Moving over a red light line to let an emergency vehicle through Options

[Soadfan1]

So this just happened today, In Walthamstow, London.

Situation was that I was in the right lane of 2 lanes of traffic stationary at a red light. An emergency vehicle sped up behind me flashing and beeping.

After a few second deliberation I made sure evetyhingf was safe and edged forward about 6 yards through the red light into the junction and he sped past and I reversed back again.

At this particular junction there is no other traffic moving into the unction whilst our lights are red so it was not dangerous so to speak.

I just assumed that would obviously be the right thing to do, however since I have read that you can actually be fined for such an event.

Please tell me this isnt true, because it would be disgusting.

Am I likely to receive anything, and can it easily be appealed?

Thanks

[Advertisement]

[DancingDad]

another good reason to have dashcams fitted.

To spot the errant apostrophe ?


I did have the opposite problem a month or so back.
Two lanes of traffic at lights, lights on red.

I'm second from the lights in the queue, hear blues and twos behind, see an ambulance some 10 cars back starting to creep up the centre as cars moved to side.
Lights turn to green...bloke in front of me doesn't move !!!!
Legal and sensible to move across the lights and then wait when there is space for the ambulance to overtake but no, moron sits there!

[rd250dx]

another good reason to have dashcams fitted.

To spot the errant apostrophe ?


I did have the opposite problem a month or so back.
Two lanes of traffic at lights, lights on red.

I'm second from the lights in the queue, hear blues and twos behind, see an ambulance some 10 cars back starting to creep up the centre as cars moved to side.
Lights turn to green...bloke in front of me doesn't move !!!!
Legal and sensible to move across the lights and then wait when there is space for the ambulance to overtake but no, moron sits there!

Or maybe to spot the wrongly placed question mark?

[DancingDad]

…..Or maybe to spot the wrongly placed question mark?

Aye, pesky things move about

[rd250dx]

…..Or maybe to spot the wrongly placed question mark?

Aye, pesky things move about

[cp8759]

I am not simple, however I do understand that whilst sat in a car at a red light I am not in a position to determine if an emergency vehicle is on a life or death run or just going off shift late
....
It's a bit like speeding, an absolute offence, you either did or didn't do it. How the bench treats you is in the lap of the god's.

You have however completely missed the point. It is not up to you to decide whether the emergency vehicle driver is entitled to use any legal exemptions, you must comply with red lights unless directed to go through them by a uniformed police officer.

But there are other examples where it would be perfectly lawful in the UK to drive through red lights, it would clearly be lawful in circumstances such as these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjl4KlQiTYY

You might want to read up on duress of circumstances.

[mickR]

Unmarked cars often have plain clothes officers on board so I guess would assume not have the power to instruct you to cross the line.
My take is that if an ambulance or fire appliance is still sounding siren while obstructed there would be good reason and therefore I would move and take the chance.
More so if it's pod in a marked car. Not so sure about unmarked cars tho.

[cp8759]

My take is that if an ambulance or fire appliance is still sounding siren while obstructed there would be good reason and therefore I would move and take the chance.

People have gone to court over incidents like that and been convicted. You might take the view that you're doing what is morally the right thing, but you'd still be breaking the law.

As for the issue of police uniform, section 35 RTA 1988 doesn't say they have to be in uniform, so strictly speaking I suppose a plain clothes officer could give such a direction.

[southpaw82]

Unless it’s fallen by the wayside constables also had a power at common law to regulate traffic on a highway.

[666]

My take is that if an ambulance or fire appliance is still sounding siren while obstructed there would be good reason and therefore I would move and take the chance.

People have gone to court over incidents like that and been convicted. You might take the view that you're doing what is morally the right thing, but you'd still be breaking the law.

As for the issue of police uniform, section 35 RTA 1988 doesn't say they have to be in uniform, so strictly speaking I suppose a plain clothes officer could give such a direction.

Is that the relevant legislation? Section 35 refers to a constable who "is for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic in a road", i.e. not racing to an incident.

The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, section 36(2) says:

"Vehicular traffic proceeding beyond a stop line in accordance with paragraph (1) shall proceed with due regard to the safety of other road users and subject to any direction given by a constable in uniform or a traffic warden or to any other applicable prohibition or restriction."

This post has been edited by 666: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 - 16:04

[cp8759]

666 the 2002 regulations were repealed over 3 years ago, you'll have to find the 2016 equivalent provision.

[DancingDad]

666 the 2002 regulations were repealed over 3 years ago, you'll have to find the 2016 equivalent provision.

Schedule 14, part 1 (4) (14)

"(14) Vehicular traffic proceeding beyond a stop line must proceed with due regard to the safety of other road users and subject to any direction given by a constable in uniform, a traffic officer in uniform or a traffic warden or to any other applicable prohibition or restriction"

[666]

666 the 2002 regulations were repealed over 3 years ago, you'll have to find the 2016 equivalent provision.

Schedule 14, part 1 (4) (14)

"(14) Vehicular traffic proceeding beyond a stop line must proceed with due regard to the safety of other road users and subject to any direction given by a constable in uniform, a traffic officer in uniform or a traffic warden or to any other applicable prohibition or restriction"

Plus ca change ...

[mickR]

Unless it’s fallen by the wayside constables also had a power at common law to regulate traffic on a highway.

When not uniformed?

[DancingDad]

666 the 2002 regulations were repealed over 3 years ago, you'll have to find the 2016 equivalent provision.

Schedule 14, part 1 (4) (14)

"(14) Vehicular traffic proceeding beyond a stop line must proceed with due regard to the safety of other road users and subject to any direction given by a constable in uniform, a traffic officer in uniform or a traffic warden or to any other applicable prohibition or restriction"

Plus ca change ...

It does beg the question, why differentiate between a constable and a traffic officer ?

[southpaw82]

Unless it’s fallen by the wayside constables also had a power at common law to regulate traffic on a highway.

When not uniformed?

Indeed, so far as I’ve seen the cases (which are old) don’t make a distinction.

666 the 2002 regulations were repealed over 3 years ago, you'll have to find the 2016 equivalent provision.

Schedule 14, part 1 (4) (14)

"(14) Vehicular traffic proceeding beyond a stop line must proceed with due regard to the safety of other road users and subject to any direction given by a constable in uniform, a traffic officer in uniform or a traffic warden or to any other applicable prohibition or restriction"

Plus ca change ...

It does beg the question, why differentiate between a constable and a traffic officer ?

Traffic officer = Highways Agency Traffic Officer, not police traffic officer.

This post has been edited by southpaw82: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 - 20:19

[DancingDad]

...........Traffic officer = Highways Agency Traffic Officer, not police traffic officer.

Ah.
Thanks

[The Slithy Tove]

But there are other examples where it would be perfectly lawful in the UK to drive through red lights, it would clearly be lawful in circumstances such as these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjl4KlQiTYY

You might want to read up on duress of circumstances.

What about this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5J1dCQVkbI&t=180s

[andy_foster]

What about this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5J1dCQVkbI&t=180s

Would you like to give us a clue as to which part of the 10 1/2 minute video you linked to might (or probably might not) be relevant to duress of circumstances?

[The Slithy Tove]

What about this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5J1dCQVkbI&t=180s

Would you like to give us a clue as to which part of the 10 1/2 minute video you linked to might (or probably might not) be relevant to duress of circumstances?

The link should have started the video at the 3 minute mark (the t=180s part of the URL), where the car was shunted very heavily across the stop line by the following car failing to stop.

[cp8759]

Not sure you even need to rely on duress of circumstances for that: the vehicle was pushed across the stop line by the vehicle behind it, which is circumstances beyond the control of the driver. Even for strict liability offences, the courts to not generally impose liability for actions which are beyond the wilful control of a person as it is assumed that Parliament intends that a law abiding person who makes every effort to comply with the law will have an opportunity to do so.