No respect or consideration for pedestrian crossings

[cd365]

The ped using/maybe using the crossing is something which you'd be failed for on your driving theory test if you didn't identify it as a potential hazard, no?

Yes it is a hazard but no legal requirement to slow down with a ped walking near a crossing. It is all very well and good saying that they should slow down and be prepared to stop but there is no legal requirement to stop let alone slow down, so most* car drivers don't! Let's start to live in the real world for a minute.
With the OPs video, it is my opinion that the car driver only saw the cyclist as the hazard, was probably paying attention to his overtake and didn't even notice the ped. I'm not defending the van driver because I do think that it is shocking and inconsiderate driving.


*Opinion changed since some people on here claim to do it, I just haven't been behind a car that has done it, city driving maybe.

 

[summerdays]

With the OPs video, it is my opinion that the car driver only saw the cyclist as the hazard, was probably paying attention to his overtake and didn't even notice the ped. I'm not defending the van driver because I do think that it is shocking and inconsiderate driving.

For me that's the point, he wasn't looking at what was going on, there could have been a pedestrian in front of the cyclist already on the crossing, about to step onto the other side having seen the cyclist slowing.

I've been there plenty of times when the car goes through without looking, and I'm now a belligerent pedestrian who steps out before cars stop as half of them won't stop unless your foot is on the crossing. That comes from city experience.

 

[cd365]

What part am I muddling up? It is a hazard but you only have to stop if they are on the crossing. As detailed below, you MUST give way when a pedestrian is on the crossing, you don't have to before. There is a lot of things in this world that fall into the "what we should do" category, it would be a far better place if that was the case. The world we live in is the "what drivers tend to do" one.

195
Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing

• look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
• you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
• allow more time for stopping on wet or icy roads
• do not wave or use your horn to invite pedestrians across; this could be dangerous if another vehicle is approaching
• be aware of pedestrians approaching from the side of the crossing.

 

[PK99]

For me that's the point, he wasn't looking at what was going on, there could have been a pedestrian in front of the cyclist already on the crossing, about to step onto the other side having seen the cyclist slowing.

I've been there plenty of times when the car goes through without looking, and I'm now a belligerent pedestrian who steps out before cars stop as half of them won't stop unless your foot is on the crossing. That comes from city experience.

That is not being belligerent, that is using s crossing correctly. I stand back from the kerb edge till I want the traffic to stop then step forward and put one foot on the crossing

 

[J1888]

Yes it is a hazard but no legal requirement to slow down with a ped walking near a crossing. It is all very well and good saying that they should slow down and be prepared to stop but there is no legal requirement to stop let alone slow down, so most* car drivers don't! Let's start to live in the real world for a minute.

I wasn't really enquiring as to the legality as such, just curious to confirm that in the 'hazard perception' part of the Driving Theory Test, you'd be penalised for failing to spot the 'hazard'.

 

[cd365]

As ever, I just love the "real world" justification, it is such a reliable indicator that the argument has no substance.

There is a lot of people saying in here what people should do but because there is no legal requirement for it to be done it doesn't happen, hence my "real world" comment.
It is all well and good saying what should happen in this "internet world", out there it doesn't happen and I would put money on people in here who say what should happen doesn't actually do it all the time. I'm a realist, I see life for what it is, not what I want it to be.

It would be nice if you actually said why my argument had no substance, just quoting a very small amount taking it out of context is a bit petty.

 

[cd365]

I wasn't really enquiring as to the legality as such, just curious to confirm that in the 'hazard perception' part of the Driving Theory Test, you'd be penalised for failing to spot the 'hazard'.

Agreed, you would as it is a potential hazard.

 

[Turbo Rider]

Two points...relating to practical driving test...

Point 1 - The three types of fault:
Minor: Not potentially dangerous, but if you make the same fault throughout your test it could become a serious fault. You can notch up 15 minors and still pass, but more than this means automatic failure.
Serious: Something that could potentially be dangerous, which means a definite test failure.
Dangerous: Something that puts yourself, the examiner, another person or property into a dangerous position. Unsurprisingly, if you rack up one of these, you’ll fail your test.

Point 2:Awareness:
Your examiner is expecting to see evidence that you’re aware of what’s going on around you at all times. That means knowing about other road users nearby, reacting to the signals of other drivers, correctly interpreting road markings and signs and using your indicators appropriately.

Both of these factors go to say that if you don't slow down at a zebra, pelican, lights (even when green) or junction...you will fail your test...overtaking a stationary vehicle and ignoring the person who's obviously intent on crossing would probably result in the tester stopping the test altogether.

If the police had seen it, it probably would have been a pull over, slap on the wrist and potential caution too.

You have no argument and though I agree that accidents happen and nobody's perfect all of the time, those facts alone don't justify or excuse driving like a cock in the first place.

 

[cd365]

You see this bit that you quoted

"look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross"

That is describing what people are telling you they do. Taking your foot off the accelerator, covering the brake, etc.

But the ped wasn't waiting to cross, she was walking towards it, as soon as she got to it she started to cross.

 

[Turbo Rider]

But the ped wasn't waiting to cross, she was walking towards it, as soon as she got to it she started to cross.

Really?!?!!?

Stop on 18 seconds...she's walking onto the crossing and the van hasnt even got there...she then corrects herself when she realises he's going to run her over if she carries on...because he's not slowing down...

 

[cd365]

When as a pedestrian, and please do note the use of the word in full, I approach a crossing with an intention to cross, I am effectively waiting to be where I am going on the other side. I wouldn't regard standing still as a necessary part of that process.

Noted, well done.
So how far away from the crossing is the car driver supposed to know that you have an intention to cross when you are walking towards it? Do they have to have mind reading skills?
An intention to cross is someone waiting at the side of the zebra crossing not walking towards it because they could just walk past. Or should every car stop if a pedestrian is walking near one. Again how far away should they be before they stop, 1m, 5m, 10m, further?

 

[J1888]

Noted, well done.
So how far away from the crossing is the car driver supposed to know that you have an intention to cross when you are walking towards it? Do they have to have mind reading skills?
An intention to cross is someone waiting at the side of the zebra crossing not walking towards it because they could just walk past. Or should every car stop if a pedestrian is walking near one. Again how far away should they be before they stop, 1m, 5m, 10m, further?

Should probably slow down and be prepared to brake, especially if they see someone walking close to a crossing - hazard perception, innit!

 

[cd365]

Really?!?!!?

Stop on 18 seconds...she's walking onto the crossing and the van hasnt even got there...she then corrects herself when she realises he's going to run her over if she carries on...because he's not slowing down...

Agreed, after watching it a few more times. Don't get me wrong, the van driver was in the wrong and was a complete cock, like I said, I think he saw the cyclist, was focused on him and didn't even notice the woman near the crossing. It was terrible driving. All I am saying is that there is no legal requirement to slow down when someone is approaching the crossing, they don't even have to stop unless they are on the crossing. If I was the van driver I wouldn't have overtaken there and I would have stopped, behind the cyclist.

 

[Markymark]

Noted, well done.
So how far away from the crossing is the car driver supposed to know that you have an intention to cross when you are walking towards it? Do they have to have mind reading skills?
An intention to cross is someone waiting at the side of the zebra crossing not walking towards it because they could just walk past. Or should every car stop if a pedestrian is walking near one. Again how far away should they be before they stop, 1m, 5m, 10m, further?

If there is nobody there, no need to adjust your driving.
If somebody is waiting to cross, you should stop if safe to do so.
If someone is in the vicinity, you should slow down and be prepared to stop. It matters not whether she does or does not stop, but you should....slow down, cover brakes and not overtake bikes. If she carries on, it has slowed you for 1 or 2 seconds. If she walked in the road you have greatly reduced your chances of a pedestrian collision.

I think you are not a very good driver.

 

[summerdays]

Noted, well done.
So how far away from the crossing is the car driver supposed to know that you have an intention to cross when you are walking towards it? Do they have to have mind reading skills?
An intention to cross is someone waiting at the side of the zebra crossing not walking towards it because they could just walk past. Or should every car stop if a pedestrian is walking near one. Again how far away should they be before they stop, 1m, 5m, 10m, further?

If they walk past they generally maintain the same direction, if they are going to cross they start veering towards it and usually their heads start turning too, but you need to look at them to notice those things. It's the same skills you use on the road when you are passing a side road and there is a car there, you look for the hints about what they are "likely" to do. Equally you can't use distance as some kids run up to crossings or people cycle across. It's about being aware of your surroundings not what is just in front of you.