably thinking "what's this mong doing 30 in a 40 for", I could see the whites of his eyes in my mirror. If his number plate screws had been a quarter turn further out he's have touched my car lol)
Anyway...
The Saab driver was progressing at an inappropriate speed and displaying a lack of situational awareness. All could add up to driving without due care IMO. He should be required to attend a driver awareness course as if he makes a habit of driving like that, it's only a matter of time before he causes a more serious incident, The arm gestures also suggest he has zero self awareness and 100% believes the pickup is at fault and he wasn't doing anything wrong.
Pickup driver likely had a poor view, and should have crept out a little rather than just going for it. Doing so may have caused the Saab to slow, and would have provided a better view potentially allowing the Saab to be seen before fully committing. This does also display a lack of proper care. However there is a stronger case that the pickup did creep at first and felt he could see far enough up the road to be sure it was clear, and that the Saab was likely speeding, if not certainly traveling much faster than one could reasonably expect.
I'd have a harder time arguing the pickup was driving without due care, unless there's other cameras that show they didn't creep at all and just went for it.
From the insurance perspective it's an easy 50/50 settlement as insurers don't like to argue back and forth. and with no clear blame they would likely both want to settle for 50/50 unless either policy holder insisted to push it further.
Hang on... just watched again a couple of times, the pickup doesn't creep at all, I realise you do actually see them on the oncoming lane and they just go for it... So that even more firmly puts it 50/50, neither sides case is winnable, and any attempt to take it to court should be laughed out. Take either one, or both of those away and replace them with a competent and careful driver and the collision doesn't happen.
So yea... throw the book at both drivers, both driving without due care and attention, put both of them to driver awareness courses (of course that also includes the possibility of points if they have a history of such offences).
If either admit to, or are suspected of being distracted or influenced by something, such as the pickup has a great big sat nav in the middle of the windscreen obstructing visibility, or the Saab was showing off for a passenger or dashcam, then the possibility of elevating to dangerous driving emerges also.
Pickup drove into the path of oncoming traffic. In what world is that 50/50?
Clip 17 - That happens all the time near me. Section of road that regularly floods, not with too much water, but enough that you need to slow going through it. Always some numpty coming in the opposite direction who doesn't slow, makes it a close call and covers your car with disgusting water. Cheers mate.
I have a fear about Pedestrian rules on a roundabout. I always think someone behind not paying attention or know the new rules will plow into the back of me. I think your white lines idea for a crossing will rectify this
Won’t change the fact that the car behind may not see the reason for stopping. On RA cars tend to be too close to each other.
The rules only say should give way, there is no must give way.
It should be a controlled stop. Their insurance will pay out if they hit you.
@@elliotpollard9083 but your insurance will still cost more too even tho not a fault, reason at any risky areas i refuse to stop unless they are already in the road crossing. not adding extra risk of being in another crash what is not driver fault and injury's
I wouldn't dream of crossing over the hatched markings, just drive further on, and rejoin at the next sliproad.
2:12 & 2:40 perfectly show why I haven't been following the change where cars should give way to pedestrians wanting to cross at junctions. It's dangerous. If a pedestrian wants to cross the road which is designed for cars, they should pick their moment. Having this rule in effect and people following it like on these two junctions is just plain dangerous. A large heavy lorry is expected to stop on a roundabout to give way to 1 pedestrian? Meanwhile it blocks the roundabout, people aren't expecting this large vehicle to come to a sudden stop and just generally interrupts the flow of traffic for 1 person that could probably have picked a gap to cross 30 seconds later.
I agree with you, more often than not I see drivers NOT following the rules too. But I don't know if that's because they are choosing too or they don't know about the changes
@@David_Trowbridge Most of the time I expect its drivers quite rightly feeling that this is not a good situation to suddenly stop
@@cycloactive5858 Well there are people in the motor vehicles, people that don't want to walk or cycle, its personal choice and no one else's business, and with the rise of electric cars the green lobby have less ammo to throw at drivers.
As for crossing the road, its not gonna kill people to cross in a more appropriate and safer place, when I'm a pedestrian I do not cross the road in silly places.
@@cycloactive5858 for me its not about a hierarchy, its about what is logical in a given situation. If there is one pedestrian waiting to cross a road but seven cars would all have to come to a stop to let the one person cross, who should wait? It makes no sense to make at least seven people wait for one person. And lets not forget about wear and tear on the brakes and extra fuel consumption when getting back up to speed.
I tried to do it while turning left.. Allowed a pedestrian across. Cars turning right from the opposite direction cut in front of me and nearly took the pedestrian out. I'm done with it. It's a stupid rule and until it's better educated or enforced, it's nothing but dangerous for everyone involved. Many incidents where I've had a horn blasted at me too. I'll proceed cautiously and if they look to be stepping out, I'll of course stop. Strangely this seems to be better adhered to in London of all places where I was visiting yesterday. Most seem to stop and give way, but not where I am.
The clip at 1:15 is the junction of Hanover Street and Princes Street in Edinburgh. You are only permitted to go straight ahead at this junction - the no left turn is on the traffic lights at the stop line, and the no right turn is on the distant signal. The road which runs perpendicular to the direction of travel - Princes Street - is restricted to buses, taxis, cycles and trams, hence the bus driver's frustration behind.
Re: overtaking I've noticed one big change in the last 43 years--when I started driving, most people knew how to change down a gear and get a move on!
That was despite many cars having worn out (or NO) synchromesh back then, so they had to double-declutch just to get into gear.
Obviously, if you want to overtake, you need to see you have room and a place to move into before you start. But once you decide to go, don't waste time labouring the engine in top gear. Change down and finish the overtake in good time!
Either that, or accept that it's time to chill, 'cos the queues mean overtaking is pointless :-)
Unless you're gonna bunny hop the whole queue. But i agree, some people have no idea how to overtake
Not easy to teach overtaking.
@@asilver2889 depends on the road. Obviously it'd be harder to teach someone how to overtake in North Wales compared to Lincolnshire
But. If on a left hand bend, as you progress your view becomes extended.
This means that in the beginning of the overtake you have, say a confirmed landing spot 1 or 2 cars ahead. As you progress you can see that you have room for another, then another, and so on. In these scenarios it is not prudent to be roaring past the line, it is safer to be aiming to match speeds for the next gap each additional car you pass
Most people overtake straight after tailgating and end up doing most if not all acceleration during the overtake, rather than keep a 2sec gap then build up speed towards them and overtake. Something else that makes me want to put my brains in a blender is when someone overtakes into a queue of traffic. Like they want to move up the one position for all 0.039 seconds it will save their trip home. On a national road with no traffic ahead its understandable
Used to drive that please drive carefully road everyday into Wilmslow, its a terrible bit of road loads of nobs that do stuff like that. But TBF the speed limit is 50 so 30 is a bit low. It changes to 30 towards the end of the clip though IIRC.
19# Too fast through a shopping area and junction there's no way I would hit a right turner especially one that big.
Dash Cam Hull is fantastic! Hahaha. Some absolute wonderful commentary.
You definitely saved the worst for first, that van was lethal. They will be in an accident before long if they haven't been already.
5:28 - not paying attention rather than drunk. The motorist decides, after clonking the kerb, to give it the widest berth imaginable. The telltale sign of "I'm guilty for dozy driving".
Love how you admonished viewer #5 for submitting in that nonsense. Behind someone with P plates too!
Clip 4, 2:20, precisely why you're not supposed to enter a RB until the vehicle has passed you, the Vauxhall was way too premature.
Worse thing is I see it on the motorway loads, HGVs too... leaving at the wrong exit and then dangerously swerving through back to live lanes at the last minute. The worse things is in 95% of the cases I see this, there's a roundabout at the exit that you can go straight through.... back onto the motorway.
This probably means I'm the worst driver, but I watched the clip from 5:00 a few times and I didn't see the second incident after the first. What's he saying 'oh my god' to?
Are they red light jumpers is that it?
Yes, couple of cars coming from the right jump the lights.
The final clip gives the best feel for how your direction is with your clips. Donkey running wild.
2:20 Any drivers that get caught out like that cannot blame it on the HC update. Before it came out, those pedestrians could have stepped out even if they shouldn't and you'd still be expected to stop. The updates don't change anything in terms of what you should be able to anticipate
I've said it before that like 90% of the changes to the highway code are just common sense anyway.
Precisely why you're not supposed to enter a RB until the vehicle has passed you, the Vauxhall was way too premature.
@@RichO1701e the lorry had gone passed. The new rules should include no crossing zones for pedestrians. That's not a safe place to cross. At the very least this should have a pelican crossing with lights.
@@KLiCuk1 Your definition of gone past is creative. Is that you just meant the cabin, because that would make sense. Problem was that the giant trailer hadn't made it past
@@goodguykonrad3701 If true the car would have hit the side of the lorry rather than *almost* hit the back of it
Clip 9 is a good example of why I think keeping your lights on even during the day is a good idea. It tremendously helps your visibility for others even in bright daylight.
2:47 Regardless of the new rules, that’s dangerous in every respect. The viewer is travelling too close to the vehicle in front, but stopping on the exit to an island is equally dangerous and ridiculous. Whoever thought up this new rule was probably being paid by the auto repair and parts industry and insurance companies. They are all going to make millions out of this.
just slow down?
Or you could just try driving properly and look where you are going.
What rule is this? I honestly didn't realise this was a rule
Why is it dangerous stopping on an exit? If people just drove normally, it would be no problem at all
@@justamanchimp Must give way to pedestrians waiting to cross
Clip 4 didn’t appear to be a pedestrian crossing point, it might be the resolution on my phone, but I didn’t see a pedestrian footpath there.
I was under the impression the new rules were for ‘proper’ pedestrian crossing areas ie dropped kerbs at the road crossing of footpaths?
Hi, this is my clip. There is a crossing there, just not a good one
Clip 4, they just didn't look ahead before moving, very common fail when entering roundabouts and probably most common reason for rear endings.
Not to mention, instead of waiting for the person to fix their mistake. They instead decide to put themselves in danger, by blocking them and driving behind them
@@whitemarmite I think you refer to clip 3, if so I do agree.
11:04 That rogue donkey is right at home amongst all the other rogue donkeys featured in this video.
I always prefer to stay well behind an idiot as that way I have more control of issues 🤣
Hello Ashley. Having just watched this I consider this the best channel of this type I have seen. Educational and informative and above all balanced.
10:28 If that's an A Pillar blind spot then everything that's not in your direct line of vision is a blindspot.
I once did miss my turn off on the motorway, ended up doing a twenty mile round tour, you should just suck it up, and accept it, glad to say its the sort of decisions that keep you, and others alive
I've been a follower of yours for some time now Ashleigh and love your content and your calm approach. I now don't flash other drivers after seeing the havoc it can cause. Best regards from another scouser.
👊
Clip 19: the amount of accidents at that junction is ridiculous, I'm a bus driver and had several near misses there, just wish I could get the buses dash cam footage for you Ashley you would be able to do a full 10 minute episode out of stuff captured there.
5:15 What second incident? 😅
Glad I'm not the only one! All I can see is some of the vehicles turning right across the cammer's route look to have jumped the red light. It doesn't appear to cause enough of a problem to explain the cammer's language though.
I thought I was the only one! I've played the clip a dozen times and I still don't know what the "second incident" is!?
I just love it when people tailgate and can not stop in the distance available. Makes for good youtube content
I personally think that applying rule 170 to roundabouts is stupid there are no markings on that exit so it is just a part of the carriageway and pedestrians should wait until it is clear
the extremely confusing (and annoying because of the lack of thought in preparing the guidance) is that roundabouts have their own section in the Highway Code, starting at Section 184 and nowhere does it mention giving way to pedestrians waiting to cross. Section 187 is particularly relevant - see where is says look out for "Pedestrians crossing the approach and exit roads" - not "waiting to cross"
Yes, some elements of the Highway Code do not appear to have been thought through particularly well.... people make genuine mistakes and are not machines. That said, the delivery scooter is a classic, the "lad" won't know better or have any fear until he's (usually male, but not always) had a bad accident. The white van driver pulling across a solid hatch - completely wrong, but he/she made a mistake - at least they indicated and used hazards to acknowledge the driver behind, still no excuse though. Jumping red lights is the most onerous as the drivers are fully aware of what they are doing. So, my view has always been - people make mistakes, be prepared for them, and that's from a biker where you don't get a second chance and always come off worse. Great video.
2:45 I'm still a recent(ish) P-plate pass and if it's not cars it's pedestrians that get cross when I follow this new highway code...it's caused so much bother!
Even just last week gave priority to a person waiting to cross before a roundabout and they shook their head like I was in the wrong for giving way?
I must admit though when I've been walking as a ped myself at times I forget the code because it's instinctual that I see a car and stop to wait because it's bigger. At the same time it's not like I freely walk out onto the road expecting people to stop😵💫
Don’t stop for pedestrians if you don’t want to. the highway code implementations are only advisory and won’t get you in any trouble if you don’t follow them. It’s dangerous for that lorry on the clip prior to stop in the middle of a roundabout
When a pedestrian I give way to anything that can cause me injury, in other words everything. New HC is catering to the green brigade,it’s not about safety , pedestrians walking out because the think a vehicle can instantly stop or cyclists weaving about in road not moving over when approached by faster vehicle.
I would shake my head too, and also facepalm and roll my eyes with my mouth wide open while screaming at you to read rule 187 which applies to 'roundabouts' rather than rule H2/170 which applies at regular junctions. 😲🤦🙄
6:40 that merc van did very well, I hope the focus stopped as hitting the curb at that speed would've done some damage I imagine, but the merc driver had no choice but to go on the curb
What's your take on the lorry stopping at 2:30ish?
Should not have stopped.
He learned the rules watching UA-cam videos rather than reading the Highway Code.
The H2 rule says to give priority to pedestrians 'at a junction', but while a roundabout is a type of junction too, the Highway Code has a separate set of rules for 'Road junctions' (170 to 183) and 'Roundabouts' (184 to 190) and also the H2 rule was added to rule 170 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'road junctions'), but not to rule 187 (about dealing with pedestrians at 'roundabouts').
Road junctions:
Rule 170
You should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way (see Rule H2)
Roundabouts:
Rule 187: In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads
Obviously rule 187 applies here, not H2/170.
1:30 - yay a place I recognise! The mound in Edinburgh. I've seen a few people get confused there as well. It is an 'offest striaght on' - but what confuses tourists/people less familiar with it, is that it has a "no right turn" symbol. now this is correct, because - as noted by the graphic highlighting the 'no entry' sign - you can't turn right, you have to go 'straight'. but because that involves the right/left move as seen in the clip, tourists/people less familiar with it get to that point on the right/left move and go "wait, where am I supposed to go".
And that’s why giving way to pedestrians at roundabouts is incredibly dangerous
I thought we had to give them priority if they are at a designated crossing point and not just any part of the road/pavement? Is this not true and someone standing anywhere has priority to cross?
@@peterjames6607 I nearly failed my recent test because of this nonsense. You’re right, priority if waiting but not like the lorry in that clip. Absolutely ridiculous.
@@peterjames6607 at the mouth of any junction unless a controlled crossing is in place.
Do we need to give way upon exiting a roundabout to pedestrians? Seems super dangerous - in both clips I wouldn’t expect a lorry/car to stop unless there is a ‘proper crossing?
@@bp19870 Ahh yes, just like a T junction, but as has been mentioned it seems crazy to apply this to an exit on a roundabout! :(
Seeing the driver turning on to a railway track. My local mainline station in the New Forest, with an 86 year old lass was driving her 20 year old companion, turned onto the railway track at. the level crossing with live 3rd rail, and somehow managed about 80 yards along the tracks before coming to a halt. They even nearly managed the station platform in January 2012. To recover the car, a car recovery crane was used to reach over to recover the car. I was surprised the companion did not point the mistake out as soon as the car entered the tracks.
Also a friend of mine was training a pony in a cart, and the pony started to try and go up the tracks, and he managed quickly stop the pony from going along the railway.
If you choose to stop to offer to share footage of an incident, please do so in a safe place, even if it means driving down a way to park up. Don't sit in a live motorway lane to do so as I have seen in the past.
Watching clip 3 reminded me of an incident that happened many years ago, on the mainline just outside Edinburgh. An older driver turned onto, and continued for a distance along the track, from a level crossing. Unfortunately he was not as lucky as this particular individual, and met up with a large train that claimed right of way further along the line.
Your brain can never be in neutral around level crossings, regardless of mode of transport. Trains will never be able to stop in time, they cannot swerve, and unless you're in a main battle tank, you WILL lose the argument.
'claimed right of way' LOL
I feel like the private hire minibus in #15 did well to avoid a pile up
More than likely experienced enough to know you can get some right numpties pulling on from slip roads
@@marklittler784 If thats the case then the Bus driver should have slowed down to an appropriate speed or held back from overtaking in such a precarious road position! Any junction magnifies the dangers of any road. The Bus driver is a blinkin idiot!
@@marklittler784 The thing is the minibus passed 3.5 dashes in approx 1 second. With dashes at 9m centres on a road like this, that puts their average speed at 31.5m/s; 70mph.
Given that they're already hard on their brakes with the nose of their vehicle dived down when they come into shot they were clearly well in excess of the speed limit beforehand.
They actually lack the experience required to show a suitable degree of caution at slip roads, hence the near crash.
@@roaduser6438 It's all this nothing to do with me I have the right of way monkey business, look where I'm going but not where everyone else is coming from.
@@marklittler784 Oh the driver merging was crap too obviously. Classic case of two idiots narrowly avoiding each other.
That's a great point. Driver gets brake checked so has to have done something wrong, just like getting assaulted means you did something wrong.
That clip of the lorry at 2.34 shows the madness of the new highway code rules which were obviously thought up by non drivers
The madness is drivers driving without ensuring the road is clear.
@@tony_w839 The madness is pedestrians crossing where they shouldn’t,
Do you see a path ?
Do you see a pavement ?
@@thelondondashcam Can't see the path or pavement because it's a few yards up the road and Ashley faded the clip a bit quickly, close enough to count though. GPS 52.310025, -1.904680
@@thelondondashcam Do car drivers do things they should not, do cyclists do things they should not, do lorry drivers do things they should not, is the madness only pedestrians?
I see a pavement with a car parked on it, I see a path with a cyclist on it.
6:35 what a save! First good taxi driver I've seen 😂
2:15 Stopping for Pedestrians when leaving a Roundabout has always been the law here in Germany, but there is no way that Lorry had to Stop there. No way you'd have to stop in a Roundabout like that. There is no Pavement or anything. This was a completely unnecessary and dangerous move by the Lorry.
The only danger came from the tailgating car.
While I don't like the rules suggesting giving way in that scenario, the lorry was simply following the rules, not doing something dangerous. The rules don't make any mention of pavements or anything, and in any case, the pedestrians are following a path and have to cross there.
The clip with the Donkey - Don't ASSume you have right of way. 😆🤦♂️
2:40 Perfect example of how scuffed the new guidance is. Absolutely no safe or logical reasoning for stopping in this scenario
Agreed
I had an incident of my own this morning, was doing 30 mph in a 30 zone (near a shopping centre) and there was a 50 ton mobile crane riding my arse who then went on to overtake at a busy crossroads. You'd think people driving heavy machinery like that would show a higher level of patience and professionalism, not drive it like a white van.
Some of these clips really show why these new rules are so dangerous.
The cars behind may not see the pedestrians at the crossings and are not expecting the car in front to brake all of a sudden.
So drive in a manner where you expect the car in front to stop suddenly, surely.... 👍
Counter argument would be that cars need to leave more space between them and the car in front. And that cars shouldn't be stopping to give way if a car is right on their behind.
@@TheDAMeaning I know what you mean but we shouldn't be giving people more reasons to stop suddenly.
2:15
With the old rules the trucks casually exits and the pedestrian crosses safely.
@@TheDAMeaning unfortunately very few do :( , I sometime wonder if I'm only one where I live that actually sticks to the speed limit, and often have some one right on my bumper as if I am an inconvenience by doing 30mph in a 30 zone, feeling comfortable that I can stop quickly if I need to, but not feeling the person behind will.
@@Tazinio01 This is why i think the new rules are bad. the only thing they do is increase traffic. It takes more time for cars to stop and let the pedestrians out than it does for them to drive past and then the pedestrians cross. It increases the risk of an accident that could push a car into a crossing pedestrian which doesn't make a pedestrian safer at all. I just cannot see the point in them.
That Toyota Corolla overtake at 5:46. As a Guernsey resident who gets around mainly by bicycle, overtakes like that, leaving little room to tuck back in for oncoming traffic, are shockingly common. I'm surprised there's not more crashes and it's just as well that the max speed limit here is 35mph.
The final clip was not the only one with an ass in it!
More seriously, why is it legal for unqualified motorcyclists to be delivery drivers. Those boxes make the bike top heavy and can easily catch a crosswind.
Because nothing would get delivered if you had to pay for a full bike test? I was a delivery driver for years, did my CBT three times because I couldn't afford to do my full test on the wages. Some are very experienced, 40+ deliveries a night, 6 nights a week... we rack up some serious miles and knowledge but sadly no danger money. Luckily I was only knocked off a few times by drunk drivers.
I’m not an expert so correct me if I’m wrong. Once you have taken an introductory course, you can ride a 125cc motorbike up to 2 years with L plates, after 2 years you have to take that course again or you get your full motorbike licence. So a lot of “learner” riders can in fact be quite experienced
@@pamelagartner3759 exactly this. Particularly the distances they do and familiarity with the area.
I never noticed any problems with crosswinds and topbox when I had my Honda C70 many moons ago
3:10 and the car felt forced to not yield to the pedestrian pushing his bike across the side road… all that because someone felt that being nice was better than merely following the rules !
7:45 I have a colleague that has argued with me on multiple occasions saying that you’re supposed to drive as fast as possible through floods and driving slow and steady damages the engine. No amount of referencing the Rufford Ford channel or the fact that I’ve traversed multiple floods and Fords without a hitch will convince him otherwise. This guy also thinks he’s the best driver in the world because he’s willing to drive everywhere at Mach 2, he really should donate his brain to science to see what on earth is going on in there.
sounds like he's heard the old "water will sneak up your exhaust and put out your fire" myth. have you pointed out that water splashes just as high inside the bonnet as it does outside the car? and that unlike the exhaust, the intake is constantly drawing whatever is in the bonnet into the engine?
@@kenbrown2808 No it chokes the engine if revs aint kept up enough, because it cant breathe.
Been through in diesels coming up windscreen, far deeper than the Rufford though it did rip front lower grill off.
@@jhareng you know what really chokes the engine off? Inhaling water. I've seen engines both gas and diesel sittimg idling and being shut down and restarted with the exhaust completely under water. I've also seen engines get hydrolock and crack components from having water splashed into the intake.
So yes, if your engine doesn't have enough torque to walk the car through standing water, you have to give it throttle, to keep it from stalling, but otherwise, more throttle just pulls more air and increases the chance of breathing water.
@@kenbrown2808 that makes sense. so where does the 'keep the revs up' myth come from? it kind of feels like it should work
@@ChrisCaaa it comes from the same place as the myth that putting a banana in the tailpipe will stop the engine from starting. People who don't understand that the compression stroke of an engine is a much higher rate of compression than any blockage of the exhaust, and both the firing stroke and the starter have no trouble overcoming that. For that matter, mobile air compressors are just a standard gas engine with half the cylinders converted to air compressor cylinders. An engine can overcome a lot of exhaust back pressure and keep running.
I used to hold a driver's license until a routine eyesight test barred me from driving a motor vehicle.
So now I am learning how to "drive" a Yamaha NP-12 piano. And one day after passing my mysic grades I would love to be seated on the seat of a 9 foot long Yamaha grand piano.
As a pedestrian I always take the safest option and wait for motor vehicles to pass me and get out of the way.
Clip 5. The new rules don't tell you to give way to pedestrians on the exit of a roundabout though. I'd be happy to be pointed to the rule that states this.
Rule H2: At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.
When existing a roundabout you are turning into a road. Also Ashley emailed the DFT for clarification and they confirmed this would include roundabouts.
@@ryanmitcham5522 That rule refers to junctions, not roundabouts. Rule 184 to 190 are for roundabouts and there's nothing there about giving way to pedestrians who are waiting to cross your exit.
The clip with the lorry stopping for pedestrians makes me wonder if you should be expected to stop when there is no clear crossing for them. No path, drop kerb or anything it looks like somewhere you shouldn’t be crossing from?
Exactly no dropped curb no crossing point.
@@davidellis8141 The new highway code rules on this make no mention of needing a 'dropped kerb' or 'crossing point'.
02:21 Noted that there is No assigned Pedestrian crossing yet the truck was required to Stop according to your statement as to "New Code Rule". For mine waiting till at least the large vehicle passed would be the sensible thing to do.
If this rule gives Pedestrians "Right of Way" everywhere and anywhere, it is going to cause a lot more accidents as people will almost certainly go the "entitled" route and start wandering across roads with oncoming vehicles travelling at speed. Add in a bit of rain\snow\ice and the results are not going to be pretty.
02:43 Another example of issues where there the combination of poor visibility due to sun position and shadows combined with focusing on traversing a roundabout being made more dangerous to all due to the same rule. Commonsense SHOULD be implemented in situations such as these where drivers attention is being split by road circumstances (such as a sign for the PEDESTRIANS informing them to "Cross when safe to do so".)
Believe as no crossing point shouldn’t have stopped. Only supposed to stop if safe to do so and at a crossing point ie dropped curb.
@@davidellis8141 We don't see in the clip but it is a crossing point since there is a footpath crossing the sliproad, GPS 52.310025, -1.904680
@@andyalder7910 agree with you here Andy! ;) But I would say to David that it's immaterial whether there's a dropped kerb or not, the rule still applies.
Ought to be fun when a lorry stops like that and a car overtakes it, that’s a worse outcome for the pedestrians than having to wait until the road is clear or, shock horror, having to walk a few metres and find somewhere that’s actually safe to cross.
Clip 20, the vehicle who came back across the hatched markings at the last second, if that's a standard motorway exit then all they'd have needed to do was go straight over at the roundabout and rejoin the motorway. Saved themselves about a minute.
Crossing a solid white line is 3 penalty points and up to £1,000
"Cyclists need to do better" yet another dumb comment from Ashley who really should desist. It doesn't matter what cyclists do in some situations .. a motorist could be staring at you and still pull out and once you are past the point of no return an accident is inevitable.
You carry on riding into danger then, and you think I'm dumb 🤔
@@ashley_neal 10.33 tell me what more the cyclist could have done at that point. The motorist should not have emerged as his exit route has blocked by vehicles in lane he was heading for. Unfortunately short of stopping at every situation like this there are always points of no return where an idiot motorist will cause an accident irrespective of what cyclist or motorcyclist does. Some folks have commented that the rider should have been in primary position - but if the cyclist was half a second later and in primary position the incident would likely still have happened. The reason the cyclist was not in primary position was that he correctly steered left of manhole cover (manhole covers are dangerous for cyclists) just before junction. A good idea for a video for yourself would be to illustrate the dangers of bad observation due to blind spots cause by vehicle pillars e.g. emerging right onto a road it is quite possible for a cyclist to be in left pillar blind spot during whole of emerge.
Why are you asking me? I'm dumb. Work it out yourself.
I regularly drive coaches down princess street as seen in clip two and that junction is an absolute NIGHTMARE. I can't remember the last time I got through those lights cleanly. The cars will q in the yellow box meaning we can't get through and then the trams will stop in the middle too. All because the pedestrians crossing isn't propperly times which causes people to make the decision to wait in the middle of the junction
You will never convince me that new rules about allowing peds to cross on roundabouts and junctions will make anyone safer.
You had it right and then went and mucked it up.
If everyone followed the rules correctly then it would work just fine. It would flow so much better for everyone. But just like how people act at merge in turns, I know people will never follow the rules like how they should be.
7:26 this is actually where I’m from, Kirkintilloch and there is actually no traffic light on the left. It is a controversial new pedestrian and cars ‘shared space’ junction. That driver was still going way too fast though
2:38 And this is why the changes are placing everyone in danger. And if you're going to say "it's only because drivers don't know them or are ignoring them" then you might as well admit that a few collisions and a bunch of pedestrians being hit by cars is a small price for other people to pay for you to get your way. There is nothing to be gained from this in the long run. At best, things will be just as they were. But in the meantime, people will get hurt. How is that a sensible rule change?
Like most things it comes down to common sense, if ANYONE follows the new rule then sorry, but you have something lacking upstairs!
I think part of the problem is people tailgating so cant anticipate in time a stop for car in front, cara that dont look left when entering a roundabout... Already a casue for so many rearendings when the car in front has chosen not to go or stopped unexpectedly... And also people. Slamming the brakes on to gove way to a pedestrian without checking their mirror. Some common sense is needed on a situational basis.
@@dalemr2 Funnily enough, I have been following the "new" rules since I learned to drive decades ago, I now train specialist drivers who are among the best in the country, if not the world. Common sense includes, to me at least, observing that people are waiting to cross, that there is a vehicle in front of me who may stop, and there is no need to exit a roundabout that quickly, or that close to the vehicle in front.
@@nahadoth2087 Attitude is more important than infrastructure. Infrastructure can actually increase the dangers. When everyone takes everyone else into account, there is actually no need for infrastructure. Experiments in both Holland and the UK demonstrate that removing entirely what is usually considered infrastructure tends towards safer highways for all users.
@@stevesmith7530 in a perfect world that's fine. But it's not a perfect world. If someone stopped in front of me to let someone cross then it wouldn't be an issue, because I'm aware and I don't tailgate. But you have another thing coming if you think I would ever be that person in front to let someone cross, not a chance, because of tailgaters! It's a huge risk that I'm not prepared to take, the person crossing can wait and use their own judgement when to cross safely without me putting pressure on them. It's the same as these idiots who flash people out for junctions without being aware of going on around them, clear the road, get on with it and let everyone else make their own decisions.
At 1:49 that car is a private hire car(booking only taxi) so that is quite a surprise that he did not know that junction in Edinburgh as it is the city centre and a route that they often take if they work in the area. I would think he was maybe preoccupied with something else behind the wheel.
I thought I would mention it as you used to have a lot of videos about taxi drivers:D
Clip 21 reminds me of something i got told years ago: "Pedestrians (and cyclists) may have right of way, but cars have greater mass". It's all well and good to be in the right, but it's better to not be in the hospital.
Excellent I couldn’t agree more.
Exactly why I don't stop for pedestrians when there are national speed limits. Would you be able to live with yourself having just witnessed the death of a pedestrian, knowing you 'did the right thing' by stopping for them
Pedestrians and cyclists do not have right of way. No part of the HC gives right of way to any road user.
Or you could just drive carefully and not be an entitled driver who thinks the road belongd to them alone as they mistakenly believe they pay road tax.
In defence of the driver at 2:17 , there doesn't appear to be a pavement there so he probably wasn't expecting to see pedestrians trying to cross.
New highway code rule, I see, continues to cause dangerous situations on the road... Is there any info/stats on actual accidents because of the change yet?
I don't abide the new changes I will continue not to, not because I'm being ignorant but unfortunately it's one of those changes where unless everybody abides by it then it's just too dangerous
Drivers cause dangerous situations. Keep your distance, observe and pay attention and you'll have no problems.
I am still not used to or understanding the interpretation of the rules, a lot of scenarios i have been in with the rule have likely been too dangerous to stop or inconvenient (Ie no one behind me) but may not be in accordance with the rule.
@@frazermountford Agreed - like with the lorry clip around 2:18 . If the lorries arse end is going to be blocking a lane on the roundabout, then it doesn't seem like a particularly safe place to stop.
People entering the roundabout also would be unlikely to be looking for pedestrians on an exit they aren't planning on taking.
@@TheBigRab yes the lorry example looked like it was on a National Speed limit road not where you would expect very many pedestrians to be. It would seem that the new rule is better placed in for example
On Sunday I watched a driver following a tram track through a no entry sign and into a one way street. The driver did stop and pull off to the side of the road when he passed the second vehicle coming in the other direction.
Disagree with Ashley @10:30, there was literally nothing the cyclist could have done “better” to avoid that situation other than let every car out on junctions. Totally the car driver’s fault and suggesting cyclists could do more in such situations is ridiculous.
4:05 Whether they had poor vision or not, when actually making the move to pull out you still need to do the additional checks. Had they done so it would have been very obvious a car was coming.