FAO Furry Exocet

[silverfoxcc]

Cant seem to post the pic on this forum,but have a look at the pic in my posting just now in the
'One thing that makes you think knob thread in general gassing

Is this piece of driving illegal?
It is done several times a day, esp at rush hours

[iva cosworth]

Sorry to barge in on your private conflab with BIB.

I assume you mean the 2nd pic with the 406 estate on the wrong side of the road with

double white lines ?

Got to be illegal shirley,although there is nothing coming due to level crossing being closed.

But double white lines don't have exemptions for that do they ?

Will watch for "official" answer.....

[silverfoxcc]

Iva,
The problem with that, is he is heading for the left turn about 20yds away from the crossing. As traffic turn right from that road. he is liable for anasty head on. esp if its me coming out with a 5 ton bus!!

Its a long way to reverse

[Frik]

I would have thought that was precisely why the double white lines were there.

[Furry Exocet]

I forgot to reply earlier (dam work getting in the way), but I'd go with Dizee on this, based on what I can see in the picture. Obviously if they cause issues with on coming traffic then you'd have a due care offence.

[silverfoxcc]

So rules can be bent according to the circumstances?

Seriously it really does make my urine exceed 100 degrees C. I have witnessed several 'head on' encounters and 9/10 its the tt 'in the wrong' that gets arsey with the guy on his right side of the road.

So next time you seen me beetling down the A322 at 80 mph. I can say you said it was ok to do it as long as it doesn't inconvenience anyone!!!!!! ( only joking)

Thanks for the clarification. Appreciate your reply

[Landshark]

It's the way the legislation is written that's the problem.

(I don't agree with it, it's fraught with issues!!!)

[silverfoxcc]

It must be a minefield out there sometimes.

[Landshark]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Ah Diz, this is where the legislation is a bit murky...............it says to pass 'a' stationary vehicle, now the debate and argument comes from, is a line of stationary traffic covered by this?? You could say no, you passing numerous stationary vehicles, and if the legislation wanted this then there would have been no 'a' put in??? Or
Yes you pass 'a' stationary vehicle, then another stationary vehicle and so on!!!!!

Which is right????

(of course then there always 'necessary' bit)

(6) Nothing in paragraph (2)(b) shall be taken to prohibit a vehicle from being driven across, or so as to straddle, the continuous line referred to in that paragraph, if it is safe to do so and if necessary to do so—

(b)in order to pass a stationary vehicle;

[Landshark]

anonymous said:

[redacted]