Petition : Call for 3 points + £100 fine for NOT using indicators when driving

[fullupandslowingdown]

I have to confess to having a ROADAR qualification (similar to IAM but we are re-tested every three years)......

Ah previously known as the ROSPA available in Gold, Silver and Bronze passes. It was always considered harder to get a Gold pass than the IAM.

I think most of us put our seat belts on automatically now. If we were to get fined for not indicating in the way the Aussie Police do it, i.e they look out specifically for that offence at junctions, then maybe we would reach a point where we feel bad or nauseous if we didn't indicate. But as previously said there are often locations where you have to rethink when to indicate to avoid confusing other road users. Which is exactly why it's a brilliant idea to do an advanced course and get your brain switched on to thinking at the higher level.

[james01]

My petition:

3 penalty points and £100 fine for not using indicators on the road.

Introduce 3 penalty points on driving license and £100 fine for not using the indicators on the road.

What about an exemption for drivers who just can't help it, eg. BMW drivers, taxi drivers ?

[ukmtk]

I used to write to the DfT regarding road safety.
I think that a sentence that ALL drivers should be able to repeat accurately (including the written test) is:

The sole responsibility of a driver is to drive their vehicle safely.

It should be what each lesson starts/ends with.

[MOARspeed]

Sorry, but I think the part before the indicating is the most important, automatically indicating all the time does NOT equate always looking and using one's mirrors..... In fact it's people who indicate automatically, usually skip the part where you check for other road users.

[rmurphy195]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=136190&p=1457313&hilit=indicator#p1457313

I'm reminded of my working days, gathering business information to put together sytem designs. Would often have signoff stalled - one group of people wanting something from the system, another wanting the (mutually exclusive) opposite. Some "interesting" negotiating!

[rmurphy195]

Sorry, but I think the part before the indicating is the most important, automatically indicating all the time does NOT equate always looking and using one's mirrors..... In fact it's people who indicate automatically, usually skip the part where you check for other road users.

Nope, I automatically check mirrors as well! "Mirror, Signal, Manouvre"

[AndyK]

Sorry, but I think the part before the indicating is the most important, automatically indicating all the time does NOT equate always looking and using one's mirrors..... In fact it's people who indicate automatically, usually skip the part where you check for other road users.

Nope, I automatically check mirrors as well! "Mirror, Signal, Manouvre"

MOARspeed makes a good general point; I don't think it was aimed at you personally. I have seen plenty drivers who obviously think it's enough to signal, and then it's up to everyone else to get out of their way.

My driving instructor <mumble> years ago was very keen on the idea that you should use the indicators only if there's another road user there to see the signal. (Cyclists and pedestrians were included in his definition of road user, of course.) I suggested that even if there wasn't anyone, surely it was a good idea to indicate just in case I'd missed someone. His response: If I wasn't completely sure whether there was anyone else around or not, it meant I hadn't looked hard enough before before I signalled.

[MOARspeed]

Sorry, but I think the part before the indicating is the most important, automatically indicating all the time does NOT equate always looking and using one's mirrors..... In fact it's people who indicate automatically, usually skip the part where you check for other road users.

Nope, I automatically check mirrors as well! "Mirror, Signal, Manouvre"

MOARspeed makes a good general point; I don't think it was aimed at you personally. I have seen plenty drivers who obviously think it's enough to signal, and then it's up to everyone else to get out of their way.

My driving instructor <mumble> years ago was very keen on the idea that you should use the indicators only if there's another road user there to see the signal. (Cyclists and pedestrians were included in his definition of road user, of course.) I suggested that even if there wasn't anyone, surely it was a good idea to indicate just in case I'd missed someone. His response: If I wasn't completely sure whether there was anyone else around or not, it meant I hadn't looked hard enough before before I signalled.

My thinking is more like "who is around and at what point will my signal obviously mean what I want it to mean?", the obvious scenario being where two side roads are close together and someone is waiting to exit (or enter) the first one.
Yes, people are supposed to wait and not simply rely on signals, but an accident hurts just as much whether you're in the wrong or right.

The one that annoys me, is when people indicate right to go straight over a roundabout form the LH lane, I don't know why this happens, it's always the 50+ generations, I think at some point in some parts of the country, driving instructors used to wrongly teach this. I've encountered it a few times, and nearly ended up with a huge pileup behind me as I had to stop just in case the driver was actually going right.