Safe Speed Forums

I picked up a hitchhiker the other day, and he told me an interesting story which sums up the difference between proper traffic police and the civil servants that make up the highways agency traffic officers.

He was standing on the grass on the on-ramp to a motorway, trying to hitch, when the highways agency pull up and start having a go at him. Apparently he isn't allowed to stand on the motorway side of the start of motorway sign and must move to the other side immediately.

He points out that this motorway junction is a roundabout with no-where to stop and that he will be creating a danger just by standing there, anyone who stops will be causing an obstruction, but the "officer" doesn't care, and sure enough he moves up to the roundabout as obstructed.


10 minutes later a copper pulls up and starts having a go at him and tells him to get the hell onto the hard shoulder as his current position is dangerous!

SO he explains to the copper that he was, until the highways agency made him come here, at which point the copper gives his name and collar number and tells him to get the highways agency to phone the control centre if they give him any more hassle. Also, it's not illegal to stand on that side of the sign so long as you remain on the grass, but more importantly it's a hell of a lot safer than on the roundabout part of a 3 level stacked roundabout which is blatantly stupid and dangerous.


20 minutes later, the same highways agency "officer" comes back and starts having a go again, so he tells them to ring the control centre, here's the number, ask for this officer, oh and I'd apprectiate you doing it right here in front of me please. The "officer" then claims not to have a telephone so he points out that it is strapped to their shoulder. They phone up and get a right good bollocking from the police, then go away.



I like this story. For once common sense triumphs over bureaucracy, we learn that there are still a few real police around doing good jobs.

However, it also highlights why we need them back, and need to get rid of the Highways Agency lot.

It's a nice story and I'd like to think it's true, but as far as I understand it, it would technically be illegal for a driver to stop on the hard shoulder to pick up the hitcher so it seems a bit strange for the police to condone motorway hitch hikers.

_________________
Peter Humphries (and a green V8S)

Really? It's illegal to be a pedestrian on a motorway - HC227.
It's illegal to stop on the hard shoulder or slip road (amongst other places, except in an emergency/told to do so by Police) - HC244

I don't think it's illegal to stop on a roundabout (unless part of a clearway)

I seriously doubt a Police Officer would give this advice.

Also does anybody know where the motorway regulations start? Anton made a few comments to an official and it seems there are several possibilities:

1) Where the blue signs are located

2) Where the Act of Parliament, Traffic Regulation Order or similar states (ie. on the plans)

3) Where it is impossible to leave the flow of traffic without committing an offence. (said by the official) Eg. where there are two lanes of traffic, one motorway and one non-motorway divided by a solid line the motorway traffic is subject to motorway regulations. Presumably this would mean that a learner driver in that lane would commit the offence of driving otherwise than in accordance with their licence AND crossing a solid line when they realise they are in the wrong lane!

indeed, but apparently if he's on the grass, and not actually walking down the motorway, then he's not a pedestrian.



So by actually picking up the hitchhiker, the driver commits an offence, the hitchhiker does not commit an offence, unless there's a "causing or aggrivating" clause for the particular offence. (in my case I picked him up at a services, so didn't break the law)



That doesn't mean it's a good idea. I would say that the hard shoulder of a slip road is a far safer place to stop.


Obviously I have no way to verify the story. But I do agree with his claim that standing by the hard shoulder is the safer option.

It's actually quite a safe place to stop, especially near the top of an on-slip.

Despite the illegality, I have and would again stop in such a place for 'adjustments' that might improve safety on the motorway drive ahead (for example to take off a bulky jacket).

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

It has to be wherever the plans say they start and the signs SHOULD be in the same place as where the plans say. The TRO probably requires that there are signs so if they aren't there then the motorway regulations probably can't be enforced. If they are in the wrong place then on the stretch of road before the signs the motorway regulations probably can't be enforced.

So even if a learner is driving on a piece of road which is technically subject to motorway regulations, until they pass the "motorway starts here" signs they have a pretty good excuse for not being 'done' for it.

_________________
Andrew.

Ah, this is where the IAM pedant forum has moved too! So he walked there as a pedestrian, but standing still, he transforms into a ?

And the verge (the grassy bit), is technically part of the motorway.

Try again!

Again, I'm just repeating what he claim the copper told him.

There is a big difference between hitching at the start of the onslip and actually trying to walk down the motorway, something the police were able to recognise but the wombles were not.

Fair enough - let's forget the legal approach and try this:
Most "wombles" have a lot less than a year's experience of working on a motorway and might be considered over-zealous in some circumstances. This will wear off.
Another example used to be moving on LGVs waiting on on slips (tacho break) - this doesn't seem to happen so much now that I see.


Harsh. We need Traffic Police and HATOs. I haven't read too much on this site, but there are many reasonable arguments elsewhere along the lines of 'why waste a good (expensive!) TrafPol coning out lanes/retrieving debris from live lanes/making sure breakdowns are dealt with safely and quickly etc. etc. when a HATO will do'

No. Not a Tacho Break (except perhaps for foreigners) morelike the driver has heard a 'bang' and needs to check tyres and 'suspension bags', or has noticed something that has come loose that could cause a danger. Finding space in a layby late at night is almost an impossibility. Stopping actually on a roundabout presents other dangers where vehicles are following a 'curved' path. Far better to exit the Motorway and rejoin, and then stop, than to use the shoulder of the main carriageway.

And on the subject of HATO's, whilst I most certainly do not support the role they fulfill, or indeed, the manner in which they fulfill that role, perhaps due to lack of training and experience, I believe the current count, nationwide, is 1 dead with 3 seriously injured. I believe that they are, as an organisation, unsuitable for that role because they are going from being a pedestrian/car user in a mainly urban environment to being what is essentially, a pedestrian, in a high speed environment. Walking out onto a Motorway and signalling three lanes of traffic to 'Stop' is no mean feat. I've done it. You pick the gaps. You target the drivers of the larger vehicles who can see over the roofs of the smaller vehicles. And, if you are lucky, a 'heavy' in Lane 2 will 'shut off' Lane 3.

These people just haven't got the experience. By all means attack the role, but please remember that these individuals (and their families) have suffered in the interim.

Is that count backed up with any evidence?
BBC reported two HATOs seriously injured a few months ago - one's back at work. Not heard of any HATO fatalities (a woman was killed at the scene of the two injured HATOs I mentioned).


Quite. And how do people get experience - they're not born with it. Even new TrafPol have to learn on the job.