Turning a blind-eye to monocular motorists

[Revolution]

To pass the time while waiting for a bus I counted the cars that passed with defective headlights.
This was at 7pm and a reasonably busy road. I was there for about 20 minutes and calculated that around 8% of all vehicles had only one headlight working [I ignored the 2 taxis that were driving on just sidelights!]
The cars I observed were missing headlights not tail or breaklights [I didn’t count those] So the drivers were aware of the defect so about 1 in every 12 vehicles is blatantly breaking the law.
I am tempted to write to the local constabulary to ask how many vehicles have been stopped for this illegal activity but I kind of know the answer - none.
I’m tempted to ask the police why they turn a blind eye to this potentially lethal behaviour but I’m pretty sure the response would have something to do with resources, available staff etc.
I’m also certain that the real reason is more likely to be not wanting to upset the Mail-reading, Clarkson-ites who would see this as petty and not what the police should be focusing on.

[mjr]

And if the police do stop them, they'll usually get two weeks to fix it and avoid a fine under the vehicle defect rectification system.

[karlt]

Actually, I've had a light go and not been aware of it; if all your driving is in well lit areas it's quite possible, especially if it's the offside. Couple that with the fact that on quite a few cars now headlamp bulb replacement is a garage item (I kid you not) and I'm not sure justice would be particularly served by handing out tickets rather than using the aforementioned scheme.

[661-Pete]

I ignored the 2 taxis that were driving on just sidelights!

It is not illegal to drive at night with sidelights only, provided you are in a well lit street, usually one with a 30mph limit. I sometimes do so, when I feel that headlights are superfluous.

[661-Pete]

Actually, I've had a light go and not been aware of it; if all your driving is in well lit areas it's quite possible, especially if it's the offside. Couple that with the fact that on quite a few cars now headlamp bulb replacement is a garage item (I kid you not) and I'm not sure justice would be particularly served by handing out tickets rather than using the aforementioned scheme.

I wonder how many cars feature a warning indication on the fascia, for headlight failure? In fact, I don't even know if my own car has one, but I rather doubt it... Best way to check is when you are stationary and drawn up behind another vehicle.

[Brucey]

I had a Honda with headlight and tail-light failure warning as far back as 1986. It worked perfectly and in the case of the rear lights would tell you if just one out four bulbs had failed.

Similar systems were available on cars like BMWs up to ten years earlier than that.

I don't know why they are not compulsory. Having said that there is no guarantee that everyone will actually correct a fault if indicated.

BTW it has been my observation that car bulbs, (especially replacement car bulbs) have been 'commoditised' to the point that they are so cheaply made that they don't actually last more than five minutes these days. I've bought 'Ring' bulbs (no choice in an emergency) in two-packs and neither bulb has lasted more than a few weeks. I've averaged two tail-light bulbs a year (from six, fortunately...) in my car in recent years.

Some car owners have gotten so cheesed off with it that they actively seek out OEM bulbs with a proven life rating (like Japanese 'Stanley' ones) even if they cost ten times as much as cheap ones. Others just change bulbs when they have to, it seems; when the MOT comes....

cheers

[jezer]

I've noticed more cars with defective headlights this winter than ever before. The worst are right hand lights completely out, as they look like motorbikes until you get really close. This could be fatal on narrow lanes. I used to give them a couple of flashes to warn the drivers, but I'm afraid there are so many now that I've stopped doing it for fear of damaging my own bulbs. Some cars seem worse than others, my Fiesta hasn't blown a bulb in almost four years of ownership, although I expect most manufacturers fit the same standard lights. Is it my imagination or are some so called up market cars now fitted with really dazzling headlights? I find driving at night really trying these days

[horizon]

On Wednesday I stopped a Land Rover Discovery that had one headlamp not working. He had followed me for about half a mile through traffic along a road that had a couple of turn-offs. I use a mirror and was never quite sure in the melee of headlamps if he was still behind me. He thanked me of course for my helpfulness (no, really ).

[squeaker]

Is it my imagination or are some so called up market cars now fitted with really dazzling headlights? I find driving at night really trying these days

Don't get me started - it's a major issue IMHO, and a case of the vehicle lighting regs lagging well behind lighting technology Also see other threads on here relating to dazzle from small size headights.

[Tonyf33]

I've noticed

That's all that needs to be said, for all the wasted breath about car headlights etc, we still manage quite ably to 'see' these vehicles, same as ninja cyclists and those wearing black..funny isn't it how quite a few still manage to knock off those that are wearing hi-vis and are lit like christmas trees but most normal people will still notice/see those that are not lit up that well by comparison..

[Revolution]

I take the point that some replacement bulbs may fail, although this has never been my experience. I am also surprised by karit's comment

on quite a few cars now headlamp bulb replacement is a garage item

That seems crazy
however, isn't carrying a spare tyres a legal requirement for cars? Why can't carrying spare bulbs also be so. I have a pack from Halfords specific to my car - cost £10 and has a replacement for every bulb in the car + a couple of fuses.

[Bicycler]

It isn't a requirement to have spare tyres or bulbs in the UK. Tyres are more of a convenience issue than a safety one, it's hard to drive any distance on a punctured tyre but plenty of people are obviously happy to ignore blown bulbs. However, I agree about bulbs and in some parts of Europe drivers are required to carry spares (plus hi-vis and warning triangles for breakdowns). There's no reason why we couldn't have the same requirements though, as someone said upthread, changing bulbs is not straightforward on a lot of modern cars.

[kwackers]

Why can't carrying spare bulbs also be so. I have a pack from Halfords specific to my car - cost £10 and has a replacement for every bulb in the car + a couple of fuses.

Might have been a realistic option a few years ago but given the growing number of LED lights any attempt to change the law now would be pointless. Give it another couple of years and there'll be no user changeable lighting on a modern car.

[mjr]

I've noticed

That's all that needs to be said, for all the wasted breath about car headlights etc, we still manage quite ably to 'see' these vehicles, same as ninja cyclists and.. .

At least ninjas are consistently unlit. A mislit car is too easy to mistake for a moped or moto. They're in the higher category of annoying and dangerous like those nutters with red lights on the front of their bikes (oh look there's a bike going the same way ahead / splat as it closes in over twice as quick as expected).

[Tonyf33]

I've noticed

That's all that needs to be said, for all the wasted breath about car headlights etc, we still manage quite ably to 'see' these vehicles, same as ninja cyclists and.. .

At least ninjas are consistently unlit. A mislit car is too easy to mistake for a moped or moto. They're in the higher category of annoying and dangerous like those nutters with red lights on the front of their bikes (oh look there's a bike going the same way ahead / splat as it closes in over twice as quick as expected).

Sorry but I completely disagree, a mislit car/van is very easily distinguishable from a two wheeled vehicle by the time you are approaching to make an overtake (if that is indeed safe to do so). If one cannot judge the closing speed of an object in front of you & fail to comprehend that you are gaining, would need to overtake and make adjustments as required then you shouldn't hold a motorvehicle licence, period. That the vehicle in front has one light or two (or none in some very rare cases) should not make much differential in your thought process. If you think that you are approaching a moped/bicycle then you would be giving it a wide berth into the next lane anyhow as a matter of course, so IF somehow you were not able to figure out that the vehicle in front was in fact a car/van etc before you got to it you would still be giving enough passing space.

That however should be a moot point because either you're going far too quickly for the conditions and cannot stop in the distance your headlights show to be clear, hence you would be able to brake in sufficient time NOT to hit them or your judgement is so poor as to not realise in that distance your headlights show that the vehicle in front is in fact NOT a moped/bicycle. At night time knowing when it is safe to overtake much slower moving vehicles & when it isn't is something people are poor at, similarly when objects are in the road and people crash into them because they haven't given themselves any leeway/drive too fast for their eyesight/reactions.