If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a red
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
What is the accepted policy regarding a red traffic light that appears
to be stuck on red?
At what point is it acceptable to cross the red light?
Is it a defence to say "I thought the light was malfunctioning" when
crossing it?
J Newman <jenniferkatenewman@gmail.com> wrote in news:vnoehh$ql7o$1@dont- email.me:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a red
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
AFAIAA it is an absolute offence to pass a traffic light signal at red meaning that there can be no successful defence to it[1]. Given that a cautious person might choose to turn around and find another route avoiding the faulty signal.
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a red
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
On 2025-02-03, Peter Walker <not@for.mail> wrote:
J Newman <jenniferkatenewman@gmail.com> wrote in
news:vnoehh$ql7o$1@dont- email.me:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a
red traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling
to amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
AFAIAA it is an absolute offence to pass a traffic light signal at
red meaning that there can be no successful defence to it[1]. Given
that a cautious person might choose to turn around and find another
route avoiding the faulty signal.
What would this cautious person do if it was a one-way street?
Or if another car comes up behind, making retreat impossible?
J Newman <jenniferkatenewman@gmail.com> wrote in
news:vnoehh$ql7o$1@dont- email.me:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a redAFAIAA it is an absolute offence to pass a traffic light signal at red meaning that there can be no successful defence to it[1]. Given that a cautious person might choose to turn around and find another route
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
avoiding the faulty signal.
[1] Quite possible that it is not even a defence to have been directed
to pass the red signal by a policeman in uniform. Being a cautious
person I have refused to pass a (non fautly) red signal when directed by
a VIP police escort who wished to clear the way for their charge and
waited for the green signal.
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:42:16 +0000, Peter Walker wrote:
J Newman <jenniferkatenewman@gmail.com> wrote in
news:vnoehh$ql7o$1@dont- email.me:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through aAFAIAA it is an absolute offence to pass a traffic light signal at
red traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling
to amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
red meaning that there can be no successful defence to it[1]. Given
that a cautious person might choose to turn around and find another
route avoiding the faulty signal.
[1] Quite possible that it is not even a defence to have been
directed to pass the red signal by a policeman in uniform. Being a
cautious person I have refused to pass a (non fautly) red signal when
directed by a VIP police escort who wished to clear the way for their
charge and waited for the green signal.
IIRC being directed by a policeman is a defence to the charge (you
still have to drive with due care and attention though).
However, case law has established that sirens/blue lights are not an instruction from a policeman, and if you cross the line in response to
them and are snapped by a camera ... well you broke the law.
Again IIRC the Highway Code says you MUST not break the law to
accommodate an emergency vehicle.
Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote in news:vnqljf$1sc4r$42@dont-email.me:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2025 11:42:16 +0000, Peter Walker wrote:
J Newman <jenniferkatenewman@gmail.com> wrote in
news:vnoehh$ql7o$1@dont- email.me:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through aAFAIAA it is an absolute offence to pass a traffic light signal at
red traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling
to amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
red meaning that there can be no successful defence to it[1]. Given
that a cautious person might choose to turn around and find another
route avoiding the faulty signal.
[1] Quite possible that it is not even a defence to have been
directed to pass the red signal by a policeman in uniform. Being a
cautious person I have refused to pass a (non fautly) red signal when
directed by a VIP police escort who wished to clear the way for their
charge and waited for the green signal.
IIRC being directed by a policeman is a defence to the charge (you
still have to drive with due care and attention though).
However, case law has established that sirens/blue lights are not an
instruction from a policeman, and if you cross the line in response to
them and are snapped by a camera ... well you broke the law.
Again IIRC the Highway Code says you MUST not break the law to
accommodate an emergency vehicle.
That is exactly the case, the official line is that general motorists are
not trained to assess the risk of passing a signal at red and so the
offence must be sustained. Emergency personnel are trained and permitted
to do so. Frequently around here (ambulance depot plus A&E nearby) the emergency crew will aproach on blues & twos, turn off sirens on approach
and blip to make awareness and encourage drivers to make space available
for passing but not 'bully' the queue into violating the red. Ambulance drivers generally impeccable in their traffic avoidance manoevers, local plods on the takeaway run less so.
J Newman wrote:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a redAn interesting question.
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
Rule 176 of the Highway Code says:
"You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is
showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is
room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a
position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care."
... but what does "not working" mean? I would suggest that being frozen
in one condition is "not working", so have always "proceed(ed) with
great care".
On 03/02/2025 12:56, No mail wrote:
J Newman wrote:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a redAn interesting question.
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
Rule 176 of the Highway Code says:
"You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is
showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is
room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a
position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the
situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care."
... but what does "not working" mean? I would suggest that being frozen
in one condition is "not working", so have always "proceed(ed) with
great care".
I was going to quote rule 176 too. My interpretation is do what a
reasonable person would do. The real question is then how many minutes
do you wait on red before believing the lights are "not working"?
The rule:
https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-junctions.html
quotes:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/36
Yet that is to with signs that are fixed in nature not traffic lights.
On 2025-02-03, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
On 03/02/2025 12:56, No mail wrote:
J Newman wrote:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a redAn interesting question.
traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
Rule 176 of the Highway Code says:
"You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is
showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is
room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a
position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat the >>> situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great care." >>> ... but what does "not working" mean? I would suggest that being frozen
in one condition is "not working", so have always "proceed(ed) with
great care".
I was going to quote rule 176 too. My interpretation is do what a
reasonable person would do. The real question is then how many minutes
do you wait on red before believing the lights are "not working"?
The rule:
https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-junctions.html
quotes:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/36
Yet that is to with signs that are fixed in nature not traffic lights.
No, it covers traffic lights too - it references the Road Traffic
Regulation Act 1984, which is used by The Traffic Signs Regulations
and General Directions 2016, Schedule 14 of which defines signs
including traffic lights.
Unless I've missed it though, it doesn't actually define anything
much that would help anyone know what "working" means. In particular,
if a light is stuck on red then I don't think there's anything that
says that's broken. Or - a question I've asked here before - if the
lights are covered with slats which mean you can't see them until
you've already passed the stop line, whether that counts as a proper
traffic light or not.
As I said earlier, the HC states "If the traffic lights are not
working, treat the situation as you would an unmarked junction and
proceed with great care" ... surely, if they're stuck in one condition
then they aren't working.
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 13:45:16 +0000, Fredxx wrote:
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
But another might not.
Is that justice ? And if it isn't does anyone care ?
I suspect that if a jury were involved (and I can't see how unless the signal offence was an element of a more serious crime) the judge would tell them that
a lit red light meant the signals were*not* inoperative as a matter of law.
On 4 Feb 2025 at 15:28:18 GMT, "Jethro_uk" <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 13:45:16 +0000, Fredxx wrote:
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
But another might not.
Is that justice ? And if it isn't does anyone care ?
I suspect that if a jury were involved (and I can't see how unless the signal offence was an element of a more serious crime) the judge would tell them that
a lit red light meant the signals were *not* inoperative as a matter of law.
On 4 Feb 2025 at 15:28:18 GMT, "Jethro_uk" <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 13:45:16 +0000, Fredxx wrote:
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
But another might not.
Is that justice ? And if it isn't does anyone care ?
I suspect that if a jury were involved (and I can't see how unless the signal offence was an element of a more serious crime) the judge would tell them that
a lit red light meant the signals were *not* inoperative as a matter of law.
On 03/02/2025 22:56, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-02-03, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
On 03/02/2025 12:56, No mail wrote:
J Newman wrote:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a red >>>>> traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling toAn interesting question.
amber/green or flashing?
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I
thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an
acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
Rule 176 of the Highway Code says:
"You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is
showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is >>>> room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a
position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working, treat
the
situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great
care."
... but what does "not working" mean? I would suggest that being frozen >>>> in one condition is "not working", so have always "proceed(ed) with
great care".
I was going to quote rule 176 too. My interpretation is do what a
reasonable person would do. The real question is then how many minutes
do you wait on red before believing the lights are "not working"?
The rule:
https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-junctions.html
quotes:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/36
Yet that is to with signs that are fixed in nature not traffic lights.
No, it covers traffic lights too - it references the Road Traffic
Regulation Act 1984, which is used by The Traffic Signs Regulations
and General Directions 2016, Schedule 14 of which defines signs
including traffic lights.
Unless I've missed it though, it doesn't actually define anything
much that would help anyone know what "working" means. In particular,
if a light is stuck on red then I don't think there's anything that
says that's broken. Or - a question I've asked here before - if the
lights are covered with slats which mean you can't see them until
you've already passed the stop line, whether that counts as a proper
traffic light or not.
As you say there is no legal definition of a broken traffic light.
As someone who has worked extensively with software, then anything that doesn't substantially work in the way intended it is considered broken.
It's becoming parlance to say a website with a fundamental fault is
'broken'.
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
On 04/02/2025 13:45, Fredxx wrote:
On 03/02/2025 22:56, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-02-03, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.invalid> wrote:
On 03/02/2025 12:56, No mail wrote:
J Newman wrote:
If one has been waiting for a long time, is it OK to go through a red >>>>>> traffic light that appears to be malfunctioning and not cycling to >>>>>> amber/green or flashing?An interesting question.
If there is a camera there that gets your car's number plate, is "I >>>>>> thought it was malfunctioning after it didn't cycle for 10 mins" an >>>>>> acceptable defence? What if it really was not malfunctioning?
What are you supposed to do? Call the cops?
Rule 176 of the Highway Code says:
"You MUST NOT move forward over the white line when the red light is >>>>> showing. Only go forward when the traffic lights are green if there is >>>>> room for you to clear the junction safely or you are taking up a
position to turn right. If the traffic lights are not working,
treat the
situation as you would an unmarked junction and proceed with great
care."
... but what does "not working" mean? I would suggest that being
frozen
in one condition is "not working", so have always "proceed(ed) with
great care".
I was going to quote rule 176 too. My interpretation is do what a
reasonable person would do. The real question is then how many minutes >>>> do you wait on red before believing the lights are "not working"?
The rule:
https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/road-junctions.html
quotes:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/36
Yet that is to with signs that are fixed in nature not traffic lights.
No, it covers traffic lights too - it references the Road Traffic
Regulation Act 1984, which is used by The Traffic Signs Regulations
and General Directions 2016, Schedule 14 of which defines signs
including traffic lights.
Unless I've missed it though, it doesn't actually define anything
much that would help anyone know what "working" means. In particular,
if a light is stuck on red then I don't think there's anything that
says that's broken. Or - a question I've asked here before - if the
lights are covered with slats which mean you can't see them until
you've already passed the stop line, whether that counts as a proper
traffic light or not.
As you say there is no legal definition of a broken traffic light.
As someone who has worked extensively with software, then anything
that doesn't substantially work in the way intended it is considered
broken. It's becoming parlance to say a website with a fundamental
fault is 'broken'.
I might be on dogy ground but if I was a juror and the defendant said
the lights were broken, say for being on red for 5 minutes, I would
acquit them.
I would have thought it would more depend on whether the driver hit
another car with the same idea.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 08:45:53 |
| Calls: | 10,388 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,835 |
| Posted today: | 1 |