Right, situation arose today on my training that I had a disagreement with the instructor on. Allow me to share the below diagram…
Right now… If Vehicle 2 is travelling along a road and there are parked cars on the right hand side. Vehicle 1 has met these cars far earlier than vehicle 2. Vehicle 1 signals and pulls out taking both lanes in order to pass the obstacles. Do they have priority and should vehicle 2 stop to give way to vehicle 1? Or does vehicle 2 have priority because their lane is clear ahead?
Sensible answers only please guys. I’m looking for the legal answer. Thanks guys.
If vehicle 1 had already indicated and began the manouvre without impeding vehicle 2 than V1 is in the right and V2 Should give way, If V1 could see V2 Approaching maybe he should slow and wait for a safe gap to make the pass
Highway code states that if the obstruction is in your lane ie parked cars buses etc then you should give way but if there is sufficient time and space to proceed without obstructing oncoming traffic then crack on.as if you waited for oncoming traffic to pass with a big enough gap you might get a minor for hesitation on your test.
Depends on situation. As rog said above,but if oncoming road is busy then not seizing an opportunity becomes the wrong choice, on some busy roads you could be sat there for a long period and become a road block. The only answer is use your judgement.
Boris1971:
Depends on situation. As rog said above,but if oncoming road is busy then not seizing an opportunity becomes the wrong choice, on some busy roads you could be sat there for a long period and become a road block. The only answer is use your judgement.
Yes I agree with what you’re saying, only that’s a real world situation, but He has to tell this to a burocrat
And 2nd hell, I’m glad I did My test a loooooooonnnnnnnnng time ago that’s like proper questions
Nice diagram btw - extra points for that
In your OP you state that this was during your training - I assume therefore that you will be doing your official test shortly and this is why you want to know?
If that is the case and the situation comes up during your test, then yes, of course, DEFINITELY go with Rog’s answer or you will be failing.
As has been mentioned however, IRL, even though it should be the same rule, your average driver tends to take liberties because everyone is in more of a rush than everybody else.
What really cooks my goat is when you, as Vehicle 2, get into that kind of situation in a town etc and you have that kind of ‘Mexican stand-off’, because Vehicle 1 did ‘force’ his way past causing you to stop, but then the whole line of traffic behind said Vehicle follows him like he’s the Pied Piper - and you’re sat there playing with your plums even though your lane is totally clear
Jon
PS I don’t think you mention it, but who was right, you or your trainer?
Crusher75:
Nice diagram btw - extra points for that
In your OP you state that this was during your training - I assume therefore that you will be doing your official test shortly and this is why you want to know?
If that is the case and the situation comes up during your test, then yes, of course, DEFINITELY go with Rog’s answer or you will be failing.
As has been mentioned however, IRL, even though it should be the same rule, your average driver tends to take liberties because everyone is in more of a rush than everybody else.
What really cooks my goat is when you, as Vehicle 2, get into that kind of situation in a town etc and you have that kind of ‘Mexican stand-off’, because Vehicle 1 did ‘force’ his way past causing you to stop, but then the whole line of traffic behind said Vehicle follows him like he’s the Pied Piper - and you’re sat there playing with your plums even though your lane is totally clear
Jon
?
Sorry to be a pedant, but if your lane was totally clear you could stop playing with your plums and get on with your job, unless of coarse you find playing with your plums a far more pleasant diversion than work, and who wouldn’t
Be that I mean playing with ones own plums as I’ve never met you, and I’m not that type of Girl
No need for me to start handing shovels out eddie, as you’re doing a fine job on that hole you started - it’s getting very deep as well as very much more disturbing (for me at least)
Crusher75:
No need for me to start handing shovels out eddie, as you’re doing a fine job on that hole you started - it’s getting very deep as well as very much more disturbing (for me at least)
OK as an update, I was vehicle 1. The road wasn’t completely straight obviously. As I had approached the 2 cars, I signaled and moved out. Only when I was out did I see the other car in the distance. But I had already signaled and committed. Vehicle 2 was speeding the other way but at this point I had nowhere to go. I was travelling about 20 mph and in control. But vehicle 2 never eased off and made it very tight for me to get back in behind the parked cars.
My instructer said I was wrong but he only reacted when the other car was tight on me ( and shouted btw which nearly earned him a crack). My argument was that I was at the obstacle way before the other driver. I had already signaled and moved and had nowhere else to go and the other driver should have been observing the road ahead and gave me the space to come back in. I never caused the other driver to have to react quickly or brake harshly.
I was also told when doing my Cat C that the priority for obstacles in the road isn’t for the person with the clear lane but the person who meets the obstacle first. I was surprised by this but told that’s the way it is.
A similar thing happened about 20 mins later with the other learner but the difference is the other car eased well off and there was loads of room for the truck to get back in. And the instructer said that was fine.
See it and go = bad
Go then see it = ok but see below
In the second scenario it begs the question - could it be seen before you go? - that is often where the examiner and trainee differ because the trainee did not see it as early as the examiner so rightly the examiner marks it down
Phil1979:
As I had approached the 2 cars, I signaled and moved out. Only when I was out did I see the other car in the distance. But I had already signaled and committed. Vehicle 2 was speeding the other way but at this point I had nowhere to go. I was travelling about 20 mph and in control.
My argument was that I was at the obstacle way before the other driver. I had already signaled and moved and had nowhere else to go and the other driver should have been observing the road ahead and gave me the space to come back in
Maybe doing you an injustice but reading your post it comes across that you didn’t read the road far enough ahead and started your manoeuvre and then got yourself in the situation you did.
Why couldn’t you see the car ahead until you were actually out? A truck has higher viewpoint so can’t see the parked cars blocking your view of an approaching car?
If it was the curve of road then fair enough, you went then the car appeared so I’d agree with your move to a point but did you really assess whether you could safely start the manoeuvre?
Of course I wasn’t there so speculation on my part as to whether or not you could have done it different. As for instructor shouting, well that’s a definite no no! Wouldn’t be happy and I’d have said so. He should expect mistakes from trainees and be calm to explain why they were a mistake.
Unfortunately it’s scenarios like this that can be a pass fail and its luck or not so lucky that they don’t come up on a test.
See it and go = bad
Go then see it = ok but see below
In the second scenario it begs the question - could it be seen before you go? - that is often where the examiner and trainee differ because the trainee did not see it as early as the examiner so rightly the examiner marks it down
Spot on.
Sometimes, for the sake of looking across the bend (maybe over a field) you could have seen the approaching vehicle. And that’s where it tends to go wrong. The bit about whoever gets to the obstruction first is incorrect.
If on test and your view obscured whilst starting a overtaking manoeuvre a brief explanation to the examiner of your actions would be a good idea. I encourage this during training.
that’s like proper questions 
hell it’s Friday look at the highway code 
