Could a council be held responsible for this?
Discussion
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
silverfoxcc said:
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
Is it an area where pedestrians have priority?Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
silverfoxcc said:
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
So why is this somebody else's fault? Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
GasEngineer said:
silverfoxcc said:
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
Is it an area where pedestrians have priority?Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs and do not take enough caution when crossing, espcially when the driver approaching the give way sign stops, and they march out not seeing the vehicle with priority approaching. I have wriiten to the council pointing out the possible dangers Fatality/serious injury. Should the council respond saying they do not consider it a risk,and later there is a fatality. could they be held under the Corporate Manslaughter Act, as they ignored earlier concerns.
I suggested a pedestrian contolled croosing to eliminate this.back in August but not a reply yet
Hierarchy of road users.
Just sayin'.
ETA.
Are you really suggesting a council could be responsible for an accident on the road?
Edited by E-bmw on Friday 31st October 13:26
Sebring440 said:
Any chance of clarification on what you're actually trying to say? Pinch point? Regulation signs? Of what?
Nobody knows what you're on about.
I think he means 'chicanes', the things that councils love to build on perfectly good roads whereby the traffic on one side of the road has to give way to traffic coming in the opposite direction. One direction will have give way signs while the other direction will have priority.Nobody knows what you're on about.
This is supposedly a 'traffic calming' system although I think it has the opposite effect as I always speed up to get there first!
Yellow Lizud said:
Sebring440 said:
Any chance of clarification on what you're actually trying to say? Pinch point? Regulation signs? Of what?
Nobody knows what you're on about.
I think he means 'chicanes', the things that councils love to build on perfectly good roads whereby the traffic on one side of the road has to give way to traffic coming in the opposite direction. One direction will have give way signs while the other direction will have priority.Nobody knows what you're on about.
This is supposedly a 'traffic calming' system although I think it has the opposite effect as I always speed up to get there first!
Sebring440 said:
silverfoxcc said:
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Any chance of clarification on what you're actually trying to say? Pinch point? Regulation signs? Of what?Nobody knows what you're on about.
The Highway Code provides specific rules where drivers and cyclists must or should give way to pedestrians.
The law was updated in 2022 to introduce a "hierarchy of road users" that prioritises pedestrians.
At Junctions: Drivers and cyclists should give way to pedestrians who are crossing or waiting to cross a road that the traffic is turning into or out of. This applies whether the pedestrian is at a marked crossing point or not.
Rule 1 of the Highway Code establishes a hierarchy of road users where those in charge of vehicles have a greater responsibility to reduce the danger to pedestrians, who are among the most vulnerable users.
The law was updated in 2022 to introduce a "hierarchy of road users" that prioritises pedestrians.
At Junctions: Drivers and cyclists should give way to pedestrians who are crossing or waiting to cross a road that the traffic is turning into or out of. This applies whether the pedestrian is at a marked crossing point or not.
Rule 1 of the Highway Code establishes a hierarchy of road users where those in charge of vehicles have a greater responsibility to reduce the danger to pedestrians, who are among the most vulnerable users.
Yellow Lizud said:
Sebring440 said:
Any chance of clarification on what you're actually trying to say? Pinch point? Regulation signs? Of what?
Nobody knows what you're on about.
I think he means 'chicanes', the things that councils love to build on perfectly good roads whereby the traffic on one side of the road has to give way to traffic coming in the opposite direction. One direction will have give way signs while the other direction will have priority.Nobody knows what you're on about.
This is supposedly a 'traffic calming' system although I think it has the opposite effect as I always speed up to get there first!
Short version. Pinch point with the regulation signs.
Pedestrians have assumed this is an authorised crossing, perhaps because of the drop kerbs
I think the point silverfoxcc was trying to make is that the actions of the council have made this look like a crossing point for pedestrians.
MOMACC said:
The Highway Code provides specific rules where drivers and cyclists must or should give way to pedestrians.
The law was updated in 2022 to introduce a "hierarchy of road users" that prioritises pedestrians.
At Junctions: Drivers and cyclists should give way to pedestrians who are crossing or waiting to cross a road that the traffic is turning into or out of. This applies whether the pedestrian is at a marked crossing point or not.
Rule 1 of the Highway Code establishes a hierarchy of road users where those in charge of vehicles have a greater responsibility to reduce the danger to pedestrians, who are among the most vulnerable users.
Hence what I said on the 5th post earlier.The law was updated in 2022 to introduce a "hierarchy of road users" that prioritises pedestrians.
At Junctions: Drivers and cyclists should give way to pedestrians who are crossing or waiting to cross a road that the traffic is turning into or out of. This applies whether the pedestrian is at a marked crossing point or not.
Rule 1 of the Highway Code establishes a hierarchy of road users where those in charge of vehicles have a greater responsibility to reduce the danger to pedestrians, who are among the most vulnerable users.
Highways engineer here. Is it a new installation? Are there tactile slabs at the drop kerbs? The drops indicate an informal crossing point, sometimes informally called a pram crossing. Any Google streetview?
It will very likely have undergone a road safety audit. It may have been installed due to an accident history. Pedestrian crossing signs are not always needed. A more formal crossing arrangement may not qualify under something called PV2 (2 as in squared) calculations.
Photos or a link to the location will help a lot.
But no, the council will generally not be held liable unless the facility is incorrectly signed or otherwise installed against guidance or regs.
(assuming adopted road and not installed by the developer on a new estate yet to be adopted)
It will very likely have undergone a road safety audit. It may have been installed due to an accident history. Pedestrian crossing signs are not always needed. A more formal crossing arrangement may not qualify under something called PV2 (2 as in squared) calculations.
Photos or a link to the location will help a lot.
But no, the council will generally not be held liable unless the facility is incorrectly signed or otherwise installed against guidance or regs.
(assuming adopted road and not installed by the developer on a new estate yet to be adopted)
Yellow Lizud said:
Sebring440 said:
Any chance of clarification on what you're actually trying to say? Pinch point? Regulation signs? Of what?
Nobody knows what you're on about.
I think he means 'chicanes', the things that councils love to build on perfectly good roads whereby the traffic on one side of the road has to give way to traffic coming in the opposite direction. One direction will have give way signs while the other direction will have priority.Nobody knows what you're on about.
This is supposedly a 'traffic calming' system although I think it has the opposite effect as I always speed up to get there first!
Problem: Stupid people walking around with their earphones in / headphones on and their gaze permanently fixed on their phone stepping into the road without looking.
Solution: Change the Law via the Highway Code to make the driver of a motor vehicle criminally responsible when one of these feckers walks straight out into the road and gets splattered all over your nice clean windscreen.
Perfect.
Obviously the speed limit on all roads where there may be people needs to be reduced to 20mph (10mph coming soon no doubt) 'for your safety' due to the numbers of these morons who walk among us.
Sorted.
'I didn't see or hear the car' now perfectly acceptable defense in court from the moron.
Car driver gets to spend 2 years at HMP stabby.
Solution: Change the Law via the Highway Code to make the driver of a motor vehicle criminally responsible when one of these feckers walks straight out into the road and gets splattered all over your nice clean windscreen.
Perfect.
Obviously the speed limit on all roads where there may be people needs to be reduced to 20mph (10mph coming soon no doubt) 'for your safety' due to the numbers of these morons who walk among us.
Sorted.
'I didn't see or hear the car' now perfectly acceptable defense in court from the moron.
Car driver gets to spend 2 years at HMP stabby.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff