Crossing staggard junctions.

[foxtrot_mike]

I have probably answered my own question here but wanted to see what the opinion is

When your crossing a staggard junction and there is a vehicle approaching from both directions on the main road, the vehicle on the left being a slow moving tractor but you would have to wait for.

The car from the right is sufficienly behind so that you can pull out in front but you then need to stop in the main road for the tractor to pass.

This action also holds up the car from the right, perfeclty legal but inconsiderate.

Also if you waited at the give way, you could wait for the car to pass, and the tractor and it also means that you dont have to stop a second time.

The only disadvantage to this is if there is lots of traffic meaning you would be waiting for a while to cross wheras you can use the staggar to your advantage over a crossroads.

For this to work this only applies to junctions where your exit junction is on the left

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

The highway code is quite explicit on this - you should wait until you can cross both lanes at once if by emerging you will block traffic. It's under the context of dual carriageways in Rule 173, but it applies equally to single carriageways really. You could also use the wording from Rules 171 or 172 - you MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction. Blocking the lane coming from the right while waiting for traffic coming from the left is not really "giving way", is it?

Edit: I see you say "this only works where your exit junction is on the left" - in that case, you need to treat it as a left and a right turn (assuming the stagger is enough for your car to turn parallel to the traffic). Then the HC says "You should leave room for vehicles to pass on the left, if possible" in Rule 179. If the stagger is not sufficient to allow you to position aligned with the direction of traffic, then I would say Rules 171-173 are more applicable.

[michael769]

This action also holds up the car from the right, perfeclty legal but inconsiderate.

I am not so sure it is legal - assuming it is a marked junction!

.....

the requirement conveyed by the transverse lines shown in diagram 1003, whether or not they are placed in conjunction with the sign shown in diagram 602 or 1023, shall be that no vehicle shall proceed past such one of those lines as is nearer the major road into that road in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

It seems to me that if the driver was aware that when he emerged past the give way lines that the vehicle on the main road would have no alternative but to slow an offence would be committed.

[zadocbrown]

At what point does 1 staggered crossroads become 2 separate junctions?

What if traffic density is such that going half way at a time is the only way to progress?

I think due care, attention and consideration will take care of it.

[GJD]

The highway code is quite explicit on this - you should wait until you can cross both lanes at once if by emerging you will block traffic. It's under the context of dual carriageways in Rule 173, but it applies equally to single carriageways really. You could also use the wording from Rules 171 or 172 - you MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction. Blocking the lane coming from the right while waiting for traffic coming from the left is not really "giving way", is it?

Edit: I see you say "this only works where your exit junction is on the left" - in that case, you need to treat it as a left and a right turn (assuming the stagger is enough for your car to turn parallel to the traffic). Then the HC says "You should leave room for vehicles to pass on the left, if possible" in Rule 179. If the stagger is not sufficient to allow you to position aligned with the direction of traffic, then I would say Rules 171-173 are more applicable.

It was entirely an assumption on my part, but the picture I had in mind was of a stagger that was sufficient to allow you to align with the direction of traffic. In which case, of the various HC rules you've mentioned I think only 179 is of any relevance once you're on the main road, aligned with the traffic and waiting to turn right. Obviously 172 about the Give Way line applies prior to that point. Although...

.....

the requirement conveyed by the transverse lines shown in diagram 1003, whether or not they are placed in conjunction with the sign shown in diagram 602 or 1023, shall be that no vehicle shall proceed past such one of those lines as is nearer the major road into that road in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

It seems to me that if the driver was aware that when he emerged past the give way lines that the vehicle on the main road would have no alternative but to slow an offence would be committed.

I've always wondered what the limit of that rule is. If there is a vehicle coming from the OP's right, but it's some distance away such that the OP has time to emerge, align himself with the main road, proceed the short distance to his right turn and stop waiting to turn, all before the vehicle on the main road has to start slowing down, has he really committed the offence? Certainly the vehicle that was already on the main road will have to slow to avoid an accident (rear-ending the OP), and would not have had to do so had the OP stayed behind his Give Way line. But would the law really hold that that vehicle had to slow down because the OP incorrectly crossed a Give Way line, rather than because the OP was legitimately waiting in the main road to turn right?

At some point in the sequence of events:

Crossing the Give Way line
Completing turning so that you are aligned with the main road
Getting on with whatever you're going to do next

you surely must reach the point where, if you have not endangered anyone or caused them to change course or speed by that point, you are considered to have complied with the Give Way law and can continue about your business?

[ROG]

If there is a vehicle coming from the OP's right, but it's some distance away such that the OP has time to emerge, align himself with the main road, proceed the short distance to his right turn and stop waiting to turn, all before the vehicle on the main road has to start slowing down, has he really committed the offence?

If the driver knew when they started off there was a reasonable chance that they would cause the vehicle approaching behind to slow down then surely that is wrong?

If they set off when it was clear to get out of the way but THEN something occured to prevent them - that would be different - yes?

[GJD]

If there is a vehicle coming from the OP's right, but it's some distance away such that the OP has time to emerge, align himself with the main road, proceed the short distance to his right turn and stop waiting to turn, all before the vehicle on the main road has to start slowing down, has he really committed the offence?

If the driver knew when they started off there was a reasonable chance that they would cause the vehicle approaching behind to slow down then surely that is wrong?

Wrong as in contravenes the law that michael769 quoted? Well I don't know - that's why I asked .

[Gareth]

At what point does 1 staggered crossroads become 2 separate junctions?

At the point where it is impossible to know whether it is safe to drive directly across.

My favourite example is in Quenington. Equally awkward from the other direction. In both cases my initial plan is to turn onto the main road rather than driving across.

[martine]

PS It's 'staggered'.

[michael769]

Wrong as in contravenes the law that michael769 quoted? Well I don't know - that's why I asked .

I doubt there is a definitive answer other than the standard AD response of "it depends".

For myself I would be uncomfortable driving out of a side road only to stop my vehicle in someone's way unless I was to drive some distance (don't ask me what some is exactly but more than a few car lengths) down the road, or there was sufficient traffic that it was clear it was the only way to get out.

The real question is at what point does it become acceptable to put our convenience ahead of the convenience of the other guy(s). I don't think there can be a definitive answer - it's a judgement call and not everyone will agree with the choices we make.

The vision of the OP I had was of a "classic" staggered junction where the junctions are no more than a couple of car lengths apart.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

PS It's 'staggered'.

... and "intrigued"

[7db]

I don't think you can reasonably apply a test of "did you know you'd have to make the other guy stop" to the give way line -- otherwise knowing that I'll reach the lights in 7 miles down the road ahead of him and then cause him to stop would make it illegal for me to pull out.

Priority issues tend to have a concept of being "established" - ie moving at a constant speed and course along a road. Where you join a road and so cause someone who is established to deviate (speed, course) then it's likely you've done so against the giveway. This is generally true in all priority situations (lane changes, minor roads, roundabouts, overtakes etc). If you've managed yourself to become established (ie at the same speed as prevailing traffic), then after that they are the overtaking car, and need to yield to you.

So for me the test is whether you are travelling in the same direction and speed as the priority vehicle before you then engage on some manoeuvre which requires him to slow. This nearly never happens in a staggered junction.

[GJD]

I don't think you can reasonably apply a test of "did you know you'd have to make the other guy stop" to the give way line -- otherwise knowing that I'll reach the lights in 7 miles down the road ahead of him and then cause him to stop would make it illegal for me to pull out.

I agree.

Priority issues tend to have a concept of being "established" - ie moving at a constant speed and course along a road. Where you join a road and so cause someone who is established to deviate (speed, course) then it's likely you've done so against the giveway. This is generally true in all priority situations (lane changes, minor roads, roundabouts, overtakes etc). If you've managed yourself to become established (ie at the same speed as prevailing traffic), then after that they are the overtaking car, and need to yield to you.

So does the OP never transition from joining the major road to being established on the major road? It was never his intention attain the very much speed. If he turns left onto the major road when there is no priority vehicle to be seen to his right, and is then prevented from turning right by what is now, to him, oncoming traffic, for long enough that a new vehicle appears on the scene behind him and has to stop, I'd be surprised if that meant he had broken the Give Way law. Do you think he might have broken it?

So for me the test is whether you are travelling in the same direction and speed as the priority vehicle before you then engage on some manoeuvre which requires him to slow. This nearly never happens in a staggered junction.

How would you adapt that test for the case of a vehicle incapable of travelling as fast as the priority vehicle, or limited by law to a slower speed?

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

I think the key phrase is in DB's first paragraph. You should not knowingly cause others to change course or speed (although I haven't found the Rule in HC where that's stated). The OP stated this was certain to happen - ergo, he should not pull out, imho.

[MGF]

...How would you adapt that test for the case of a vehicle incapable of travelling as fast as the priority vehicle, or limited by law to a slower speed?

I would expect the driver to wait for a suitable gap in the traffic taking into account the speed of his own vehicle in relation to the priority traffic.

Of course, in busy traffic it is often impossible to emerge without inconveniencing priority traffic a little, even if it only requires them to lift-off a little.