Er.... I thought that's what I said?
So you did...and I wasn't disagreeing with you.Statistics:Posted by Joby — Mon 03 Feb, 2014 10:31 pm
]]>
Er.... I thought that's what I said?
Statistics:Posted by Darcy Sarto — Mon 03 Feb, 2014 6:21 pm
]]>
Straying off topic slightly but.......the police are on a hiding to nothing when it comes to enforcing this sort of stuff.
But the police should enforce the law, regardless of what that law is. It's more down to a lack of manpower and political will that motorists are allowed to flaunt the law with virtual impunity (and also react with outrage at any attempt to seriously enforce those laws).Local stop-and-check campaigns are a good idea - I've seen a few of these in Hertford over the last few years, both mechanical (tyres etc.) and drink-driving spot-checks.
Statistics:Posted by Joby — Mon 03 Feb, 2014 1:00 pm
]]>
If they stop people for having lights out (which they should) they get criticised in the usual "why aren't they catching real criminals" way. If they don't people (like us) criticise them for failing to enforce. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Just wait until we're expecting them to stop people smoking in their cars with kids in the back!
It strikes me that a coupkle of very localised "stop and advise" campaigns would be manpower effective and might be deemed a service to the community.
Perhaps someone should let Mr Lloyd (or his expensive PR person) know?
Statistics:Posted by Darcy Sarto — Mon 03 Feb, 2014 12:28 pm
]]>
It would have taken nothing to have pulled them over and told them to sort it out, not necessarily giving a ticket, just pointing out it was illegal.
Statistics:Posted by Kateg28 — Mon 03 Feb, 2014 10:22 am
]]>
Nope, not something new. Was there when I passed my test in the '80s. 
114
You MUST NOT
use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
Law RVLR reg 27
And it refers to Rule 226 which is:
226
You MUST use headlights when visibility is seriously reduced, generally when you cannot see for more than 100 metres (328 feet). You may also use front or rear fog lights but you MUST switch them off when visibility improves (see Rule 236). Law RVLR regs 25 & 27
(taken from the Highway code)
The highway code uses 'Should not' and 'must not' and they are distinct, should not is guidance, must not is absolute. And it is in capitals. I think they mean it!
I am not sure about use in connection with a medical condition but I don't think you can use it as a defence in this country and the law might state that if you cannot drive at night in accordance with the highway code then you should not drive however I am not a lawyer.
114
You MUST NOT
use any lights in a way which would dazzle or cause discomfort to other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders
use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves to avoid dazzling other road users (see Rule 226).
In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.
Law RVLR reg 27
And it refers to Rule 226 which is:
226
You MUST use headlights when visibility is seriously reduced, generally when you cannot see for more than 100 metres (328 feet). You may also use front or rear fog lights but you MUST switch them off when visibility improves (see Rule 236). Law RVLR regs 25 & 27
(taken from the Highway code)
The highway code uses 'Should not' and 'must not' and they are distinct, should not is guidance, must not is absolute. And it is in capitals. I think they mean it!
I am not sure about use in connection with a medical condition but I don't think you can use it as a defence in this country and the law might state that if you cannot drive at night in accordance with the highway code then you should not drive however I am not a lawyer.
Statistics:Posted by Darcy Sarto — Sat 01 Feb, 2014 3:19 pm
]]>
This is what Highway Code says about it:
Rule 226
You MUST use headlights when visibility is seriously reduced, generally when you cannot see for more than 100 metres (328 feet). You may also use front or rear fog lights but you MUST switch them off when visibility improves (see Rule 236). Law RVLR regs 25 & 27
But what some, annoyingly, are not aware of is
Rule 236
You MUST NOT use front or rear fog lights unless visibility is seriously reduced (see Rule 226) as they dazzle other road users and can obscure your brake lights. You MUST switch them off when visibility improves.
Statistics:Posted by highwayman — Sat 01 Feb, 2014 2:50 pm
]]>
]]>
Well fog again this morning and I seem to have passed more people than ever when it was still dark and with only one headlight working with or without fog lights on.
Driving standards do seem to deteriorate sharply with the weather.Statistics:Posted by Joby — Tue 21 Jan, 2014 11:12 am
]]>
]]>
It worked....
Now another 8 meaningless posts.
This is very funny.Now another 8 meaningless posts.
Statistics:Posted by Louis M — Fri 10 Jan, 2014 4:48 pm
]]>
thats true - most importers handle that for you though. Thats why you often see some pretty nice (often japanese) sporty cars, and yet they have these cheap and nasty rear foglights cludged onto the back!
Mine is a Japanese sports car. But I imported it myself as it is 25 years old.
Statistics:Posted by Kateg28 — Tue 17 Dec, 2013 5:12 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
No, I dont believe so.
However re: broken light there is a clause in the MOT that certain features if fitted must work, and foglights fall under that. (And there is a caveat that if the lights are uneconomical to repair people have been known to remove the switch in the cabin lol)
Thanks codek2 for (ahem) illuminating us . Perhaps the less drastic alternative would be just not to switch them on and thereby not attract the attention of the local mobile constabulary However re: broken light there is a clause in the MOT that certain features if fitted must work, and foglights fall under that. (And there is a caveat that if the lights are uneconomical to repair people have been known to remove the switch in the cabin lol)
Statistics:Posted by Footfruit — Mon 16 Dec, 2013 2:37 pm
]]>