Board logo

Police try to prosecute for reverse light n/s
britishtrident - 3/12/07 at 05:17 PM

Recently in Scotland a driver knocked down a 90 year old lady while reversing out of his drive.

One of the charges the police tried to prosecute on was having defective reverse lights.

see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7122736.stm

Humbug - 3/12/07 at 05:34 PM

While it's probably not a great idea to reverse out onto a main road

a) it's not a requirement to have reversing lights at all

b) the Highway Code in itself is guidance... some of the "rules" in there are legal requirements/prohibition, some are just good practice.

Driving without due care and attention sounds right to me.

Paul TigerB6 - 3/12/07 at 05:46 PM

quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
Highway Code ruled drivers should always reverse into driveways and drive out forwards.


thats me breaking the law then with my bec



Its an advisory not a law to the best of my understanding. Rules which are legal requirements have the words "Must" or "must not" in bold in the Highway Code so not breaking the law in itself.

Typically though, the Highway Code also states....... "Although failure to comply with the other rules of the Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see 'The road user and the law' to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’."

So make of this what you will......

"201
Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can."

britishtrident - 3/12/07 at 05:59 PM

Interestingly "he was cleared" on the reverse light charge --- it should of course never have been brought or have been thrown out.

A worrying lack of knowledge of what actually is the motoring law appears have been displayed by all and sundry.

Paul TigerB6 - 3/12/07 at 06:08 PM

quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Interestingly "he was cleared" on the reverse light charge --- it should of course never have been brought or have been thrown out.

A worrying lack of knowledge of what actually is the motoring law appears have been displayed by all and sundry.



Doesnt surprise me in the slightest!! I recently had to defend myself in court for "failing to produce a valid MOT test certificate" and also "failing to display a valid tax disk". This was dispite being on a SORN declaration and on my way home from a pre-booked MOT test with a failure notification in my hand when the police asked me why my tax disk was out of date.

The Prosecution even tried arguing a point that as I have been building kitcars for the past 8 years then I should know that the tintop would fail its MOT and had no excuse for not passing and should have therefore passed and had a valid MOT at the time - I kid you not!!!

Needless to say both charges got thrown out when i produced the relevent sections of the RTA relating to SORN, Mot's etc etc

scootz - 3/12/07 at 08:11 PM

I know you don't need to have a reverse light, but is it not a case of IF there are reverse lights fitted to a vehicle then they MUST be working satisfactorily?

I may be wrong (I usually am!).

speedyxjs - 3/12/07 at 08:52 PM

You should see some of the accidents our neigbours have had backing out onton our main road

onzarob - 3/12/07 at 09:06 PM

I think the main problem here is not the reversing lights, but the driving not looking where he was going!!!

If the reversing lights were working, is it the responsibility of the hazard to move?!!!

rf900rush - 3/12/07 at 09:44 PM

Lucky that reversing lights are not compulsory.

What would BEC's do with no Reverse Gear !

muzchap - 3/12/07 at 09:51 PM

Paul Tiger B6,

That is SHOCKING what a flagrant disregard for protocol.

The police in this country make me sick!

Well done on producing the relevant info!

M

MkIndy7 - 3/12/07 at 11:13 PM

It always makes me chukkle thinking of an Accident I'd seen in Morrisons car park whilst working there.

An Escort van (no rear windows) reversing up quite a steep hill out a a space and an old boy reversing down hill in a newish small car....
They had a bit of a bump anf the old boy started playing hell about the little scuff on his bumper "I want your details blaa blaa laa" and wanted me to be whitness.

I just said "it'll polish out and really it was your fault.. he was doing a hill start in reverse with limited rear visibility.. you were rolling backwards down hill with full visibility" to the old Guy and that was before I'd ever driven a van!

iank - 4/12/07 at 11:55 AM

quote:
Originally posted by rf900rush
Lucky that reversing lights are not compulsory.

What would BEC's do with no Reverse Gear !


Switch on the dash, with a tell-tail - just like the fog light I'd expect. Either that or maybe observing the driver getting out and pushing

JoelP - 4/12/07 at 08:06 PM

must say its one of my pet hates, people reversing unsafely. Either onto main roads or just plain incompetently. Woman reversed into my mates car yesterday in a car park, claimed she didnt even realise she had hit him!

I always reverse into my drive because its much easier to reverse when the car is warm, all windows clear etc and you know where everyone is. Means you can drive off in the morning without getting neck ache!

Dazza - 4/12/07 at 11:18 PM

if the lights are fitted, they MUST work for an mot.

my old recovery truck didnt eevn have a loop in the wiring for a reverse light. but when i reversed, i had 2 rear flood lights and 4 revolving strobes, so if anyone missed me, they were clearly blind....

the idea that we should all be carefull is great, as i am sure everyone of US on here are, i am, but there are those that are less than carefull.

the way of the world......

britishtrident - 5/12/07 at 08:56 AM

NOT an MOT testable item

The MOT can only test obligatory lights, at one stage in the late 60s and early 70s the MOT/Depatment of Transport/DoE staff couldn't make thier mind up if number plate lights were included.
Reverse lights are limited to 21 watts.


Driving & fog lights are tested and if fitted have to be in pairs and meet the regulations.

MkIndy7 - 5/12/07 at 05:40 PM

quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
Reverse lights are limited to 21 watts.


Definatly?

I'm about to fit another light to the Kangoo van low down as the rear visability with 1 reverse light on 1 side of the van is poor to say the least when reversing down dark driveways etc.

I was thinking of fitting an old front foglight below the bumper shining at the ground... I suppose I could just switch it off or take the bulb out come MOT time tho.