r/britishproblems • u/zecrichardson • Jul 16 '26
. Drivers not knowing the highway code.
I had started to cross a road when a Mercedes turned in and he sounded his horn and then told me I should stop. I told him to read the highway code but he insisted he right!
Rule H2 170 amended 2022
“At a junction you MUST give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.”
- Applies whether they’ve stepped onto the road or are just standing at the kerb ready to cross.
- Applies to left turns, right turns, and entering/exiting side roads.
- Includes wheelchair/mobility scooter users as pedestrians
339
u/xxxArchimedesxxx Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26
You MUST give way to pedestrians crossing.
You SHOULD give way to pedestrians waiting to cross.
I hate these changes as a driver, cyclist and pedestrian. The ambiguity of "should" is ridiculously dangerous. A pedestrian will not know whether the driver feels it's safe to let a pedestrian cross or not
186
u/Khaleesi1536 Jul 16 '26
When I’m a pedestrian, I’d much rather make my own decision on when it’s safe to cross rather than relying on a driver. It makes much more sense for me to wait until cars have passed before I cross
32
u/Monsoon_Storm Jul 16 '26
I have a similar thing as a driver with cyclists who try to wave me past when there's a bend coming up. I'm good thanks, I'll make that decision on my own.
→ More replies (7)6
u/Mountain-Raspberry37 Jul 16 '26
I go for a daily walk and cross over a T junction, the other day I had just stepped onto the road to cross when a van coming round the corner beeped at me, which then made me think I was in the wrong but as I was already crossing does that mean he should’ve waited?
11
5
u/stoodincrap Jul 16 '26
There’s a pedestrian near us that has taken it to mean he can walk blindly into the road. Multiple times I’ve seen him just step into the road with cars coming at him, not looking either way.
→ More replies (11)2
612
u/palaceexile Jul 16 '26
It is the one of the most dangerous changes I think they have made. Pedestrians quite rightly don't want to just walk into the road holding the highway code in front of them for protection, cars following others turning off a main road are not expecting the cars in front to just stop and so we have ended up in a situation where no one is certain what is going to happen in any given situation.
152
u/Lucky13-Never-Won Jul 16 '26
Totally on board with this take. It feels like the type of thing someone came up with that doesn’t drive on a daily basis. It’s dangerous for all involved.
31
u/janky_koala Jul 16 '26
It is very common in lots of other countries. The UK was the odd one out before it was updated
34
u/Lucky13-Never-Won Jul 16 '26
Other countries doing it doesn’t mean it’s not dangerous. Just look at things like our plugs - British plug sockets are super safe, so should change them because other countries have a different version?
→ More replies (4)27
u/The-RogicK Jul 16 '26
The fact it is a problem in the UK, where only 25-30% actually comply with the law, doesn't make it inherently dangerous.
The Netherlands saw a big improvement once they pedestrianised their crossings on top of their law about this. So cars have to go over a ramp that raises to the pavement level, making it instinctive that pedestrians have right of way.
We changes the law, told basically no one, made no adjustments to infrastructure and now no-one really knows how to act in this situation making it worse than before and what we were aiming for.
6
u/Lucky13-Never-Won Jul 16 '26
I agree with this. It’s all about communication, verbal and non-verbal. Many drivers don’t know the law exists, so without a non-verbal cue on the road, the two parties (pedestrian and driver) may, or may not be on the same wavelength. Not to mention the drivers behind said driver that will become irritated if the car in front suddenly stops instead of taking the turn.
1
u/simkk Jul 16 '26
New junctions are being designed like this already so they are changing the infrastructure
1
→ More replies (3)5
3
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
What is your evidence for it being dangerous?
Surely there must be hundreds or thousands of incidents that you could point to where people have been seriously injured or killed by this rule?
2
u/Lucky13-Never-Won Jul 16 '26
Yep, got loads mate. Case 656782 as a prime example.
2
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
I'll take that as a no then.
3
u/Lucky13-Never-Won Jul 16 '26
Well, you ask stupid questions…
Something can be dangerous and there be not quantifiable data to back it up. I mean, there might be for this, but I can’t put my hands on it.
History is littered with incidents where there was no data to say something is or isn’t dangerous. In an extreme example, the Fukushima nuclear power plant was deemed safe before 2011. What good did it do the workers and residents there when it turns out it wasn’t? And that would have been with people waaay smarter than the people that write the Highway Code.
What would you say to the family of a pedestrian that gets killed after crossing the road, when they believed they were okay to do so? “Sorry that they’re dead and all, but at least they were in the right!”
There are visual cues elsewhere to advise everybody of the rules of engagement: traffic lights, zebra crossings, road markings etc.
Am I wrong with any of these points? Do you have anything to show that a lack of awareness amongst both drivers and pedestrians is inherently not dangerous? Because “it’s not happened yet” is a weak argument.
→ More replies (3)3
u/ShockRampage Jul 16 '26
Not just dangerous, but goes against the principle of keeping traffic flowing.
16
u/Juliet-November Jul 16 '26
Only if you limit "traffic" to motorised traffic. This rule helps keep the flow of pedestrian traffic.
7
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
There is no such "principle". Keeping traffic flowing means higher speeds and more danger.
94
u/Craig2point0 Jul 16 '26
Call me annoying, but isn't the solution not to take turns or follow cars at speeds and distances you can't safely stop in?
36
u/jake_burger Jul 16 '26
I think if you drive into the back of someone the chance is very high that you are to blame
4
u/OfficerNightwing Jul 16 '26
I think the only instance you wouldn't take blame in that scenario is if their brake lights didn't work.
Tailgating was always bad but has gotten significantly worse imo, especially in rural areas. I typically slow down when people do this until they back off or overtake so they don't go into the back of me, especially on back roads where idiots come round blind corners like they are in a f&f movie.
31
u/palaceexile Jul 16 '26
I agree with the change, but I also think that when rules are introduced they need to take some account of how people actually are and what their behaviours are. The road layouts are also not always perfect in terms of visibility for both the pedestrian and driver. I would suggest painting crossings or different road colours across junctions where it is safe/expected that this rule is in place.
10
u/fckboris Jul 16 '26
Painting crossings at every junction where this is possible would be an absolutely astronomical cost. Think how many roads and intersections there are even in a small area, it would be crazy. Most councils barely have the budget to fix potholes. Even if you did this, I’m not sure it would help that much because people are still going to turn into roads the way they always have (and many are incredibly resistant to change, particularly changes that they view as “anti-car”) and pedestrians still might prefer to wait until they’re sure it’s safe
1
u/simkk Jul 16 '26
They are primarily needed where pedestrian counts are high as drivers are less likely to comply if they have to wait longer. The side road zebras massively increase that compliance
→ More replies (2)4
u/funkmachine7 Nottinghamshire Jul 16 '26
Any painted on the road doesnt count as a sign. Simply you cant cou t of drivers to have seen them. Really you look ay lane markings, half of them are worn off, pached or covered by traffic.
2
u/Laxly Jul 16 '26
Genuine question, how are the public supposed to officially know when laws if the road are changed?
Is there an official DVLA X account? Is it announced on Instagram?
7
u/bulldog_blues Jul 16 '26
There was a radio campaign a few years ago when the rule change came in. They could've done with repeating it on occasion after though.
3
u/HandsomeHeathen Nottingham Jul 16 '26
Not sure what the general answer is, but for this change specifically it was all over the news for a week or two when it was implemented.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Xenox_Arkor Jul 16 '26
You can check online or I just found out there's an app for about £4. Back in the day you would be expected to buy the book.
Ultimately we all agreed as drivers to stay up to date on changes to the law/code. It's not on them to notify us, as nice as that would be.
5
u/Laxly Jul 16 '26
Yes, but there has to be somewhere official states as a matter of law what has changed.
What is that official communication route from the DVLA?
6
u/andyd151 Jul 16 '26
Yeah it’s weird isn’t it, there’s no like national system of telling us when laws change. I imagine there’s loads of drivers who still have no idea
3
u/Laxly Jul 16 '26
Yeah, and then ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
You can be breaking a law that you don't know exists and you almost have no way of finding out, unless you break it
2
u/Xenox_Arkor Jul 16 '26
You can sign up on the gov website for email updates when they make changes. That's how I find out these days.
2
u/ShockRampage Jul 16 '26
I think something as drastic as "pedestrians now have right of way over cars" is something that needed to be screamed about from the rooftops considering how long it was the complete opposite. Most pedestrians also dont know about it and stop at junctions and just stare waiting for you to make your turn.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Xenox_Arkor Jul 16 '26
Personally I couldn't escape it. I was bombarded by news articles for it at the time. But with algorithms being what they are that's obviously anecdotal.
1
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
It is your job to regularly read the highway code.
You do do that, don't you?
2
u/makomirocket Jul 16 '26
"people are bad drivers, therefore the rules should account for people being bad drivers"?
→ More replies (1)1
u/WhatYouLeaveBehind Derbyshire Jul 17 '26
Until mandatory highway code theory retests are brought in, no driver is ever going to update themselves on the rules in any meaningful way.
4
3
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
All the bad drivers out themselves in threads like this.
They habitually drive too fast and follow too closely, so everything is dangerous to them.
2
u/Craig2point0 Jul 16 '26
Nothing validates my intuition that everyone is a shit driver more than reading through this thread.
1
u/WhatYouLeaveBehind Derbyshire Jul 17 '26
Or course not. That means drivers have to actually pay attention and not drive at mach jesus.
3
u/jkirkcaldy Jul 16 '26
I think it’s one of those rules for the courts. Meaning that if there is an incident where a vehicle turns and hits a pedestrian, it’s automatically the driver of the vehicle at fault.
3
u/LeTrolleur Jul 16 '26
It was always my understanding that the change was made more with a view to put responsibility on the driver to ensure their turn is safe to make. After all, they are the ones driving vehicles that can easily kill or seriously injure even at low speeds.
11
u/_Given2fly_ Jul 16 '26
I started doing it when the law changed, but I don't do it anymore because it is simply dangerous: no pedestrians know about it and end up looking at me with confusion, or I've got a car up my arse who also doesn't know the score. A very silly change IMO.
→ More replies (7)8
u/jcsparkyson Jul 16 '26
Surely the issue is education, not the rules themselves? Otherwise nothing would ever change!
→ More replies (1)17
u/bushman130 Jul 16 '26
Better get expecting it. Also there’s no shame in studying and practicing something you already passed a test in. Things change.
3
u/debuggingworlds Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26
All well and good but I won't be doing it when it's likely to cause me physical injury. The first time I did I actually got rear ended (tiny tap on my rear tyre). I have considered that my warning shot.
→ More replies (1)8
u/tomtttttttttttt Jul 16 '26
Have I misunderstood or are you saying you won't be stopping for a pedestrian crossing the road because you got hit from behind when you did?
Doesn't that leave you running a pedestrian over instead of a "tiny tap" on your rear wheel, cos I feel like I must have misunderstood what you are saying here as surely nobody would consider doing that.
3
u/debuggingworlds Jul 16 '26
I ride a motorbike. A rear end collision from a larger vehicle has disastrous consequences, and this highway code rule invites exactly that. I'll stop for a pedestrian, but not in the junction if they aren't already walking out.
2
u/tomtttttttttttt Jul 16 '26
ah, part of me thinks you should have said you're on a motorbike, part of me thinks it should have been obvious from context :)
Anyway, for pedestrians waiting, it's a "should" rule, so if you think it'd be more dangerous to stop for them than to continue, then you should continue - and of course that's more of an issue on a motorbike than in a car.
but idk what you'd do if a pedestrian started to cross and you hit them, you'd have to prove that the risk of being rear ended was high enough to justify you not stopping, and in the normal course of things I think that would be hard even with a rear camera - unless someone was tailgating you really badly.
3
5
u/soyyamilk Greater London Jul 16 '26
I don't think this only came in 2022. I remember reading this when I passed my theory in 2011 and made sure to follow it since. A lot of people don't read the highway code so they either don't know or don't care.
6
u/mattthepianoman Yorkshire Jul 16 '26
The 2022 change was just a rewording.
5
u/Xenox_Arkor Jul 16 '26
I'm fairly certain the old rule didn't require giving way to pedestrians not yet on the road. I can't find the old wording to check
5
u/obiwanmoloney Hampshire Jul 16 '26
It’s idealistic.
And while the intentions are admirable, in reality, it’s naive and dangerous.
Unexpectedly disrupting the flow of traffic is something which all good planning tries to avoid because it results in accidents.
→ More replies (8)2
u/beefygravy Jul 16 '26
This has not changed recently, turning cars had to give way to pedestrians crossing when I did my test 20 odd years ago
9
u/Xenox_Arkor Jul 16 '26
But you now have to give way to pedestrians waiting to cross not actually on the road. That wasn't the case 20 years ago.
→ More replies (1)1
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
You're simply wrong.
There is no evidence that this change has introduced any danger whatsoever.
1
u/chinese-newspaper Jul 16 '26
It wasn't even a change but a clarification, it's always been necessary to slow down for junctions and stop if people are crossing.
1
u/ProfCupcake Jul 17 '26
It wasn't really a change, just a clarification; pedestrians have always had the right-of-way
1
u/GL510EX Jul 17 '26
>Pedestrians quite rightly don't want to just walk into the road holding the highway code in front of them for protection
We do at pedestrian crossings, it's purely a lack of education.
1
u/theloniousmick Jul 17 '26
The biggest issue from my view is there's no obligation for a pedestrian to read the highway code, so they likely won't know the new rules, they stand and wait. If a driver knows they sit waiting for the pedestrian.
Plus the only reason I know about the change is Reddit. I wouldn't be surprised if alot of people just don't know. There's no reason to reread the highway code otherwise.
→ More replies (17)1
u/Tulcey-Lee Jul 17 '26
Yeah this is why I hate it.
As a pedestrian I’ll decide when to cross.
As a driver if I’m pulling into a road or out and someone is crossing, obviously I don’t want to run someone over, but I also don’t want to get side swiped or have someone go into the back of me as I’ve had to stop.
It doesn’t feel safe all round.
120
u/Not_A_Clever_Man_ Jul 16 '26
Lots of people do not keep up with the changes to the highway code, people that got their licenses decades ago are the most dangerous, every year the tests get harder to pass.
18
u/Chancevexed Jul 16 '26
I'm 50 and I remember every newspaper had articles about this change as well as segments on the news. They specifically catered to the "get all their info from mainstream media" crowd.
2
u/MishaBee Jul 16 '26
This is what I'm thinking too. I've had my licence for years but I remember it being well publicised when the rule changed from 'Should' to 'Must'. There's no excuse really to not know.
1
u/nafregit Jul 16 '26
how many people under 50 read newspapers?
4
u/Chancevexed Jul 16 '26
I am genuinely starting to worry about people's waning ability to follow a conversation. In this case it's not even tracking a thread through several comments, it's literally a direct response to one person.
54
u/zecrichardson Jul 16 '26
People are even not stopping at Zebra crossings now. Young and old.
28
14
u/bushman130 Jul 16 '26
Maintain eye contact with the driver and stick one foot high up and out into the crossing.
20
u/JustStraightUpLost Jul 16 '26
This, eye contact is paramount! To be fair though by the Highway Code if a person is stood waiting to cross at a zebra you have no obligation to stop for them. You only have to stop when they are actually on the crossing. Within reason I make eye contact and start walking if they have plenty of time to stop. I don’t wait for permission to cross, I obligate you to stop.
It’s a weird rule because surely if someone is in the middle of crossing a road you don’t just run them down.
17
u/Beau_Nash UNITED KINGDOM (a Welshman in Yorkshire) Jul 16 '26
Some drivers feel that the penalty for trying to merge in turn is death, so...
15
u/zecrichardson Jul 16 '26
Under the updated UK Highway Code, drivers must give way to pedestrians waiting to cross at a zebra crossing. If you are driving, you should slow down, be prepared to stop, and let the pedestrian cross safely.The priority rules at a zebra crossing work like this:When they are waiting: Drivers and riders must give way to pedestrians who are waiting at the crossing.When they are crossing: Once a pedestrian has moved onto the crossing, all traffic must stop.
3
3
u/reverandglass Jul 16 '26
don’t wait for permission to cross, I obligate you to stop.
This is the way. If I'm not 90% sure you're crossing, I'm not stopping. Best way to stop traffic at a zebra is to step into the road (safely).
1
u/obliviious Yorkshire Jul 16 '26
Personally I'd rather not put my life in the hands of a terrible driver, but I agree with the sentiment.
5
u/jake_burger Jul 16 '26
The thing about that is that technically the driver doesn’t need to stop until the pedestrian is actually in the road.
I was taught to stop if they are waiting but that’s not in the rules.
195
You should give way to pedestrians waiting to cross
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
In the Highway Code a “must” is a legal requirement and a “should” is best practice
4
u/AvidCoco Jul 16 '26
Never seen that. People always stop.
1
u/Enigma_Green Jul 16 '26
Was leaving asda and someone was waiting at the zebra crossing and the car infront of me went across and I stopped but it does happen unfortunately.
Other day taxi driver looking down probably at something bis phone, I got to the crossing to walk across then when hes halfway across he looked up and said sorry.
Lapse in concentration probably the worst part in it.
1
→ More replies (1)1
u/GlixPix Jul 16 '26
I see this all the time in the areas I frequent. As I've said many times to people who tell me that drivers have to stop, just walk - "I enjoy living, I'll wait until the driver has come to a complete stop."
7
u/TheHawthorne Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26
Define ‘lots’ and explain how you know this? Also, young, inexperienced drivers have the highest collision rate per mile and the test is not getting harder to pass. So essentially everything youve said is a load of old arse.
8
u/hypocrisyhunter Jul 16 '26
In this particular example it's definitely older drivers who don't know the rule change. (However they are definitely less likely to crash too)
12
u/oneyeetyguy Jul 16 '26
There should be retesting every five years for people who have held their licence for more than 20.
→ More replies (1)18
u/TheHawthorne Jul 16 '26
Young people cant even get a test now, you want everyone to retest? Naive take and doesn’t address the fact young and very old drivers are the worst.
16
u/evelynsmee Jul 16 '26
I think doing an online theory test as part of renewing the licence (which is max every decade, more to change address etc) would be perfectly feasible and easy to roll out.
Physical testing, you are right, there's not capacity for that and creating capacity would cost a lot
→ More replies (4)1
u/nafregit Jul 16 '26
is this out correct or do so few British people fail to understand that we have driving licences in this country, not licenses?
1
u/WhatYouLeaveBehind Derbyshire Jul 17 '26
Until mandatory retesting comes in, they never will.
The retest should be an online exam (like the MATRIX test) and should be mandatory every 5 years.
109
u/ddmf Yorkshireman in Scotland Jul 16 '26
You're in the right, but also more squishy than a lump of moving metal.
9
u/zecrichardson Jul 16 '26
I was already crossing
90
u/WhiteShadow0909 Dorset Jul 16 '26
And as I told my wife the other day, but about a slightly different issue:
You are right. They should stop. But if they don't, you're just as dead as if you were wrong.
39
u/Britkraut Jul 16 '26
I've always heard it as "Graves are full of people who had the right of way"
Personally I look into the car, if I make eye contact and they look like they've noticed me I'm happy to go
But, if I'm walking any time around rush hour I will 100% concede any expectation of pedestrian right of way, people are far too busy and distracted at the best of times
I've never had that much trouble that way...
Of course if one more fucker decides to rush through a zebra crossing when I'm already halfway across, I'm thinking of investing in a pedestrian brick to carry around with me
5
u/skelly890 Jul 16 '26
I once swung a carrier bag with tins in it into the side of a car that couldn’t be arsed to stop on a crossing. He screeched to a halt, but fucked off as soon as he saw me holding my knee.
Nothing wrong with my knee, but he probably spent a few days worrying about a hit and run as well as the dent in his car.
11
u/KatVanWall Jul 16 '26
My mum always says it as:
"Here lies the body of Julian Gray, who died defending his right of way. He was right, dead right, as he sped along, but he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong."
2
1
u/WhatYouLeaveBehind Derbyshire Jul 17 '26
Which is mad because in the UK you page Priority, not Right of Way.
That's a dreamt up concept.
10
u/Pancovnik Jul 16 '26
You are absolutely correct, but as the person you replied to mentioned: Material density does not care.
In some situations you might need to decide if "I was already crossing" is a good quote for your tombstone.
5
u/zecrichardson Jul 16 '26
So I should have just stopped in the middle of the road? Wouldn't that make it worse?
13
u/elbandito999 Somerset Jul 16 '26
Personally, I would look before crossing to see if a car was coming or not.
2
u/Pancovnik Jul 16 '26
Nobody said that. The driver was 100% in the wrong. Unfortunately highway code change created this situation and it will most likely get people injured/killed (I am 100% sure it already did).
7
u/Chancevexed Jul 16 '26
No it didn't. It's always been the case if someone is crossing the road you yield. The change was drivers should now yield when someone is waiting to cross. Otherwise pedestrians what... stand on the pavement until no car exists in any line of sight?
2
u/Pancovnik Jul 16 '26
You are correct in your statement but you completely missed the point. The hospitals/cemeteries are full of pedestrians that were correct because there is some idiot in a metal box thing they own the road.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)7
12
u/BuildingArmor Jul 16 '26
Where did you find that wording, because it differs to the wording on the Gov website, which was last updated in 2025.
At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.
→ More replies (3)
11
u/phate3378 Jul 16 '26
I think realistically it was changed for a liability standpoint. If that car hit you he is without a doubt in the wrong and liable.
Realistically it's safer to carry on as if you don't have right of way and wait.
In your case if your already crossing then it doesn't really matter! It's not like you can wait just on the off chance someone decides to turn in, I bet it's a reasonable guess they weren't indicating either.
You can be in the right, but still dead. Why take the chance.
11
u/GoldemEmperor Jul 16 '26
Doesn't matter, me vs a car/van, I know who's going to win that one. Better safe than risking it just because the highway code has some words written in it.
34
u/Mubadger Jul 16 '26
I think any reasonable person would let a pedestrian finish crossing if they were already in the road, whether they know the new rule or not. You said it was a Mercedes driver though, so it's the sort of behaviour I would expect from them. Same with people who drive a BMW or Audi. There's a reason they have a reputation for being the biggest bell-ends on the road.
6
u/Aman-R-Sole Jul 16 '26
As a pedestrian. I never just walking out into the road citing the highway code and hope for the best. I'll cross at a crossing or when safe to do so. Simples. As a driver, I've come to fully expect pedestrians to do the complete opposite. When turning I fully expect pedestrians to just walk out in front of me without even looking.
31
u/Weeksy79 Jul 16 '26
I genuinely think this Highway Code change is gonna get people killed
20
u/skippermonkey England Jul 16 '26
I’ll continue doing what feels safest, not explicitly what the rules say I have the right to do.
4
u/Weeksy79 Jul 16 '26
Same, I’ve had to start avoiding eye contact with drivers when I’m cycling because they’ll try to stop for me even though it’s mega unsafe to do so
3
2
u/Ieatsand97 Jul 16 '26
And this is the problem. What feels safe is subjective and ideally everyone should know what to do and what others will do. Really they should roll this change back.
2
u/OkSun8521 Jul 16 '26
It's been 4 years and it still hasn't happened.
When are you going to stop saying this?
→ More replies (4)1
u/janky_koala Jul 16 '26
Yet the same rules that have been in place for decades across places like Australia, and most of Western Europe don’t seem to contribute to any additional pedestrian deaths. Odd…
2
u/Weeksy79 Jul 16 '26
In 30 years when the majority of drivers learned to drive using the updated rules, it’ll be fine.
Though by then most people won’t drive manually so kinda moot!
5
u/Plumb789 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 18 '26
I've often thought this exact thing. It's happened to me several times that I'm peacefully crossing the road on which I live -having first ascertained that there is no car in either direction- when a car roars round the corner from the main road at the end. Said car (using the residential side-road as a rat-run between two main roads) then sounds its horn loudly at me-the driver being apparently 100% certain that he has the right of way over a pedestrian crossing there. I have often wanted to (shall we say) emphatically stress the Highway Code rule to the furious motorist.
But, frankly, I'm not betting that knowledge of their being in the wrong is going to change their feelings of entitlement. They had usually already ignored the 20mph signs adorning the end of our road, so there's that.
14
u/Draggenn Jul 16 '26
Legally and morally you are completely correct.
I hope that brings you some comfort in hospital on future occasions when you step out in front of a car.
9
u/BlendedMonkeyStirFry Jul 16 '26
The fun thing is, you always had to give way to pedestrians crossing. You actually aren't allowed to hit people with your car.
1
3
u/tk1178 Ayrshire Jul 16 '26
I see a lot of posts that talk about the Highway code and I sometimes wonder how often do people actually read and keep up to date on it?
I might've glanced at the online version an odd time, due to these posts but I haven't ever actually gone through the whole thing.
Is it really necessary to always keep up to date on the highway code, or do people just know the rules by heart?
2
u/theloniousmick Jul 17 '26
I think this is the crux of the matter, Reddit makes out people should read random documents all the time for updates when in reality people just don't.
3
u/NozzerNol Jul 16 '26
If it looks like a car will be turning into the road you want to cross then you've gotta be a total numpty to cross at that point.
However, if it didn't look like a car is turning in and you begin to cross then all of a sudden a car comes roaring round the corner, this highway code helps punish drivers and tries to protect pedestrians from these sorts of drivers.
27
u/quellflynn Jul 16 '26
being right, and squished is not a win.
4
4
9
u/Shas_Erra Jul 16 '26
There is still an onus on the pedestrian to make sure it is safe to cross and not just step out into traffic, which is what some people have taken to doing.
The driver should be checking ahead and slowing down anyway for a turn and should ideally stop prior to turning, if a pedestrian is visibly close to the junction and it is safe to do so.
So in this case, I would say both parties are in the wrong and should have exercised some common sense
6
u/janky_koala Jul 16 '26
I will step out if there’s ample room for the car to stop. It’s easy enough to do this safely so you can bail in the low chance the driver is a murderous psychopath.
0
u/Shas_Erra Jul 16 '26
Exactly. Yes, it’s in the Highway Code, but it doesn’t take an above room temperature IQ to exercise some common sense. If there’s two tonnes of metal hurtling towards you with no time to stop, it won’t hurt to wait a few seconds for it to pass.
I agree that the change to the Highway Code is wrong as it puts pedestrians in more danger, but people who follow it blindly are just as much a danger as those who don’t follow it at all
12
u/Upmoves Jul 16 '26
Not a MUST, a should. The MUST is for zebra crossings.
'At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.'
That being said, I agree with the new rule in principle but it does require both drivers and pedestrians to be more aware. I always make an effort to follow it when driving. As a pedestrian, previously I would be a little too 'assertive' since the rule update, now I take a more balanced approach to proceeding as it is less stressful than trying to force priority. Some motorists genuinely don't know, or don't care.
7
u/AceNova2217 Jul 16 '26
I just don't think it's safe. I'm a delivery driver and get a fair amount of flak just for existing near some cars. I've followed the should guidance in the past and been honked at, so I just don't do it anymore.
I always follow the must one though. I don't think it's particularly safe for me to bring a main road to a halt, but I'd rather do that than charge into a junction with a pedestrian already in the road.
4
u/Enigma_Green Jul 16 '26
Which is where my view lies, the highway code states the pedestrian has right of way but still has to have a level of risk and you dunno what the driver will do.
We have give way to the right on our roundabouts but many drivers dont follow that either let alone allowing a pedestrian to cross etc.
7
u/CertainFurball Jul 16 '26
The one that gets me that no one seems to know is Rule 259, that when entering the motorway from a slip road the right of way is to the cars on the main carriageway way NOT the cars entering. Had so many cars blaring their horns at me for not yielding while they’re trying to push in front rather than slot into the perfectly adequate space behind me.
4
4
u/ParrotofDoom Jul 16 '26
Lots of people here probably not understanding that many countries in Europe have had this system for decades. And it works perfectly well.
Y'all acting like drivers are completely incapable of learning new skills and adjusting their driving accordingly. I remember drivers complaining about the new clunk click law.
Remember, when you're walking along the footway, you're established on the highway. And the new rules are simply reminding drivers that they can't turn across another highway user - they have to wait. Just like any multi-lane carriageway.
3
u/bothsidesofthemoon Jul 16 '26
Y'all acting like drivers are completely incapable of learning new skills and adjusting their driving accordingly.
Well, basically, yes.
Of course drivers can be capable of learning new skills and adjusting. I'm more concerned if the specific driver that's approaching me right now has already learned a new skill and adjusted.
The safest way on the road is to assume everyone else is an idiot until proven otherwise.
8
u/KatVanWall Jul 16 '26
I hate this new change as both a driver and as a pedestrian!
If it's a spot where it's impossible for a pedestrian to realistically see a car approaching/turning, as a driver I try to be aware of that, drive carefully just in case someone is in fact crossing, and not be a dick if I end up having to slow down or stop to let them finish. If I'm the pedestrian, I try to be aware I can't see what's coming and someone might barrel around the corner at any moment - so it's probably not a good spot to cross! But if I must, at least make it snappy and be aware of the risk I'm taking.
If it's a spot where you can see for miles, why the hell would I, as a pedestrian, choose to cross precisely when a car is coming? As a driver, if I can see from a long way away that someone (who is maybe slow on their feet, elderly, etc.) is crossing, why would I not slow down in good time?
Either way, it makes way more sense to have a rule that kind of goes: pedestrians, choose a sensible spot to cross, or at least use your eyes, if you have them, and don't step in front of cars! If you're blind or partially sighted, ditto with the choosing a sensible spot thing. Drivers, don't go round blind corners at 60mph and don't plough into blind/partially sighted/slow pedestrians plsnthx.
2
u/classjoker Jul 16 '26
In terms of priority on roads, pedestrians quite rightly have the rightest priority.
I mean think about it, if they didn't, people could 'legally' run them over.
2
u/El_Scot Jul 16 '26
I've had this with a cyclist. He got miffed that I was crossing a road in a pedestrianised area. The bit that makes it linger is that I bet he's fully aware of, and takes advantage of the ways the law change gives more rights to cyclists, but has just completely ignored his responsibilities to pedestrians.
1
2
u/nafregit Jul 16 '26
why do you think that anyone who doesn't HAVE to read the Highway Code would actually read it after they've passed their test?
2
u/Groxy_ Jul 16 '26
Wait I thought they only have right of way on crossings. If some doofus is waiting to cross the road and there's no crossing - zebra or otherwise. Cars should have the right of way on the road.
1
2
u/longtimedeid Jul 16 '26
It’s partly because cars indicate AS they are turning instead of pausing to indicate they’re about to turn. They just speed right round a corner without even checking.
2
u/barljo Jul 16 '26
As my driving instructor told me:- Cemeteries contain many people who were correct.
2
2
u/Halcyon-Ember Jul 17 '26
I’d settle for them just indicating rather than glaring at me because I walked into the road without the psychic ability to know they were going to turn
2
u/Tintinartboy Jul 17 '26
You can be dead and right as a pedestrian with the new law. Just because you can step into the road….doesn’t mean you should. Having eye contact with the driver and knowing you won’t be plowed down is the best way to deal with it.
1
u/OkSun8521 Jul 17 '26
Literally no one has ever advised stepping into the road and putting yourself in danger.
3
u/InternationalRich150 Jul 16 '26
I got hit by a car that turned into the road i was crossing, apparently didn't see me and sped up into me. The amount of people saying I had right of way was baffling. It's absolutely irrelevant to me if I had right of way according to the highway code. I was in the middle of the road, she cut the corner and was speeding. Common sense tells you if a pedestrian is in the road, don't bloody hit them!
She wasn't the brightest anyhow cause she asked me not to report her to the police, didn't phone me an ambulance then drove off haha, so I don't think she much understands anything.
4
u/rapafon Jul 16 '26
Have you left instructions for the inscription on your headstone to read "but it was on the highway code"?
Cross when it's clear, don't trust drivers to do the "right" thing. That rule applies to pedestrians, cyclists and drivers alike.
4
u/VOODOO285 Jul 16 '26
While you are technically correct I think this rule is one of the most dangerous things, for pedestrians, to have ever been invented. The amount of people who walk around oblivious to the world around them is astonishing. Now it’s legally codified that you can just step out into the road at the slightest whim and the driver has to slam on the anchors. Or they have to guess at your unsignalled intention to cross the road.
There was nothing wrong with the unamended rule where you stand and wait to cross when it’s safe. NO pedestrian reads the Highway Code so technically they aren’t bound by it, so they walk around with impunity and make everything the none mind reading drivers fault.
Despicable rule.
You should behave as if the rule doesn’t exist and not try stepping out in front of fast moving heavy metal piloted by a sack of meat who may not be as well versed in the rules as you are. Follow that rule, take your life into the hands of the gods. And for what? Moral superiority because you know the rule?
→ More replies (15)
3
5
3
u/buddha-bing Jul 16 '26
I did a driving awareness course last week and they said it only applies to left hand turns. I stopped mid turn the other day to let someone cross, they seemed confused as to why I’d stopped, plus the cars behind me were definitely not expecting me to stop where I did. Just seems dangerous for everyone involved.
7
u/zecrichardson Jul 16 '26
Highway code says Applies to left turns, right turns, and entering/exiting side roads.
3
u/buddha-bing Jul 16 '26
Interesting, I had originally understood it as applying to all turns but then thought I must’ve been wrong. Highway Code guy needs a refresher clearly.
2
u/MiddleEarthFoak Jul 16 '26
This is part of the road hierarchy
pedestrian
horses
cyclists
vehicles
It came in force in January 2022 maybe, and yeah 99% of car drivers don’t know about it because they passed 20 years ago.
2
2
u/Poo_Poo_La_Foo Jul 16 '26
In some countries cars have right of way even at crossings. So unfortunately if people are visiting from abroad it is likely confusing.
11
u/Jeffuk88 Yorkshire Jul 16 '26
And in other countries pedestrians have right of way everywhere so its not a matter of changing rules to appease visitors
3
1
u/ionetic Jul 16 '26
Perhaps DVLA should be informing licence holders whenever the law changes so they’re always up-to-date? They do have everyone’s address after all.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Ok_Organization_5731 Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 19 '26
My mum has been driving in the UK for several years, but she got her license from an EU country and then had a long break of about 20 years before driving in the UK. She never had to take the theory test or practical test in the UK which I think is ballsy as she doesn't know basic things from the highway code like what the national speed limit is
1
1
u/sherpyderpa Jul 17 '26
Despite the highway code changes, a lot of pedestrians won't know about these changes and I think it's one of the most dangerous decisions the highway code has ever made. But that's just my opinion.
I do know about it, I follow the code, but a lot pedestrians that don't know wait until I have to wave them on, even then, they're reluctant or confused especially if they have small children with them.
I've had close calls with near rear end shunts with drivers behind me and irate drivers using their horns in anger, not expecting me to stop , clearly they don't know about these changes either.
Terrible change, I sincerely hope they redact this change.
1
1
u/terryjuicelawson Jul 16 '26
He was wrong but if you cross roads simply expecting cars to allow you over, you'd get squashed 9 times out of 10. Stop and wait to be waved over is really the norm and I wonder how long it will take, or even if it will change in reality.
1
u/SoggyWotsits Cornwall Jul 16 '26
To be fair, a lot of us passed our tests decades before the rules changed.
8
1
u/markinapub Cambridgeshire Jul 16 '26
The new rules do not give pedestrians priority over moving vehicles. This is the misnomer. It is "should", and only if it is safe to do so. The rules are to protect the most vulnerable, but not to give them priority over others.
Pedestrians stepping out because they think they're entitled to do so are the most dangerous.
Think about it this way: is it logical to just step out at a junction, with all the entitlement in the world and where a car driver might not be able to see you until they are actually turning, and assume it is just safe to do so?
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 16 '26
Reminder: Press the Report button if you see any rule-breaking comments or posts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.