I got a fixed penalty today

[Slowgrind]

Damned dangerous!!!

 

[ArDee]

The white arrow painted on the road also constitutes an instructional road sign indicating only turn left.

 

[Davidc]

I would probably argue. Blue doesn't mean mandatory,

It does, and has done since the signs were introduced 50ish years ago.

This is the online highway code page with the mandatory blue signs listed.

 

[Crackle]

Whilst this thread now disappears up it's own backside is a good time to ask why you were not on your bike, heh, huh?????

 

[Fnaar]

Whilst this thread now disappears up it's own backside

Sorry, that's a no entry

 

[Davidc]

Whilst this thread now disappears up it's own backside is a good time to ask why you were not on your bike, heh, huh?????

Could be 'cos it's very difficult to ride a bike and drive a car at the same time .

 

[thomas]

It does, and has done since the signs were introduced 50ish years ago.

This is the online highway code page with the mandatory blue signs listed.

"Signs with blue circles but no red border mostly give positive instruction."

 

[Crackle]

Sorry, that's a no entry

Could be 'Except for Access'.

 

[4F]

Whilst it is clear the OP was wrong and it was clear what the real meaning was the HC states "Signs with blue circles but no red border mostly give positive instruction" Surely as the right turn is prohibitive then the sign should have had a red circle. If it was me I would just pay the £ 30 and take it however I am sure it could be argued that the signs are not correct.

 

[Fnaar]

Could be 'Except for Access'.

You mean access to the tradesman's entrance?

 

[Davidc]

"Signs with blue circles but no red border mostly give positive instruction."

The end of a minimum speed limit isn't an instruction, and there might be others in the full list.

It doesn't change the legal position, or the absolute unambiguous clarity of the signs.

If you've ever taken a driving test you must have had to learn and be tested on road signs!

 

[4F]

I agree with Thomas, surely if the right turn is prohibitive then the sign should be a red circle as per the example Thomas put up earlier.That is not to say though that we don't know what the intention was here though.

 

[swee'pea99]

I tend to be in the 'a no-right-turn sign would be more effective', if what you want is to dissuade drivers from turning right (whatever the letter of the law we all remember to a greater or lesser degree depending on how many decades it is since we revised for our test).

It sometimes seems that signs have been put up with little thought and no great conviction...on one road near me there's a 20 limit, but it's advertised only by one sign, at an obscure point about a third of the way along the road, and the sign's about the size of a side plate. There's no question that The Limit Is 20 (and you could doubtless be done for exceeding it) ...but you can't help feeling 'if they wanted to make a 20 limit, why not put a proper sign in a sensible place?'

 

[kendalcottages]

In an effort to avoid doing work this morning I had a look on Google maps. (By evans cycles in Kendal)
The blue sign in the photo IS repeated further back along the road a bit and also the sign for the junction ahead with the road layout on it has a "no right turn" red circle sign on that road.

So it seems to be very clearly marked.

Did they offer you a "driver awareness" course as an option? If so it may be worth considering.

No, they didn't. And with all due respect, you are making reference to what's on Streetview, not what's on the ground today. When I posted that link, I did emphasise:

...but please note that they are continually messing around with this junction - adding/removing crossings, changing road markings, moving signs, etc.

The blue sign in the photo is NOT repeated further back and there is NOT a "no right turn" red circle.

I am not saying I'm not to blame. I'm just saying that I don't feel that the junction is as clear as it could be.

 

[HLaB]

The reason that sign is there and like it is, is pragmatic reasons. There are two junctions there where you can turn ''right'' - having a no right hand turn sign would confuse drivers even more because they would not be sure whether it means the junction where the OP got nicked or the junction at the top of the picture.

A One way sign sign following the path of the road going round to the left with ''except local buses'' is the best way of explaining that junction to motorists.

For once the council have done good and applied a bit of common sense.

Whilst I would consider a 'no right turn to be more effective' that's a good explanation lee.