Frank exchange of words with black cabbie New Topic Reply to Topic

North-bound, London Bridge, three lanes, I'm in the left hand lane,
he's in the middle.

I'm doing about 20 mph, he ducks into my lane without indicating, I jam
the brakes on and skirt around to his offside.

"Gimme a chance mate, use your indicators!"


"I don't need to indicate"

he said

"I'm going straight on!"


He accelerated off, I set of after him and catch him in traffic by the
B of E. His window's open, I can see he's clocked me, I go up.

"Mate, you swung into my lane"

I said, reasonably.


"Tchuh, this is the problem, you people"

he began, so I became as reasonable as I could with my legs still
shaking.


"Mate, you weren't indicating, your offside brake light's bust too".


"Oh, that's my fault is it? Tell Ken".


All this said in a fairly even-voiced way, he banged on a bit more
about how he was going straight on so didn't need to indicate (?) and
then the traffic moved off.


Blatantly in the wrong and he COULD NOT admit it.

spindrift wrote:
"Gimme a chance mate, use your indicators!"


"I don't need to indicate"

he said

And he's correct. He's wrong to force you to brake, of course - that's bad
observation / bad driving by him - but if he was given a clear lane (yes, I
know he didn't get one, because you were in it), then he doesn't need to
indicate. The rule of the road is to keep left. If a driver is in an
overtaking lane, he should move back to the left hand land when safe.

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)

Pete.

Sorry, I wasn't clear.

He's STATIONARY in a queue at the lights. I'm in the empty left hand
lane, he swerves out dead ahead of me and blocks the lane. Had I hit
him he would have been culpable, indicating or no.

What got me was the preumption of innocence and the attitude, i was
entirely polite.

Wish I'd got his number, at least to report his bust light.

This is a professional driver who doesn't check his mirrors or maintain
his vehicle.

P wrote:
spindrift wrote:
"Gimme a chance mate, use your indicators!"


"I don't need to indicate"

he said

And he's correct. He's wrong to force you to brake, of course -
that's bad observation / bad driving by him - but if he was given a
clear lane (yes, I know he didn't get one, because you were in it),

So he was wrong then!

then he doesn't need to indicate. The rule of the road is to keep
left. If a driver is in an overtaking lane, he should move back to
the left hand land when safe.
(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police
class 1 driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into
a left-hand lane, and the above was his explanation.)

Pete.

What did he specify that you were doing wrong by indicating when you didn't
need to?

"P" writes:

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)

That's odd. I was told by my driving instructor to indicate before every
significant change of direction, and changing lanes (in any
direction) certainly fell into that category.

Roos

On 03 Aug 2006 08:14:23 GMT, Roos Eisma wrote:
"P" writes:

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)

That's odd. I was told by my driving instructor to indicate before every
significant change of direction, and changing lanes (in any
direction) certainly fell into that category.

I think there's a certain tendency amongst serious police drivers to
teach how they have been taught to drive, and it's not actually
applicable to normal driving.

I was taught by a recently serious police driver (who'd just given up
policing to take up driver instructering) and taken out for some
practice by a current serious police driver, and taken out again after
I passed for some motorway practice by a current serious police
driver. The actual instructor taught the indicate at a drop of a hat
approach, as you describe. The current police driver (who at the time
was a teacher-of-serious-police-drivers, I think) was much more of the
'don't indicate if it's not necessary' school.

I put it down to serious police drivers don't indicate if they don't
think it necessary, because they:

a: have the experience, practice and skill to reach the right decision
regarding whether it is necessary

b: are likely to be in a situation where indicating is detrimental -
if you're proceeding at 180mph you don't want to take one hand off
the wheel if it's not necessary.

A learner, and an average inattentive driver, is better defaulting to
indicate whenever, and is better not being so close to their limits.


As to the 'right' approach - I don't indicate when it's not necessary,
but positively tend to err on the indicating side. I don't indicate
if I'm pulling back after going past a HGV on a fairly quiet motorway
- everyone should expect me to pull back in. I do indicate every
manoeuvre during the day in a built-up area, because there might be a
vehicle or pedestrian that might benefit from some notice that I'm up
to something.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Ian Smith writed in
:

As to the 'right' approach - I don't indicate when it's not necessary,
but positively tend to err on the indicating side. I don't indicate
if I'm pulling back after going past a HGV on a fairly quiet motorway
- everyone should expect me to pull back in. I do indicate every
manoeuvre during the day in a built-up area, because there might be a
vehicle or pedestrian that might benefit from some notice that I'm up
to something.

regards, Ian SMith

I generally tend to follow your approach.
I have been told that 'there's too much to take in at 70 on a motorway as
it is, so the less signalling that goes on the better' by plod, which
seems a reasonable way of looking at it.
As for in town, and when cycling, I generally use the 'who's going to see
me, even if I can't see them?' approach, and indicate by default.

Roos Eisma wrote:

That's odd. I was told by my driving instructor to indicate before
every significant change of direction, and changing lanes (in any
direction) certainly fell into that category.

That's a difference between 'driving tuition' and 'advanced driving
tuition'.

When you're learning to drive, it is safest to always indicate. It
won't do any harm if you indicate when you don't need to, and it saves
you from making an error of judgement about whether you need to and
failing to indicate when you should.

Advanced driving takes the premise that if there are no road users
around who will benefit from your signal, there is no point in giving
one [1]. If you indicate when there is clearly no need to, you are
deemed to not be sufficiently aware of the road around you and not
paying enough attention to notice that there is no-one nearby.

So when pulling back to the left-hand lane after overtaking another
car, there is no need to indicate, as (i) that is the correct course
of action to take, and (ii) once you are past them, you will be moving
away from them, so they won't need to take any action when you do pull
back in.

On the other hand, when pulling back into the middle lane after
overtaking, I almost invariably _do_ indicate, in case there is a car
that I haven't see in the left-hand lane.

[1] You must, of course, account for potential road users. If you
don't have a clear view all round, you should indicate in case
there is someone who is just out of sight, even if you can't see
them at the time.

--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

P wrote:

And he's correct. He's wrong to force you to brake, of course - that's bad
observation / bad driving by him - but if he was given a clear lane (yes, I
know he didn't get one, because you were in it), then he doesn't need to
indicate. The rule of the road is to keep left. If a driver is in an
overtaking lane, he should move back to the left hand land when safe.

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)

And I would disagree with you and him. If you are changing your course,
then you should signal your intentions. That is the first principle.
Keep left comes secondary to that.

BTW, where is this 'overtaking lane'? If the traffic is stationary in
queues (as it was) then overtaking can be done wherever and lane
changes should be signalled.

There is no harm in signalling left and if that signal will benefit
someone else then one should do so.

...d

P wrote on 03/08/2006 09:00 +0100:

And he's correct. He's wrong to force you to brake, of course - that's bad
observation / bad driving by him - but if he was given a clear lane (yes, I
know he didn't get one, because you were in it), then he doesn't need to
indicate. The rule of the road is to keep left. If a driver is in an
overtaking lane, he should move back to the left hand land when safe.

(When I took my advanced driving test, I was told off by the police class 1
driver in the passenger seat for indicating when moving into a left-hand
lane, and the above was his explanation.)


Can't agree with that. What is the problem with giving a signal? Worst
case is it's no use, best case it might help inform someone of your
intended actions. So there is no downside, only upside giving a median
of positive benefit and therefore worth doing.

Also the Highway Code says:

"Lane discipline

112: If you need to change lane, first use your mirrors and check your
blind spots (the areas you are unable to see in the mirrors) to make
sure you will not force another driver or rider to swerve or slow down.
When it is safe to do so, signal to indicate your intentions to other
road users and when clear move over."


--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci