steve30000
Striker
Or she could have indicated, then just waited like a normal person.
SMB driving experts...
- Thread starter bernardbresslaw
- Start date
- Status
soapster
Striker
highway code, does use must, must not and these must be adhered to. The highway code is also used to give guidance and if that guidance is not adhered to, then it can be used in court to assert blame if there is any
"Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.
"Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.
steve30000
Striker
No no no, you have to speed right up to the cones, indicate, then force your way in.. if you ram someone else who is in the correct lane in the first place, it's clearly their daft fault.
soapster
Striker
not defending the woman at all. analysing actions of both drivers and both are in the wrongPeople still defending woman.
Fred Basset
Winger
Absolutely, mate. I agree entirely. However, she did not so then it is up to you to manage the situation. My view, and it is just my view, is slow down and let her pass. After that, keep a safe distance behind her. In my mind, that saves me waiting over an hour for police to arrive, and potentially wasted more time filling in insurance forms had there been a collision (that probably would have ended up 50/50 in this case.
Just my opinion, marra. See your point of view, and agree with what you are saying.
Firstly, no-one has an absolute right of way in the UK: "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident." https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-hig...-advice-for-all-drivers-and-riders-103-to-158
So the entirety of the highway code is just recommendations/ advice on when one car should give way to another.
It states:
Rule 134
You should follow the signs and road markings and get into the lane as directed. In congested road conditions do not change lanes unnecessarily. Merging in turn is recommended but only if safe and appropriate when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed, e.g. when approaching road works or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.
And in the case applicable here:
Road Works 288
Where lanes are restricted due to road works, merge in turn.
Then when you look online where people have asked the HA agency for clarification on this issue, all the replies are similar to:
"Merge in turn signs on a fast section of dual carriageway are backed up by signs where 'queuing' is commonplace and the intention is that the motorist should judge when 'merge in turn' is applicable. Advance signing of likely queuing should exist prior to a 'merge in turn' sign.
'Merge in turn' in effect removes any priority that one lane may have over another and again is signed when this is the case."
And:
"This is vastly different to a "merge in turn" situation whereby within slow moving traffic a priority is not established and it is for individual traffic to merge in to spaces one by one. Usually in this case which ever vehicle is ahead should be allowed to merge with compliance from the vehicle who is trailing."
The long story short is that because you are in the left hand lane it doesn't mean you automatically have right of way. The guidance is that generally you do, obviously, and if someone cuts you off e.g. on a dual carriageway when travelling at speed then they are in the wrong.
However the guidance is also pretty clear that when traffic is congested and moving slowly due to a lane ending, then you should merge in turn. This directive to merge in turn thus takes precedence over who is in what lane. If the HA wanted to say what you're suggesting they would have said: "Road Works 288: Where lanes are restricted, vehicles in the closed lane should merge into the open when clear to do so" or something. But they don't - they explicitly say you should merge in turn.
Obviously if you have to wait 10 cars to move across safely you have to wait 10 cars - there's no issue with doing what you can to avoid an accident. I wouldn't pull out at a green light if I saw an oncoming car that had jumped a light to prove a point or whatever. But the HA is pretty clear IMO, and seem even clearer when clarified, that in times of lane closures, where traffic is moving slowly, then merge in turn has priority over who's in what lane.
oyoysaveloy
Midfield
I agree the Audi driver is being a bit of a cheeky **** but i would have just let her in rather than be that stubborn 5 minutes down the road would you even care any more imo both are in the wrong
steve30000
Striker
She broke a law by driving over cones, and into a closed lane.
what she did there was f***ing pathetic, irresponsible, and dangerous. If no one wants to let you in, then wait, let them and their massive ego carry on. She was just pissed off that she wasted her time by trying to gain extra time for herself , by going right to the end of the lane closure, and couldn't get her own way. It's f***ing childish.
I'd have done her for careless driving and criminal damage.
D
Deleted member 7190
Guest
The van driver should have just let her in, merge in turn. She also should have waited though, there's no winner if both drivers are driving aggressively.
The zipper rule for merging is a good idea.
The zipper rule for merging is a good idea.
Last edited by a moderator:
She broke a law by driving over cones, and into a closed lane.
She was just pissed off that she wasted her time by trying to gain extra time for herself , by going right to the end of the lane closure, and couldn't get her own way. It's f***ing childish.
I'd have done her for careless driving and criminal damage.
Yes, she has gone on like an absolute bellend, but I still would have let her in if I was the van. Much like if I'm at a traffic light and it's green and someone jumps it I let them past and don't drive into them/ force them to make an emergency stop. Or if I'm on a motorway and someone tries to join my lane I slow down and let them in. Etc etc etc. Even if you're in the right you have a responsibility to prevent/ reduce the risk of accidents. If someone is driving like an absolute twat then you should report them to the police. You shouldn't try and prove a point, because it makes the roads more dangerous for all of us.
steve30000
Striker
Valid points, but that was at a snail's pace, and he had already let two in. Is he supposed to piss off the drivers behind him just to give her, her own way? She was not going to crash into anyone, it's just the fact that he embarrassed her by showing her up.
Then she flips her lid, damages cones and her own car to gain back some superiority.
f***ing hilarious
longtimelurker
Striker
I'd sooner have her take me mirror off than let her pull that shit on me.
Valid points, but that was at a snail's pace, and he had already let two in. Is he supposed to piss off the drivers behind him just to give her, her own way? She was not going to crash into anyone, it's just the fact that he embarrassed her by showing her up.
Then she flips her lid, damages cones and her own car to gain back some superiority.
Oh I totally agree she's gone on like biggest pillock of the two. No doubt. Personally, I think on balance it would have been safer to let her in.
soapster
Striker
as I said earlier, the highway code can be used in evidence in a court (and therefore by insurance companies) as to see who followed the code and therefore proportion blame
on balance about sums it up.
D
Deleted member 6694
Guest
This! If you completely ignore that she went on like a twat after, the amount of people on here saying he should have still let her in obviously haven't watched the video closely enough. 2 cars from the right had already merged creating this space for 2 more cars in the right lane as traffic moved forward slowly. That's what the 2 Audis did as they didn't merge in turn, they merged when they got to the cones which is f***ing stupid as it creates a bottleneck in slow moving traffic.She broke a law by driving over cones, and into a closed lane.
She was just pissed off that she wasted her time by trying to gain extra time for herself , by going right to the end of the lane closure, and couldn't get her own way. It's f***ing childish.
I'd have done her for careless driving and criminal damage.
So I'll ask again, do you let 5 from the right and 3 from the left again due to even more space in the right hand lane? This will have a knock on effect as more and more cars get in front the right. That is why people from the left don't let them in as all drivers know they are queue jumping even if a couple of car lengths from the cones. It's just some get into position so they don't get to the cones and then 1 driver normally ends up being a twat just because they think they are more self important and don't simply merge in turn as most will know what position they should take up.
How can common sense of merging in turn within a couple of cars within the cones to keep traffic moving slowly not be the simple solution? It seems some here actually think that because an extra car merges a few seconds earlier that they can fly up those few extra yards right up to the cones jumping a couple of cars in the left lane and THEN merge in turn after the very next car!
Some are obviously missing that the 2 Audis are aware of the traffic merging and just watched 3 cars merge in correctly. They decide to drive faster over a short distance over 5 seconds and white Audi overtakes the silver car at the point of the merge in turn sign. The black Audi then overtakes at the same position when passing the sign
These people probably aren't quite as bad as the Audi drivers but one reason why the roads aren't as chilled out as they could be because people simply can't wait their turn.Look again at the road and click it forward, back and look around and look at the distance between the lamp post where the sign is and the end of the railings on the right.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.9...4!1s-APuu4YE4Y8LnIgPIcvk9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Fred Basset
Winger
I agree, and would prefer a driver like that in front of me rather than behind
I'm Spartacus
Striker
It would have been infinitely better for her to wait till it was safe to do so. It matters not how annoyed you are, it matters not how anyone else on that road is driving. You have to wait till it's safe before you do anything. Piling through cones to prove a point is f***ing lunacy. She should, at the very least, lose her licence as her actions had the potential to cause serious injury or worse to someone working on that highway.
I severely doubt that.
Last edited:
I'm not disputing her behaviour was worse. I am saying that if I was in his position, faced with someone behaving like a loon, I would let them in and stay as far away from them as I could. I would de escalate it by letting her get on with it.
longtimelurker
Striker
At least if I drive along there today it will be quiet.
Everyone is arguing on here.
Everyone is arguing on here.
soapster
Striker
At least if I drive along there today it will be quiet.
Everyone is arguing on here.
if it is at the lindisfarne roundabout, I can understand why people get annoyed there, but if really affected they need to take a detour and not get into the lunacy involved in that video.
- Status
