Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that people increasingly seem to think that pedestrians have the right of way at the junction of East dulwich grove and lordship lane!!?? People seem to think they can just meander across the road whenever they wish and traffic should stop for them! Sometimes I really feel like running them down! Lol. #roadrageinED
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/58922-the-invisible-zebra-crossing/
Share on other sites

I am not talking about that junction. I am talking about the junction that has Oliver bonas on one side and a green corner shop on the other with the bishop directly across the road. Perhaps I have the wrong road name. Oh yes I do. It's the junction of East dulwich grove and lordship lane.
I am just having a random moan dopamine. :) I don't mind letting someone walk across sometimes, but it's annoying when people just walk across with no regard to who might be turning off of it onto East dulwich grove. I have even had pedestrians give me a dirty look for not stopping. It's quite amusing.

but if they're already on the road I think you are supposed not to run them down bermygirl ...


(from the Highway code: turning at road junctions; give way to pedestrians who are already crossing the road into which you are turning)


It's a nightmare junction for everyone and there is someone who posts on her who was quite seriously injured.

Yeah bawdy man. I hear you. What I am saying is that when I am 5 feet from the actual junction and a pedestrian who I know has seen me, just decides to cross the road anyway. They know they won't make it across before the car is upon them, but they walk anyway. It's ANNOYING! and the bottom line is that if I took my eyes off the road for a minute and someone got hit, I would not be at fault. Because pedestrians have just as much of a duty to take care and wait until it's clear for them to cross, and they just don't.

bermygirl Wrote:

> if I took my eyes off the road for a

> minute and someone got hit, I would not be at

> fault.


In that situation you would be at fault - even more so if didn't have your eyes on the road.


Pedestrians have right way at junctions if they have started to cross.


https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183

That junction really needs AT LEAST a zebra crossing but would be better off with a traffic light. People drive way too fast down east dulwich grove, and people turning onto east dulwich grove from LL often do so quite hastily without regard to foot traffic.


Bermygirl, the problem is there are a lot of people walking up and down LL and not any effective means to cross what is a busy junction. Just as cars don't want to be left standing neither do pedestrians. Not a good situation for anyone really.

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that people increasingly seem to think that cars have the right of way at the junction of East dulwich grove and lordship lane!!?? People seem to think they can just drive through road whenever they wish and people should stop for them! Sometimes I really feel like posting on a forum! Lol. #pavementrageinED

grabot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Doesn't the Highway code have something about

> pedestrians having prioprity when behicels turn

> from a main road to msaller road. "

>

> No.


Err, read this https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183


"watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way"

grabot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "If they have started to cross they have priority,

> so give way"

>

> Emphasis on "if they have started to cross".

> Whether the road is main or smaller is neither

> here nor there.


It was James who raised that not me. The point is, even if you're hurtling towards the junction at 60 and a pedestrian steps out, they have priority. The OP is right in a sense, junctions are invisible zebra crossings.

Lowlander Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> grabot Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > "If they have started to cross they have

> priority,

> > so give way"

> >

> > Emphasis on "if they have started to cross".

> > Whether the road is main or smaller is neither

> > here nor there.

>

> It was James who raised that not me. The point

> is, even if you're hurtling towards the junction

> at 60 and a pedestrian steps out, they have

> priority. The OP is right in a sense, junctions

> are invisible zebra crossings.


No they do not. The pedestrian is a dangerous fool in that situation. The pedestrian should not step out unless it is safe to do so. Jumping out in front of cars is dangerous for all concerned and any attempt to perpetuate the idea that it automatically grants priority is vicariously dangerous.

bermygirl Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

It's ANNOYING! and the bottom

> line is that if I took my eyes off the road for a

> minute and someone got hit, I would not be at

> fault. Because pedestrians have just as much of a

> duty to take care and wait until it's clear for

> them to cross, and they just don't.


You're hilarious.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Link to petition if anyone would like to object: Londis Off-License Petition https://chng.it/9X4DwTDRdW
    • He did mention it's share of freehold, I’d be very cautious with that. It can turn into a nightmare if relationships with neighbours break down. My brother had a share of freehold in a flat in West Hampstead, and when he needed to sell, the neighbour refused to sign the transfer of the freehold. What followed was over two years of legal battles, spiralling costs and constant stress. He lost several potential buyers, and the whole sale fell through just as he got a job offer in another city. It was a complete disaster. The neighbour was stubborn and uncooperative, doing everything they could to delay the process. It ended in legal deadlock, and there was very little anyone could do without their cooperation. At that point, the TA6 form becomes the least of your worries; it’s the TR1 form that matters. Without the other freeholder’s signature on that, you’re stuck. After seeing what my brother went through, I’d never touch a share of freehold again. When things go wrong, they can go really wrong. If you have a share of freehold, you need a respectful and reasonable relationship with the others involved; otherwise, it can be costly, stressful and exhausting. Sounds like these neighbours can’t be reasoned with. There’s really no coming back from something like this unless they genuinely apologise and replace the trees and plants they ruined. One small consolation is that people who behave like this are usually miserable behind closed doors. If they were truly happy, they’d just get on with their lives instead of trying to make other people’s lives difficult. And the irony is, they’re being incredibly short-sighted. This kind of behaviour almost always backfires.  
    • I had some time with him recently at the local neighbourhood forum and actually was pretty impressed by him, I think he's come a long way.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...