18 replies to this topic

[Gaz66]

You now have to open the door with your left hand when getting out of the car or face a 1k fine!
Is it April 1st already?

[PoolGuy]

You now have to open the door with your left hand when getting out of the car or face a 1k fine!
Is it April 1st already?

I think you may have misread the new 'rule'.

[Gaz66]

Im going by what was on tv.
Tv said you have to open the door with the hand furthest from the door or face the big fine.
Dont know how they will police that one.

[PoolGuy]

Im going by what was on tv.
Tv said you have to open the door with the hand furthest from the door or face the big fine.
Dont know how they will police that one.

They don't need to police it, it's not true. The Highway Code is available to view online, if you'd like to know what's changed.

[Gaz66]

The propaganda machine spurted this out. Which is where I heard/saw it.
You've got to laugh.

https://youtu.be/ey-_ypApIRU

[PoolGuy]

Yep, that prog isn't what it was since Piers Morgan left...anyway, they're wrong. 

[Steam]

Yep, that prog isn't what it was since Piers Morgan left...anyway, they're wrong. 

It would have to be better and with more integrity without him!!

[sonscar]

I read it as if you open the door carelessly and damage a cyclist you could potentially be prosecuted and fined up to 1K.This would have always applied and however you open the door.Sensationalist headlines sell news and the population lap it up.Enjoy what is left of our motoring freedom.Soon it will be "did you think of driving a car?That will be 1K and some social demerit points" Only joking,Steve..

[PoolGuy]

Exactly Steve, heaven help us if this place becomes like FB with people mindlessly repeating incorrect info.

[Ethel]

I've never thought it enjoyable to knock cyclists off. If you open the door as described you'll naturally be looking in the right direction to realise you're about to open the door in front of a cyclist (or 10 tonne truck) that's reason enough surely?

 

 

The highway code isn't law. It's advice to drivers on how to avoid accidents, in some cases by following laws designed to reduce accidents, while driving. It gives similar advice to cyclists for cycling & pedestrians for, erm, pedestrating. You're reading it wrong if you think stuff other road users are advised not to do means you can do the thoughtless/dangerous stuff it intends to help them avoid.

[sonscar]

Respect for all other users is what I try to practice,everyone has a bad day eventually.In my narrow experience those who listen do not need the advice and those who choose not to listen will not heed advice.Sweeping generalisation I know but all I can go on is my limited experience.
If it is in a newspaper it is fact,if on TV it is absolute fact,and on the internet well then it is LAW.
Try to be courteous and careful and enjoy your travels,Steve..

[Maccmike8]

Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison.

 

 

 

 

According to the RAC, the Highway Code itself is not a legal document and the rules outlined in it are not official road laws. ... A number of the points outlined in the Code are backed up by official traffic laws, meaning you can be fined, prosecuted or disqualified if you ignore them.

[mini-mad-mark]

Wouldn't it be good if the HC pointed out which bits were

 

a) rules intended to help you meet legal requirements 

b) rules of best practice/advice - what to do (or not do) to support a)

c) information only - not telling you to do (or not do) anything - just explaining a) and b)

[PoolGuy]

Wouldn't it be good if the HC pointed out which bits were

 

a) rules intended to help you meet legal requirements 

b) rules of best practice/advice - what to do (or not do) to support a)

c) information only - not telling you to do (or not do) anything - just explaining a) and b)

I’ve always thought that it does exactly that, when it says ‘you must’ it’s law, and when it says ‘you should’ it’s advice/common courtesy.

[Steam]

Wouldn't it be good if the HC pointed out which bits were
 
a) rules intended to help you meet legal requirements 
b) rules of best practice/advice - what to do (or not do) to support a)
c) information only - not telling you to do (or not do) anything - just explaining a) and b)

I’ve always thought that it does exactly that, when it says ‘you must’ it’s law, and when it says ‘you should’ it’s advice/common courtesy.

Yes.
Should advisory
Shall not optional.