Revised Highway Code
 

According to news reports today, the Highway Code is due to be revised in order to afford greater precedence and protection to more vulnerable road users such as cyclists and pedestrians.

While I am not against this in principle, I wonder if it may result - at least initially - in an increase in low-speed, rear-end collisions. Consider: driver 'A' slows or stops to accord precedence to a pedestrian, waiting to cross the road at a junction, where there is no designated pedestrian crossing, and is rear-ended by driver 'B'.

Traditionally, driver 'B' would be considered to blame, but should not there also be a responsibility on the part of the pedestrian to ensure that it is safe for them to do so before starting to cross?

Thoughts?

Regards, John.

Still sounds like a straightforward case of driver B at fault. He has no idea what event, if any, may cause the car in front to stop. Just because it's a dopy pedestrian doesn't alter the fact that he should have been further back and/or concentrating.

Agreed - as a part-time cyclist and pedestrian myself, as well as motorist, I'm all for improving their safety but, as you indicate, there should also be something done to increase their own awareness, common sense and road safety - if that's even possible...

All road users should have equal respect for others, whether on two, four, or more wheels.

Apart from peds stepping off the curb without even looking - ears full of music so frequently not listening either - how often so we see cyclists blasting through junctions on a red light, or diving across oncoming lanes, cutting corners across pavements - showing no regard for motorists, or even other cyclists & pedestrians?

Totally irresponsible behaviour, endangering themselves and others - breaking the law into the bargain - and as soon as they see a motorist doing something they don't like, giving them a mouthful of abuse.
And they're not even licensed or insured - way too little accountability.
Totally clued up on their rights but not a care for their responsibilities.

Only a small but dangerous minority, obviously...!

I think as a general point the onus must be on the following vehicle to leave enough distance to stop. If the car in front stops, and consequently there is a collision, it is driver of car B that is at fault regardless.

So if cyclist is coming the other way who subsequently falls off his bike and driver A stops during evasive action resulting in a collision - it's driver B's fault.

Why would that be any different if drive A stopped to look at some pretty flowers? In those circumstances driver A perhaps should be prosecuted for driving without due car and attention (or similar) but the collision would be driver B's fault as they did not leave enough room to stop/were not paying attention.

I too welcome clarification of some rules, but I do hope it is properly publicised through TV, magazine adverts and the like - it would be very wrong to quietly change the rules and criminalise some drivers without warning them. After all the intention is to improve driving standards by getting people to change their habits?

Cyclists in groups of 3 or more are by far the worst behaved of any road users, I do hope there is something in the new code to help them.

Biggest problem out there from my perspective. I drive an artic for a living and whilst I am aware of the death and destruction I could cause I can't just drive with impunity because 'I'm in a truck I'll be OK', every minor bump and infraction puts my licence and my job at risk, so the last thing I need is some numbskull popping up in front of me 'because you have to give way to a pedestrian/bike/car'.

But on the other hand how does one deal with the car/van/truck driver who seems to think they so important they own the road and everyone should get out of their way?

As a practical matter it makes zero difference.

It has always been illegal to run over pedestrians and cyclists, so car drivers have to defer to them, where necessary, anyway.

People need to chill out on the road and ditch this "us and them" tribalism atritude. Whether they ride a bike or drive a huge artic, they're human beings with lives and familes and loved ones. Treat all other road users as you would expect to be treated yourself - its actually not at all difficult.

It certainly shouldn't be... as I said: "All road users should have equal respect for others, whether on two, four, or more wheels."

Put your self-righteous ego in your back pocket and sit on it - which should be pretty easy when driving... :rolleyes:

Waits for cases to flood in of pedestrian / cyclist bump for cash scams.

I cycle more miles a year than I drive, and have 2 motorbikes. My daughter has 2 horses. So I know about about vulnerable road users.

Driving sensibly and being cautious around more vulnerable road users isnt being self righteous - its simply practical, because its kept me with a clean licence for 40 years, a clean conscience, and out of prison.

Instead of being needlessly rude you could perhaps simply explain what it so difficult about any of this?

Im not quite sure how you think that will happen - as aforementioned, its already against the law to run over cyclists and pedestrians, and has been since time immemorial. As a practical matter nothing has changed, apart from now being written down. In any case, car drivers have been having a go at crash-for-cash for a while and that didn't get you excited enough to comment on it before.