Driver -V- Pedestrian

Seasoft

I'm wondering what people's take on an incident I saw is. In particular, I'd like clarity on pedestrian rights when crossing roads at junctions.

I was stopped on minor road at a T-junction. No traffic lights. I was turning right, so was very aware of traffic in both directions on the main road.

A young man walking on the path reaches the corner on my right, does not look over his shoulder, just walks out. A few seconds later a car comes from my right and turns left into the minor road, indicating as he approaches. Now as he turns the pedestrian is one-third out from the footpath. Car driver blows horn, pedestrian stops, car passes a foot in front of him. Pedestrian waits then crosses. I waited until he cleared across me before moving out.

Ok, pedestrian was careless, unobservant and foolish. However, car could have given way as the pedestrian was on the road before he turned the corner but driver chose to force his way by making the man crossing stop.

Comments? What is the law/ rule about when crossing pedestrians have right of way?

keithsfleet

AFAIK and im fully open to correction here. The pedestrian has right of way.

Mycroft H

Seasoft wrote: »

I'm wondering what people's take on an incident I saw is. In particular, I'd like clarity on pedestrian rights when crossing roads at junctions.

I was stopped on minor road at a T-junction. No traffic lights. I was turning right, so was very aware of traffic in both directions on the main road.

A young man walking on the path reaches the corner on my right, does not look over his shoulder, just walks out. A few seconds later a car comes from my right and turns left into the minor road, indicating as he approaches. Now as he turns the pedestrian is one-third out from the footpath. Car driver blows horn, pedestrian stops, car passes a foot in front of him. Pedestrian waits then crosses. I waited until he cleared across me before moving out.

Ok, pedestrian was careless, unobservant and foolish. However, car could have given way as the pedestrian was on the road before he turned the corner but driver chose to force his way by making the man crossing stop.

Comments? What is the law/ rule about when crossing pedestrians have right of way?

Pedestrian always has right of way once he/she has started to cross the junction according to the ROTR

Atomic Pineapple

Ridiculously the pedestrian has right of way.

OldmanMondeo

Seasoft wrote: »

Ok, pedestrian was careless, unobservant and foolish. However, car SHOULDd have given way as the pedestrian was on the road before he turned the corner but driver chose to force his way by making the man crossing stop.

FYP. Car driver is a tool, they are fine and safe in the metal box, the pedestrian will come off worse. And yes the pedestrian should have looked.

Seasoft

keithsfleet wrote: »

AFAIK and im fully open to correction here. The pedestrian has right of way.

BX 19 wrote: »

Pedestrian always has right of way once he/she has started to cross the junction according to the ROTR

I always feel Irish drivers rarely take this into account, or are not aware. Often people crossing are beeped out of it.

The fact that we do not have striped lines at junctions, normal in France, Spain etc. means Irish drivers are not pedestrian aware.

Anan1

My understanding is that cars turning from a major onto a minor road must always yield to pedestrians.

OldmanMondeo

Seasoft wrote: »

I always feel Irish drivers rarely take this into account, or are not aware. Often people crossing are beeped out of it.

The fact that we do not have striped lines at junctions, normal in France, Spain etc. means Irish drivers are not pedestrian aware.

To go one step further, anything on the road before you where there has right of way, may it be a horse and cart, a car already on a roundabout, may it be from your right or already in front of you or a pedestrian crossing the road.

tricky D

Simplistic rule of thumb is: if it is already on the junction, it has right of way. Think of elderly person crossing the road very slowly with green man, if they take too long and you get the green light, can you run over them? Also, no matter who has right of way, you hit a pedestrian, your insurance pays up.

Pedestrian in OP is obviously dumb.

Seasoft

Thanks to you all. All agree that the pedestrian on a minor road has right of way.

To take it to the next level.... when can a pedestrian safely step out? If I was about to cross as this guy was, I'd look both ways to see if a car was approaching with indicators on. If there was, I'd wait till it turned.

In light of the right of way aspect, is it OK to step out if the car approaching is back a bit but will reach the corner before I complete the crossing? In other words can I assert my right of way (as cars do at roundabouts) or should I play safe?

CiniO

I would actually agree with others that pedestrian had a right of way, when crossing on the junctions, while the car was turning, as even if he looked, he might have not known that car was going to turn.



I had a different story with pedestrian some time ago.
I was on main road trying to turn right into minor road. There was heavy traffic from opposite site coming, so I was waiting long for any gap. On the minor road there was traffic lights controlled pedestrian crossing, and I actually had green light, while pedestrians had red.
Eventually there was a little gap in oncoming cars, I took a look again, I still had a green light, and I saw no pedestrians, so whenever the gap was there I floored it, as gap was pretty small. I did it tiny bit too strong, as my front wheels spinned few times making a tyre squeal. Unfortunately after I turned, I met pedestrian in the middle of pedestrian crossing - he was running, and he still had red light. I slowed down as much as I could, and I used my horn to warn him I was coming. He increased the speed of his run, and everyone went it's way.
However I parked nearby as it was where I was going, and he came to me and started shouting that I wanted to run him over intentionally, and I was squealing my tyres.
I explained that I had a green light, while he had red, so he was not allowed to cross the road. I told him as well, that pedestrians are not allowed to run through the street - they should walk instead. I also told him, that I do agree - I spinned the wheels and squealed the tyres, but it was because I had to accelerate fast to make it through the gap, and actually I didn't think it was against the law to spin the tyres, in oppose to running through the red light. He actually wanted to fight with me, but in the end he sad I had no proof he was running through the red light (indeed I had no proof) while he has a proof I was spinning the wheels, as there were tyre marks on the surface, so he said he was going to sue me, and he left.
It was nearly 2 years ago, and I didn't hear from him since.

slimjimmc

Seasoft wrote: »

Thanks to you all. All agree that the pedestrian on a minor road has right of way.

The class of road has feck all to do with it, you must always yield to pedestrians if they're straying across your path regardless.

Seasoft wrote: »

To take it to the next level.... when can a pedestrian safely step out? If I was about to cross as this guy was, I'd look both ways to see if a car was approaching with indicators on. If there was, I'd wait till it turned.

The safest time is when there's no traffic approaching. Any other time and you're taking a risk that the car will hit you.

Seasoft wrote: »

In light of the right of way aspect, is it OK to step out if the car approaching is back a bit but will reach the corner before I complete the crossing? In other words can I assert my right of way (as cars do at roundabouts) or should I play safe?

You can indeed assert your right of way but if you time it wrong you may not get a chance to assert it again. Common sense would say that for self-preservation you should make your intention to cross obvious to the driver and in good time for him to react. If he hits you he could be trying to convince the law and his insurers, but you could be trying to convince St. Peter.

Seasoft

@slimjimmc

Fully agree. Very sensible, sums up the difference between legal entitlements and common sense.

In the absence of road markings declaring pedestrian priority a cautious approach is the only way, i.e. when the roads, minor and major, are clear. Was just interested in others opinions on the matter.

dr.fuzzenstein

CiniO wrote: »

He actually wanted to fight with me, but in the end he sad I had no proof he was running through the red light (indeed I had no proof) while he has a proof I was spinning the wheels, as there were tyre marks on the surface, so he said he was going to sue me, and he left.
It was nearly 2 years ago, and I didn't hear from him since.

And that to me is sometimes a problem with pedestrians and cyclists on the road.
The thinking is "I Am Entitled To Be Here" and "Everyone Has To Look Out For Me", whilst they wander or cycle slowly in the middle of the road with an iPod on, looking up into the clouds without a care in the world.
True, they are vulnerable road users and we need to watch out for them.
But the game goes both ways, they also need to watch what they're doing, if they're completely careless and get run down it has to be partly their fault.
Simply being in the right doesn't render them invulnerable and any accident not being their fault (in their mind) won't change the reality of car+pedestrian=minced meat.
Some people really should check out the safe cross code again.

blackwhite

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/si/0182.html#zzsi182y1997a46

If a pedestrian is shown to have breached any of the following, causing or nearly causing an accident, then they are considered to be at fault, and can be charged with an offence. (My grandmother, of all people, was fined £80 for attemping to cross O'Connell St without using the lights about 12 years ago).

1997 Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations

Rules for Pedestrians
46. (1) A pedestrian shall exercise care and take all reasonable precautions in order to avoid causing danger or inconvenience to traffic and other pedestrians.

(2) A pedestrian facing a traffic light lamp which shows a red light shall not proceed beyond that light.

(3) A pedestrian about to cross a roadway at a place where traffic sign number RPC 003 or RPC 004 [pedestrian lights] has been provided shall do so only when a lamp of the facing pedestrian lights is lit and emits a constant green light.

(4) Subject to sub-article (5), save when crossing the roadway, a pedestrian shall use a footway if one is provided, and if one is not provided, shall keep as near as possible to the right edge of the roadway.

(5) At a road junction where traffic is controlled either by traffic lights or by a member of the Garda Síochána, a pedestrian shall cross the roadway only when traffic going in the direction in which the pedestrian intends to cross is permitted (by the lights or the member) to proceed.

(6) Within a pedestrian crossing complex [traffic sign number RPC 002] a pedestrian shall only cross the roadway at the location of traffic sign number RPC 001 [pedestrian crossing].

(7) On a roadway on which a traffic sign number RPC 001 [pedestrian crossing] has been provided, a pedestrian shall not cross the roadway within 15 metres of the crossing, except by the crossing.

(8) For the purposes of this article, each carriageway of a dual carriageway shall be deemed to be a separate roadway, and where there is a traffic refuge on a roadway the portion of the roadway on each side of the refuge shall be deemed to be a separate roadway.

ballooba

Seasoft wrote: »

Ok, pedestrian was careless, unobservant and foolish. However, car could have given way as the pedestrian was on the road before he turned the corner but driver chose to force his way by making the man crossing stop.

I don't have an opinion on who had right of way, but if you don't assert your right of way on the road then people never learn.

djimi

The bottom line is you do not turn onto any road until it is clear to do so. The pedestrian had started crossing the road before the car got there, therefore the road was not clear for the car and it should have waited.

creedp

djimi wrote: »

The bottom line is you do not turn onto any road until it is clear to do so. The pedestrian had started crossing the road before the car got there, therefore the road was not clear for the car and it should have waited.

In theory fine but I await the reports of increased fender benders at junctions when cars brake to allow pedestrians to cross the road causing then to be rear-ended. Most drivers are not aware of what is happenning in front of the car in front of then and will not expect that car to stop when entering a minor road that doesn't have traffic lights/pedestrian crossing. I know shouldn't be the case but I'd bet not many are aware of the pedestrians entitlements in this case.

Anan1

creedp wrote: »

In theory fine but I await the reports of increased fender benders at junctions when cars brake to allow pedestrians to cross the road causing then to be rear-ended. Most drivers are not aware of what is happenning in front of the car in front of then and will not expect that car to stop when entering a minor road that doesn't have traffic lights/pedestrian crossing. I know shouldn't be the case but I'd bet not many are aware of the pedestrians entitlements in this case.

Tough sh1t on the car behind, so.

creedp

Anan1 wrote: »

Tough sh1t on the car behind, so.

You sound like a reasonable chap:)

djimi

creedp wrote: »

In theory fine but I await the reports of increased fender benders at junctions when cars brake to allow pedestrians to cross the road causing then to be rear-ended. Most drivers are not aware of what is happenning in front of the car in front of then and will not expect that car to stop when entering a minor road that doesn't have traffic lights/pedestrian crossing. I know shouldn't be the case but I'd bet not many are aware of the pedestrians entitlements in this case.

If the car behind isnt leaving enough of a gap to stop safely then that is another issue entirely. You can just advocate that a car can make any manouevre it pleases just because some jackass behind him might not be paying attention.

And its nothing to do with pedestrian entitlement; it just so happens that in this case the obstruction was a pedestrian. You dont turn onto a road if it is obstructed, no matter what the cause. You should have enough awareness of the situation to enable you to slow down and take the turn safely, or not take it as the case may be.

Anan1

creedp wrote: »

You sound like a reasonable chap:)

Come on now, you're not seriously suggesting endangering a pedestrian with right of way to facilitate the possible doziness of the driver behind?:)

seamus

At any junction regardless of the class of road, a driver must always yield to pedestrians already crossing at that junction. This is provided that the pedestrian is using the junction correctly (e.g. using lights where they're provided).

Yielding Right of Way

8. (3) A driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction shall yield the right of way to another vehicle which has commenced to turn or cross at the junction in accordance with these Regulations and to a pedestrian who has commenced to cross at the junction in accordance with these Regulations.

Anan1

seamus wrote: »

At any junction regardless of the class of road, a driver must always yield to pedestrians already crossing at that junction. This is provided that the pedestrian is using the junction correctly (e.g. using lights where they're provided).

OT, but I like your sig.

djimi

seamus wrote: »

At any junction regardless of the class of road, a driver must always yield to pedestrians already crossing at that junction. This is provided that the pedestrian is using the junction correctly (e.g. using lights where they're provided).

I think the second part of that is one of those times when the law is completly and utterly irrelevant; if somone is in process of crossing the road then you yield no matter what the circumstances!

creedp

djimi wrote: »

If the car behind isnt leaving enough of a gap to stop safely then that is another issue entirely. You can just advocate that a car can make any manouevre it pleases just because some jackass behind him might not be paying attention.

And its nothing to do with pedestrian entitlement; it just so happens that in this case the obstruction was a pedestrian. You dont turn onto a road if it is obstructed, no matter what the cause. You should have enough awareness of the situation to enable you to slow down and take the turn safely, or not take it as the case may be.

I agree with you but I was simply making the point that if this approach was dutifully observed there would be more rear-enders .. that's all. How many times have you seen cars blowing horns/flashing lights at pedestrians in these circumstances? I have rarely if ever seen a car stop in these circumstances where there isn't a traffic light. Indeed even where there is a pedestian crossing I've often seen cars ignore them completely leaving pedestrians playing chicken when trying to cross the road. Again, not saying this is right ...

ballooba

Am I correct in saying that on roundabouts pedestrians have right of way over cars entering the roundabout but not over cars exiting? I was exiting this roundabout yesterday when a pedestrian started to throw themselves in front of the car. http://g.co/maps/ahj7b

seamus

ballooba wrote: »

Am I correct in saying that on roundabouts pedestrians have right of way over cars entering the roundabout but not over cars exiting? I was exiting this roundabout yesterday when a pedestrian started to throw themselves in front of the car. http://g.co/maps/ahj7b

In theory a roundabout should be treated as a series of junctions, so if a pedestrian is already crossing at one of the exits before you get there, you must yield.

corktina

not only must you yield, but the guy behind should anticipate you may yield and should not run up the back of you.

Driving standardfs are so poor in this country.People make up thier own rules I think

creedp

Anan1 wrote: »

Come on now, you're not seriously suggesting endangering a pedestrian with right of way to facilitate the possible doziness of the driver behind?:)

No I wasn't .. I was simply being a gobsh1te:) But seriously I do think a lot of drivers wouldn't consider that the pedestrian had the right away in the absence of a pedestian crossing/traffic light so I was simply pointing out this fact while not condoning it

ballooba

corktina wrote: »

Driving standardfs are so poor in this country.People make up thier own rules I think

A lot of my driving has been done in Australia where I think the right of way for pedestrians at roundabouts may be different. It seems more logical to me that cars would not stop on a roundabout in such circumstances but I'll have to follow the prevailing rules.

djimi

seamus wrote: »

In theory a roundabout should be treated as a series of junctions, so if a pedestrian is already crossing at one of the exits before you get there, you must yield.

I can understand a roundabout being a little different in that cars on a roundabout should not have to stop unnecessarily, but I really dont think right of way matters too much in this case; pedestrians might not be "allowed" to cross somewhere, but regardless, the person who is walking across the road has right of way in that the alternative is they get run down...

corktina

ballooba wrote: »

A lot of my driving has been done in Australia where I think the right of way for pedestrians at roundabouts may be different. It seems more logical to me that cars would not stop on a roundabout in such circumstances but I'll have to follow the prevailing rules.

only if the pedestrian was already in the road you understand, not if they are just waiting to cross

ballooba

djimi wrote: »

I can understand a roundabout being a little different in that cars on a roundabout should not have to stop unnecessarily, but I really dont think right of way matters too much in this case; pedestrians might not be "allowed" to cross somewhere, but regardless, the person who is walking across the road has right of way in that the alternative is they get run down...

Does that mean you can't buzz them to teach them a lesson?:p

CiniO

OSI wrote: »

I'm not allowed to run on the street now?

And are you?

Pedestrians running through the street might be highly dangerous.

46. (1) A pedestrian shall exercise care and take all reasonable precautions in order to avoid causing danger or inconvenience to traffic and other pedestrians.

So yes - In my opinion, you are not allowed to cross the street while running.

coolbeans

A few people seem to think that peds should yield to cars but when you think about it this does not compute. Cars need to be licensed to use the road whereas pedestrians have a natural right to same.
Also, people were here long before cars and will, I suspect, be there long after the car is gone the way of the dodo.
Peds are also the most vulnerable class of road user and therefore it stands to reason from a legal viwpoint that they should be granted the most privileges. Conversely, motorised vehicles are potentially dangerous to those who have a natural right to use the road and as such they must yield and always be mindful of the more entitled road user i.e. the ped.
Simples.

CiniO

OSI wrote: »

It's ridiculous to suggest a person cannot run on the street as a pedestrian.

That was one of the first things you learn in your life, even before school.
I was always told (since I was probably about 3) to cross the street by walking, not running. Doesn't it make sense to you?

Next you'll be telling me I'm supposed to indicate when following the flow of the carraigeway. Oh, wait.

No. You are supposed to indicate when altering course, so f.e. when you are turning left or right.
:P

CiniO

coolbeans wrote: »

A few people seem to think that peds should yield to cars but when you think about it this does not compute. Cars need to be licensed to use the road whereas pedestrians have a natural right to same.

No, they don't have any natural right to use the roads.
They can use the roads, provided they obey the rules of the road which apply to them.
Fact they are unlicenced doesn't relive them from knowing and obeying the law.

F.e pedestrians are not allowed on motorways, and I can't really see much of a drivers fault if pedestrian gets hit by a car at 120km/h on the motorway, while he was running across it.

creedp

coolbeans wrote: »

A few people seem to think that peds should yield to cars but when you think about it this does not compute. Cars need to be licensed to use the road whereas pedestrians have a natural right to same.
Also, people were here long before cars and will, I suspect, be there long after the car is gone the way of the dodo.
Peds are also the most vulnerable class of road user and therefore it stands to reason from a legal viwpoint that they should be granted the most privileges. Conversely, motorised vehicles are potentially dangerous to those who have a natural right to use the road and as such they must yield and always be mindful of the more entitled road user i.e. the ped.
Simples.

Is this not a bit sweeping though. I've no problem with the vulnerable thing and therefore the need to protect peds where possible but this unfettered right thing surely could be taken to extremes. Why would a ped be bothered using a ped crossing or crossing at a traffic light .. just tumble out onto the road where ever you feel like it and let the dodgem games begin. Is there any case where a ped could be sanctioned by the Gardai for walking on a roadway in a dangerous manner. Cyclists are also unlicenced and vulnerable road users but that doesn't give them the right to do whatever they like on the road. Surely peds have some personal responsibility for their actions in ROTR terms?

challengemaster

On the note of pedestrians being careless, nearly saw two get run over by being utterly stupid today.

One decided to cross a crossroad/junction with lights, while the lights were green for pedestrians, except he decided to cross diagonally across the centre of the junction, after standing looking at the lights. Obviously the cars had to wait for him, but pure nonsense carry on.

The other lad, decided he wouldn't look before walking straight out in front of a motorbike. And continued walking. Lucky the guy on the motorbike was quick to swerve around him.