Temporary Traffic Lights

[G3CWI]

Do TTLs have the same status in law as fixed ones? Will police prosecute TTL jumping?

 

[fossyant]

Yes.

 

[mjr]

Yes, same status in law AFAICR. I think the main wrinkle is that the "WAIT HERE" signs are meaningless and it is passing the post of the lights which is the offence. EDIT: this is no longer true. The WAIT HERE sign is legally like a stop line in TSRGD 2016.

I expect police will ticket you if they see you jump it and you fail the attitude test when they try to advise you that was a bad move. Not sure what you mean by prosecute.

You may have a possible defence if the lights are defective (not detecting cyclists) and you proceed with caution after a reasonable delay.

 

[G3CWI]

Yes, same status in law AFAICR. I think the main wrinkle is that the "WAIT HERE" signs are meaningless and it is passing the post of the lights which is the offence. EDIT: this is no longer true. The WAIT HERE sign is legally like a stop line in TSRGD 2016.

I expect police will ticket you if they see you jump it and you fail the attitude test when they try to advise you that was a bad move. Not sure what you mean by prosecute.

You may have a possible defence if the lights are defective (not detecting cyclists) and you proceed with caution after a reasonable delay.

They seem to be widely ignored round here. I just wondered if they had any legal status. Videoed someone jumping one yesterday against oncoming traffic. Too indistinct to submit to Police but wondering for future reference.

 

[I like Skol]

and you fail the attitude test

This applies to most things in life. Be a nobber and get treated like one

 

[mjr]

Videoed someone jumping one yesterday against oncoming traffic. Too indistinct to submit to Police but wondering for future reference.

I'm not sure if any/which police act on bikecam/dashcam footage of RLJing but I'd be interested to know!

 

[G3CWI]

I'm not sure if any/which police act on bikecam/dashcam footage of RLJing but I'd be interested to know!

Very interesting. Do you have a reason to think that they won’t act on it for some reason?

 

[mjr]

Very interesting. Do you have a reason to think that they won’t act on it for some reason?

Only that it seems a bit patchy which offences are covered. For example, they won't act on phoney driving footage because they currently have to interview the phone user promptly, thanks to DPP v Barreto.