Is indicating optional?

tuxy

Just wondering was it illegal to fail to indicate. I know in other countries you can get a fine for it but I have not heard of that happening here. I have yet to see the traffic core in my area use indicators, so maybe that answers my question. But I would like to know for sure.

Autosport

i thought indicators came as an optional on vehicles :rolleyes:

Jimmy Bottlehead

I get ****ing enraged at people not indicating on the road. Whether it's at junctions, crossing lanes, or any amount of other situations, people don't do it.

It's free, it costs nothing, it's a simple flip of a finger, and it helps everyone keep a bit safer and more aware so please do it!

tuxy

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

It's free, it costs nothing, it's a simple flip of a finger, and it helps everyone keep a bit safer and more aware so please do it!

But it's only an indication of intent to turn and may be dangerous to assume someone will turn the way they are indicating. You really have to wait until you see the car actually move even if it is indicating. Perhaps the guards are trying to promote safer road practices by not indicating.

CiniO

Indicating...
hmmm......
I think last time I've seen people doing it, was when I was on holidays abroad.

PARKHEAD67

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

I get ****ing enraged at people not indicating on the road. Whether it's at junctions, crossing lanes, or any amount of other situations, people don't do it.

It's free, it costs nothing, it's a simple flip of a finger, and it helps everyone keep a bit safer and more aware so please do it!

This sums up my feelings.Especially at roundabouts.Its downright ignorant as well as dangerous.When I was learning to drive my instructor told me not to indicate unless I was sure it was necessary:eek:.He was from Wales. I took my test and failed(He was a terrible instructor).I then re-applied, didnt get any more lessons off anyone and passed.

phill106

Roundabouts....Lack of indicating....Me filled with rage....

RandomAccess

Ah feck off will ya, how can I indicate on a roundybout when I'm on d phone and have a fag in me other hand.. sure I'd get ash everywhere :pac:

Mar4ix

RandomAccess wrote: »

Ah feck off will ya, how can I indicate on a roundybout when I'm on d phone and have a fag in me other hand.. sure I'd get ash everywhere :pac:

... +1 ... plus forgot to tell about coca cola 0.5 l.bottle between legs , 50/50 with whisky

Midnight_EG

On BMW's they are...but only when they get to roundabouts! :mad:

but43r

Midnight_EG wrote: »

On BMW's they are...but only when they get to roundabouts! :mad:

No! Not just BMW's. Bloody everybody thinks that indicator is an extra and worst of all Traffic Corps and Garda set an example by NEVER using indicators. Unreal... Where I come from if the cops seen you not indicate it's pretty much guaranteed that you would get a fine.

dolallyoh

Does anyone know the answer to the OP

Del2005

I only ever use the 4 at once when I nip into the shops.

kc66

phill106 wrote: »

Roundabouts....Lack of indicating....Me filled with rage....

I know its probably been said a million times before but this makes me mad. Yesterday approaching a roundabout, theres a car in front of me and behind me, both indicating right. They both take the 2nd exit, straight on. :mad:

Idleater

dolallyoh wrote: »

Does anyone know the answer to the OP

When I do my advanced driving courses, indicating is always described in terms of providing information to other road users about your intentions. Therefore, indicators should be used wisely and appropriatly given the immediate conditions.
For instance, consider the unnecessary indicating left in a left turn lane? Or the indicating well in advance of a turn just after a petrol station. There are no hard and fast rules about indicating, demanding rigorous rules would either lead to confusion in unconforming circumstances or people assuming right of way upon indicating by relying on the ruleset.
My rule of thumb when seeing indicators is to assume nothing until some other independent action confirms the likelihood of the direction being taken.

TwoShedsJackson

dolallyoh wrote: »

Does anyone know the answer to the OP

It's not a legal requirement to indicate.

Obviously you should use indicators where you can, to signal intentions to others, but it's technically optional so it's down to the driver themselves: if they aren't an idiot, they will indicate, which is why you see so many people not indicating on Irish roads.

And don't take anyone else's indicator flashing to mean they will definitely do what they are indicating e.g. if you're waiting at a T junction to turn out onto the main road and someone comes from your right indicating to turn left into the road you're on - if you pull out in front of them on the assumption that they are in fact turning left and they go straight into you, you'll be at fault for the accident.

Whether their indicator is on or not means nothing.

dolallyoh

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

It's not a legal requirement to indicate.

Obviously you should use indicators where you can, to signal intentions to others, but it's technically optional so it's down to the driver themselves: if they aren't an idiot, they will indicate, which is why you see so many people not indicating on Irish roads.

And don't take anyone else's indicator flashing to mean they will definitely do what they are indicating e.g. if you're waiting at a T junction to turn out onto the main road and someone comes from your right indicating to turn left into the road you're on - if you pull out in front of them on the assumption that they are in fact turning left and they go straight into you, you'll be at fault for the accident.

Whether their indicator is on or not means nothing.

Ta for the legal clarification - always been said to me that the only thing an indicator indicates is that the bulb works.

coylemj

I believe defensive driving involves not indicating as a deliberate policy, this is probably why the cops don't use their indicators.

The thinking behind it is that by not using your indicators it makes you more alert to other road users and you adopt a far more cautious attitude. Many drivers use their indicators as an excuse for bad driving manifested by the practice of a lot of crap drivers which can be summarised as: if I indicate I'm going to do something it gives me the right to do it - WRONG.

The best example of where you should not need to use your indicators is when you're pulling away from a stationary position, either on a street or a busy road. By deliberately not indicating it means that you will only pull out when there is nobody to indicate to i.e. the road is completely clear.

However at certain junctions like where a lane can be used by people going straight ahead or turning right it obviously makes sense to indicate right if that is your intention in order to spare some other drivers from getting stuck behind you if they are going straight ahead.

Del2005

coylemj wrote: »

I believe defensive driving involves not indicating as a deliberate policy,

The thinking behind it is that by not using your indicators it makes you more alert to other road users and you adopt a far more cautious attitude. Many drivers use their indicators as an excuse for bad driving manifested by the practice of a lot of crap drivers which can be summarised as: if I indicate I'm going to do something it gives me the right to do it - WRONG.

The best example of where you should not need to use your indicators is when you're pulling away from a stationary position, either on a street or a busy road. By deliberately not indicating it means that you will only pull out when there is nobody to indicate to i.e. the road is completely clear.

However at certain junctions like where a lane can be used by people going straight ahead or turning right it obviously makes sense to indicate right if that is your intention in order to spare some other drivers from getting stuck behind you if they are going straight ahead.

Surely defensive driving would involve giving others as much warning of your intentions not hiding them.

Other drivers using their indicators incorrectly doesn't absolve you of using them correctly.

coylemj wrote: »

this is probably why the cops don't use their indicators.

Have the Gardaí sorted out the Supers letter farce and now all our Gardaí are now highly trained drivers? If so then they really need to review the course.

coylemj

Del2005 wrote: »

Surely defensive driving would involve giving others as much warning of your intentions not hiding them.

I think you're missing the point, one of the elements of defensive driving is to be so far away from other drivers such that your actions have no effect on them and therefore it is not necessary for safety reasons to indicate.

However if somebody is up my arse and I'm about to turn left or right then obviously I have to indicate because the little brain power he has might tell him that I'm about to slow down to turn but there are lots of situations where if you put sufficient distance between you and other drivers then there is no reason why you should indicate.

Remember that the policy of not indicating is to make the driver (you) more alert and cautious.

Obviously when going around a roundabout you have no control over whether other drivers are around or not so in that situation you should indicate your intentions.

12 element

And what if I'm waiting to pull out onto a main road and your turning left into it? Would defensive driving allow you to indicate so that I'll know that your going to be slowing down to turn in allowing me to pull out? What is this defensive driving, sounds like a load of crap to me!

coylemj

12 element wrote: »

And what if I'm waiting to pull out onto a main road and your turning left into it? Would defensive driving allow you to indicate so that I'll know that your going to be slowing down to turn in allowing me to pull out? What is this defensive driving, sounds like a load of crap to me!

Say I did indicate left but kept going straight and you drove out in front of me and I crashed into you, what then?

12 element

I know what your saying and I've seen close calls before. But it might make the difference in deciding to pull out or wait for an other gap. (Where it would be possible to pull out without the person hitting you but might be borderline).

Seasoft

coylemj wrote: »

I think you're missing the point, one of the elements of defensive driving is to be so far away from other drivers such that your actions have no effect on them and therefore it is not necessary for safety reasons to indicate.

Do you take pedestrians into consideration when you refuse to use indicators?

If you are turning left without a car behind you you say you would not indicate. You claim this is acceptable. What if a pedestrian wants to cross the junction, looks, sees your car without an indicator, and starts to cross the road. Next moment you turn without warning, hoot horn, scare pedestrian, etc.

Always use indicators!

coylemj

Seasoft wrote: »

Do you take pedestrians into consideration when you refuse to use indicators?

If you are turning left without a car behind you you say you would not indicate. You claim this is acceptable. What if a pedestrian wants to cross the junction, looks, sees your car without an indicator, and starts to cross the road. Next moment you turn without warning, hoot horn, scare pedestrian, etc.

Always use indicators!

I didn't say I never use indicators and in fact I always indicate when turning left and right. My point is that when out on the open road or on a motorway it is not always necessary to indicate just because (e.g.) you're changing lanes and if you try to engineer the situation such that it is not necessary to indicate then it will make you a safer driver.

On the specific situation you mention, if the pedestrian can see me then I can see him and obviously I would indicate so that he knows he should wait for me to execute the turn before he crosses the road.

Nobody is saying that you should never indicate.

-Chris-

OSI wrote: »

I'm sorry but there is no excuse for not indicating when changing lanes on the motorway. None.

What if there's no one within several hundred meters of you?

dr.bollocko

I keep a toy gun in my car and take the rage out of this aspect of driving by shooting anyone who doesn't indicate.

muckwarrior

kc66 wrote: »

I know its probably been said a million times before but this makes me mad. Yesterday approaching a roundabout, theres a car in front of me and behind me, both indicating right. They both take the 2nd exit, straight on. :mad:

I saw even worse yesterday, a blonde woman in a BMW (triple stereotype I know, but fact nonetheless) taking the 3rd exit (3 o'clock) enters the roundabout without indicating, then just as she passes the second exit indicates right. :rolleyes:

Del2005

coylemj wrote: »

I didn't say I never use indicators and in fact I always indicate when turning left and right. My point is that when out on the open road or on a motorway it is not always necessary to indicate just because (e.g.) you're changing lanes and if you try to engineer the situation such that it is not necessary to indicate then it will make you a safer driver.

On the specific situation you mention, if the pedestrian can see me then I can see him and obviously I would indicate so that he knows he should wait for me to execute the turn before he crosses the road.

Nobody is saying that you should never indicate.

So what you're saying is that when no one else is around there's no need to indicate but if there's anyone around you should always indicate. That's just common sense not defensive driving, but getting yourself into a position so that you don't need to indicate seems like a very awkward way out of a simple situation.

Seth Brundle

All an flashing indicator means is that the bulb works!
You cannot trust that a driver (especially in this country) who indicates will actually make the manouvre correctly. Its unfortunate but a reality!

kbannon

kbannon wrote: »

All an flashing indicator means is that the bulb works!
You cannot trust that a driver (especially in this country) who indicates will actually make the manouvre correctly. Its unfortunate but a reality!

It's still a massive improvement on no indicating

Wetbench4

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

It's not a legal requirement to indicate.


And don't take anyone else's indicator flashing to mean they will definitely do what they are indicating e.g. if you're waiting at a T junction to turn out onto the main road and someone comes from your right indicating to turn left into the road you're on - if you pull out in front of them on the assumption that they are in fact turning left and they go straight into you, you'll be at fault for the accident.

Whether their indicator is on or not means nothing.

I'm not disputing you, but thats the maddest thing i've ever heard, so if i wanted a claim, all i have to do is indicate to turn near a junction, and drive into whoever pulls out??? Who's bright idea was it to make the use of indicators not part of the law???

tuxy

Thanks for the answer regarding the law, I'm seriously considering not indicating unless it's absolutely necessary.

sentient_6

IMO indicating even when theres no one around is just good practise & habit to get into. Why bother wasting time making the distinction between when/if you should or not when you just couldv'e gone ahead & indicated anyway?

& its not that hard people, junctions, roundabouts, changing lanes. Whats the problem?

Wetbench4

sentient_6 wrote: »

IMO indicating even when theres no one around is just good practise & habit to get into. Why bother wasting time making the distinction between when/if you should or not when you just couldv'e gone ahead & indicated anyway?

& its not that hard people, junctions, roundabouts, changing lanes. Whats the problem?

Good point, i've always used indicators all the time, and it has become automatic, as in i don't really even think about it. To me, even if there were no other cars in sight, it would feel strange to not use them.

**Timbuk2**

muckwarrior wrote: »

I saw even worse yesterday, a blonde woman in a BMW (triple stereotype I know, but fact nonetheless) taking the 3rd exit (3 o'clock) enters the roundabout without indicating, then just as she passes the second exit indicates right. :rolleyes:

The amount of times I have seen people indicate right at the exit before their intended exit on a roundabout. You'd have to laugh at how stupid some people are. Imagine the chaos you'd cause if you decided to go onto the M50 at rush hour and reverse all your indications

tuxy

sentient_6 wrote: »

& its not that hard people, junctions, roundabouts, changing lanes. Whats the problem?

The problem is the majority of Irish drivers don't bother or do not understand how to indicate correctly. If they don't understand how to indicate then they may misinterpreter when you indicate. There really is nothing that can be done about this unless it becomes law and is enforced.

sentient_6

tuxy wrote: »

The problem is the majority of Irish drivers don't bother or do not understand how to indicate correctly. If they don't understand how to indicate then they may misinterpreter when you indicate

Ya but thats their problem not yours. The worse case is an accident due to you not indicating at all(potentially putting the blame on you) than the other party misinterpreting your (hopefully) correct indication (putting the blame on them).

& im not saying thats all an potential accident would come down to, who's wrong or right, or how'd an insurance company would look at it, but just for your own piece of mind even.

GreenHell

muckwarrior wrote: »

I saw even worse yesterday, a blonde woman in a BMW (triple stereotype I know, but fact nonetheless) taking the 3rd exit (3 o'clock) enters the roundabout without indicating, then just as she passes the second exit indicates right. :rolleyes:

I go through 4 round abouts on my way to work. I see that at least twice a day. Come on like! How does that make any sense. It is worse than no indication.

montane

OSI wrote: »

The one that really annoys me is people at the front of a queue of traffic lights, 2 lanes, one going straight and left, one going straight and right. You see one is shorter and the person in front isn't indicating. Great must be straight on!!! No, as soon as the light turns green they pull out 2 feet and then indicate that they're turning. ****ing rageful.

Yes !!! This makes my flucking blood boil!

Yer 1

Ah for jaysis sake people! Why dont we all just indicate when we are going to make a turn!?! Problem solved!!

Chuck Stone

When people do anything other than drive in a straight line they should think about whether they should indicate or not.

I'd rather people would use their indicators badly than not at all.

That way they're letting you know they're a bad driver at the very least.

sentient_6

sentient_6 wrote: »

IMO indicating even when theres no one around is just good practise & habit to get into. Why bother wasting time making the distinction between when/if you should or not when you just couldv'e gone ahead & indicated anyway?

& its not that hard people, junctions, roundabouts, changing lanes. Whats the problem?

Indicating is helpful for all the people/cars you don't see as well

guil

like others have said most people havent a clue about your intentions when they see indicators or hazzards come on, what wouly you think if you saw a truck in front of you and the hazzards came on?

i drive a bin lorry and have to reverse a lot but everytime i hit the hazzards and swing out to reverse more times than not some gob****e tries to fly up by me or else stops right behind me

schween

It may not be a legal requirement to indicate but my Dad was waiting to turn right at a junction a few years back and a van rear ended him.

The van driver's immediate claim was that my Dad didn't indicate so it was his fault but my Dad pointed out to the Guards that the indicator was still flashing in what was left of the back of the car.

cc

I think it's spot what other posters have said about getting into the habit of indicating. It just feels just feels right when you always do it, the same way it feels wrong when driving without a seatbelt on (for most people anyway i'd imagine).

line6

indicators mean nothing in this country because people use them in so many different ways - you're better off ignoring them and assuming that any driver can do anything at any time, save a lot of rage for yourself

use your own indicators of course, but bear in mind that people will interpret them differently as well

also the self cancelling yoke is a disaster, i don't know why they're standard at all when they can switch off just when you need them to stay on

slimjimmc

schween wrote: »

It may not be a legal requirement to indicate but my Dad was waiting to turn right at a junction a few years back and a van rear ended him.

The van driver's immediate claim was that my Dad didn't indicate so it was his fault but my Dad pointed out to the Guards that the indicator was still flashing in what was left of the back of the car.

The indicator on after the collision that doesn't prove anything other than the indicator still works, it certainly doesn't prove you father indicated before the collision. The van driver's claim could be valid but it is difficult to prove. Not that it would have mattered to the outcome since the van still shouldn't have hit a stationary vehicle in front of him, indicators or none.

line6

tuxy wrote: »

Is indecating optional?

no but speling is

guil

line6 wrote: »

no but speling is

bit ironic that ya spelt spelling wrong

line6

guil wrote: »

bit ironic that ya spelt spelling wrong

and yet further irony that you spelt 'you' wrong - hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah