Road Craft/Highway Code advice required please....

[curleybar]

While taking my wife to work this morning we had an incident with a police car that has resulted in me questioning my own driving knowledge.

 

Sorry it is a bit long winded...but having been told by a police officer that I need to read up on the "Highway Code"......

 

A residential road comfortably wide enough for 2 way traffic. There is always one side clear & the other has intermittently parked cars. This means (we use the route daily) that you can progress in one direction but traffic in the other has to manouvre into the gaps in the parked cars to wait for clear road. Unless it is a bus or a skip lorry of course ...they then have right of way !!

 

We are driving down the clear side, road is empty apart from a police car coming towards us they ignore the parked car slalom and continue straight at us..I have to brake to give way to them. NO sirens or lights I emphasise.

 

As they pass I throw my hands up in the universal "what's going on ?" gesture and continue to the nearby junction.

 

Imagine our surprise...the police car does a U turn comes after us and the passenger, a seargent gets out and comes to the car (now holding up traffic),   

 

His attitude is amazingly aggressive. Why had I gestured at them ? Why had I swore at them ? (I did not, my wife is an old fashioned girl and bad language is not in our family vocabulary). By removing my hands from the wheel I was not in control of the car & could be penalised with 6 pts etc etc he went on & on.....My driving was agressive and dangerous.

 

However the reason for this post.....

 

I suggested that as my side of the road was clear that I had a reasonable expectation that I had right of way and the onus was on them to give way to me.

 

According to him, this is completely incorrect, once they had started past the parked car they then had right of way and it was me who should allow their progress....

 

3 times he told me to go away and read the "Highway Code" .

 

We were able to see each other from about 100 yards away so they could easily have braked.

 

Did we just catch this officer at a bad time, he was a Seargent and clearly an experienced policeman so was his interpretation of events correct ?

 

If so, and my thought that "If the obstruction is on your side you give way" is clearly wrong.

 

Thanks for reading.....any comments please ?

[CitigoAllen]

Technically the police man was correct, however as you say as he could see you coming he should have pulled into the space to allow you to pass.  It is really the same situation that you would have on a single track road with passing places, such as those found in the Scottish Highlands.

[Ootohere]

Highway code is being revised at present.

 

Rule No 1, 'Chill'. Just give way and inwardly think, 'Male Member'  even if it is a Female..

[clamberer]

If he was already in the area, you should have let him pass, HOWEVER, if he could see you approaching the narrowing before he entered it, HE should have waited at that point.

 

http://www.cacn.org.uk/features/feature8iamrightofway.htm

[CitigoAllen]

If he was already in the area, you should have let him pass, HOWEVER, if he could see you approaching the narrowing before he entered it, HE should have waited at that point.

 

http://www.cacn.org.uk/features/feature8iamrightofway.htm

Yes but he had not waited, so he then had right of way.  Same with a car and roundabout, as soon as a car has its front wheels on the round about you have to give way as he has right of way.

[curleybar]

Thanks for your comments.

I am always wary of posting "long winded threads" but sometimes it is the only way to try and explain a scenario...appreciate you taking the time to read it !!

It is my wifes'car with a noticeable private plate so I have told her that they have got her marker now.....!

[@Lee]

sounds to me that as the copper saw you, he had plenty of time to pull in and wait for you to pass. As you said, no siren or lights so no hurry. I think the Sarge was having a bad day and acted like a tool.

[CitigoAllen]

sounds to me that as the copper saw you, he had plenty of time to pull in and wait for you to pass. As you said, no siren or lights so no hurry. I think the Sarge was having a bad day and acted like a tool.

I agree, something all too common with the police.  They often abuse their so called powers.  I have had more than one argument to point out to them that unless I break the law they have no more power over me than the next person.  However if the OP had given cheek, technically the cop was in the right, if not morally so.

Edited 20 August, 2013 by CitigoAli

[KenONeill]

You can argue this one both ways; personally I'd say that it was their responsibility to give way unless they would have been forced to perform emergency braking to do so, since all the gaps were on their left.

[clamberer]

Yes but he had not waited, so he then had right of way.  Same with a car and roundabout, as soon as a car has its front wheels on the round about you have to give way as he has right of way.

Quite, which is why I said "at that point".

As soon as the police car entered the area, it was Curleybar who should have given way.  In the end both drivers at different points should have given way but didn't, but hey, you know what they say about two wrongs..

Rules aside, I personally tend to try to be courteous to the police on the road anyway.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

If I'm reading it right, the intermittently parked cars are on the police cars side of the road? His job to hold back between the obstructions on his side of the road until the opposite side is clear for him to pass then as I understand it. 

[CitigoAllen]

If I'm reading it right, the intermittently parked cars are on the police cars side of the road? His job to hold back between the obstructions on his side of the road until the opposite side is clear for him to pass then as I understand it. 

 

If I'm reading it right, the intermittently parked cars are on the police cars side of the road? His job to hold back between the obstructions on his side of the road until the opposite side is clear for him to pass then as I understand it. 

Yes but as soon as he did pass the space (which he did) it was OPs job to give way.  Fault was on both sides.  Moral fault by the cop and technical fault by the OP.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

road is empty apart from a police car coming towards us they ignore the parked car slalom and continue straight at us..I have to brake to give way to them. 

 

 

Yes but as soon as he did pass the space (which he did) it was OPs job to give way.  Fault was on both sides.  Moral fault by the cop and technical fault by the OP.

 

That reads to me that the police car has passed the first car on its side of the road and decided that they arnt going to bother stopping at the next gap and just try to smash their way down the whole road. 

[keystonedriving]

If I'm reading it right, the intermittently parked cars are on the police cars side of the road? His job to hold back between the obstructions on his side of the road until the opposite side is clear for him to pass then as I understand it. 

Rule 163 (6th bullet point) ^^^

 

And the definition of giving way is that you should not put your own or another road user into danger and should not cause another road user to change their speed or direction.

 

Because this rule only contains advice, rather than a specific piece of legislation, then it only really comes into play when contact is made.  If you have ignored the advice contained in the Highway Code, or a warning sign, and you come to grief then there is no question that you have been driving without due care and attention.

 

The whole question really revolves around whether he could see you before he pulled out to pass the parked vehicles.  If he could see you then by causing you to take physical action he failed to give way to you when he should have and was therefore driving without due care and attention (even if it was an error of judgement on his part).  If he was already out there when you came into view then clearly common sense says that you have to make suitable allowance.

 

Even if they are on a shout the only dispensations they have are to treat a red traffic light as a give way line (but they still do not have priority), can exceed the speed limit (if it is necessary and safe to do so) and go the wrong side of a traffic island (if it is necessary and safe to do so).  All of the other rules of the road still apply.  They may take liberties, but if they come to grief whilst doing so they can find themselves in deep trouble.

 

I work on Driver Alertness and Speed Awareness courses and some of the other presenters are ex traffic police.  They come out with more duff information about legalities than any of the other presenters, although they do it with total conviction.

 

Nobody likes it being pointed out to them that they got it wrong, and in that respect Police drivers are no different.  All sorts of people will try it on if they think they can get away with it, again that will include Police officers.  It's just human nature.

[KenONeill]

Rule 163 (6th bullet point) ^^^

 

And the definition of giving way is that you should not put your own or another road user into danger and should not cause another road user to change their speed or direction.

 

Because this rule only contains advice, rather than a specific piece of legislation, then it only really comes into play when contact is made.  If you have ignored the advice contained in the Highway Code, or a warning sign, and you come to grief then there is no question that you have been driving without due care and attention.

 

The whole question really revolves around whether he could see you before he pulled out to pass the parked vehicles.  If he could see you then by causing you to take physical action he failed to give way to you when he should have and was therefore driving without due care and attention (even if it was an error of judgement on his part).  If he was already out there when you came into view then clearly common sense says that you have to make suitable allowance.

 

Even if they are on a shout the only dispensations they have are to treat a red traffic light as a give way line (but they still do not have priority), can exceed the speed limit (if it is necessary and safe to do so) and go the wrong side of a traffic island (if it is necessary and safe to do so).  All of the other rules of the road still apply.  They may take liberties, but if they come to grief whilst doing so they can find themselves in deep trouble.

 

I work on Driver Alertness and Speed Awareness courses and some of the other presenters are ex traffic police.  They come out with more duff information about legalities than any of the other presenters, although they do it with total conviction.

 

Nobody likes it being pointed out to them that they got it wrong, and in that respect Police drivers are no different.  All sorts of people will try it on if they think they can get away with it, again that will include Police officers.  It's just human nature.

By your argument, if I enter a stretch of single track which has no on-coming traffic on it prior to a visual obstruction to my sightline, then I have complete right of way over any such traffic until I reach that obstruction?

[keystonedriving]

By your argument, if I enter a stretch of single track which has no on-coming traffic on it prior to a visual obstruction to my sightline, then I have complete right of way over any such traffic until I reach that obstruction?

In a word, no!

 

One of the problems with single track roads is that there is no priority, we have to cooperate to get things done safely.  If you come into view before an oncoming vehicle has reached a suitable passing place then common sense dictates that they should wait for you at that point.  If you meet at the point where vision is obstructed, one of you will have to go back.  Who goes back can be governed by how far each will have to reverse, what types of vehicle are involved, whether there are a number of vehicles following one another, etc.  It all has to come down to common sense (which is why us folks of a Celtic persuasion tend to be better at it!

 

With regard to the OP, having dug out my copy of Roadcraft, it has the following to say in the section headed 'Developing your skill at overtaking safely'.

 

Key Safety Points

 

Don't overtake where you cannot see far ahead to be sure it is safe.

 

Avoid causing other vehicles (overtaken, following or oncoming) to alter position or speed.

 

Before starting to overtake, always ensure you can move back to the nearside in plenty of time.

 

Always be ready to abandon overtaking if a new hazard comes into view.

 

Do not overtake in situations where you might come into conflict with other road users.

 

 

That all seems pretty clear, doesn't it.

 

Rob.

[Thecko]

Yes but as soon as he did pass the space (which he did) it was OPs job to give way.  Fault was on both sides.  Moral fault by the cop and technical fault by the OP.

 

I look forward to having the police's backing then should I ever decide I don't want to wait behind the bus and expect the traffic that I can see coming in the other direction to stop for me.

[Volvomeg]

Sounds like a copper on a power trip to me and i would have done same, just because its a police car doesnt give them automatic give way rights unless it has blues on and then it is only if safe to do so

[brownfox]

I am a former police traffic officer with all the usual grade 1 bike/car psv hgv training i make just as many mistakes as any normal reasonable driver. I agree with the points about wether the police vehicle had allready started to overtake he has priority however he must pull into the first reasonably safe gap to allow you to continue presuming your side of the road has no obstructions, however we all no that it is sometimes more practical to allow the opposing vehicle to negotiate all the offside obstructions before you set off, i would expect a courteous wave for this. I do wonder what he would have done if you had been driving a 44 ton truck. From my point of view but i was,nt there. Normal police drivers no matter what rank are not highly driver trained (only specified traffic officers). His actions have done nothing to enhance the reputation of the uk police it might have helped if on stopping you he had admitted his dis curteous behaviour in not pulling into a suitable gap,in other words sorry, but told you off for gesticulating at him. Done in a nice manner would have left you feeling that tha police are human afterall and perphaps you  did overeact. Sometimes it pays to be a passive driver as my wife is allways and allways telling me.

[fordfan]

He should read it so that he knows that we drive on the left in this country.  It's common sense that if you are forced to drive on the wrong side of the road, you do so with caution and deference to the people coming in the opposite direction on the correct side of the road.

 

Sounds like he was full of bluster to disguise the shortcomings with his own driving .

[silver1011]

I'd complain and include the reasons why (according the Highway Code) that you believe he should have given way.

 

It'll come to nothing but the officer involved will be aware you have since read up on the Highway Code (therefore following his advice) and still believe you had right of way?

 

Enter the road name in Google Maps (Street View) and post it in this thread so we can see the road in question. You can even copy the image at the exact point you were on the road when the Police car came into sight, for example...

 

[FUBAR]

curleybar my lad, the time may have come for you to get a cheap dash cam. Although you painted a very good picture of the events in your post, nothing beats a quick 10 seconds fairly conclusive of video footage. The presence of which having the ability to record the following stop, would have been good to hear.  

 

Shame the guy who stopped you wasn't a little more professional in his manor. A camera being there might have made him a little more self aware. 

[KenONeill]

In a word, no!

 

One of the problems with single track roads is that there is no priority, we have to cooperate to get things done safely.  If you come into view before an oncoming vehicle has reached a suitable passing place then common sense dictates that they should wait for you at that point.  If you meet at the point where vision is obstructed, one of you will have to go back.  Who goes back can be governed by how far each will have to reverse, what types of vehicle are involved, whether there are a number of vehicles following one another, etc.  It all has to come down to common sense (which is why us folks of a Celtic persuasion tend to be better at it!

Ok, so why does a STR differ materially from the situation in the photo in post #21, as you seem to be arguing?

[keystonedriving]

Ok, so why does a STR differ materially from the situation in the photo in post #21, as you seem to be arguing?

Because on a single track road there is no 'this is my side', 'that is your side' to come into play.  It's all 'our side', therefore there can be no priority.  It all has to come down to common sense and cooperation.  Unfortunately these are not always qualities that are associated with those who are not used to narrow country lanes.

 

Rob.

[sparks03]

You'd expect from the point of courtesy and professionalism (as a driver let alone officer) that he might have given way regardless of the rules. To continue to be a tonsil after the events suggests either a lack of professionalism or wrong place wrong time. An apology may be deserved in either case.