Driver who flashed others to warn of police speed trap is fined £175.

[brucemillar]

So

I told my next door neighbor there was a camera van parked up the road. Do I get charged??

 

[MercFanUk]

Would it be illegal to carry a sign with you in your boot that said "Speed Camera In Action Here Today - 1 Mile Away" and plant it a mile down the road from the camera? It's such a vague area of law really...

 

[LTD]

Surely a motorist flashing his/her lights is a mere indication to other motorists that they are there ?

Isn't that what we are taught when learning to drive if another driver flashes you at a junction etc. ?

 

[219]

Hmm, "speed checks" is too passive a term as it suggests that they're just checking your speed, as opposed to taking any action.

It is , nevertheless , the correct term which is used to describe such activities .

 

[Burger]

I'm pretty sure flashing your headlights has no official meaning at all. In fact I'm also pretty sure the highway code used to at least mention this specific point. The correct way of warning road users of your presence is the horn. Flashing lights can mean, hey, I'm here or OK buddy, you go first, or even a simple watcha, thank you, look at me. Clearly it also means, look out there's a tax collector on the next bridge. It's because of this varied use that headlights at least were specifically called out as having no meaning whatsoever.

That's my understanding anyway.

 

[219]

A headlamp flash has only one meaning : to alert another road user to your presence - just the same as a horn warning .

 

[Burger]

I'm pretty sure flashing your headlights has no official meaning at all. In fact I'm also pretty sure the highway code used to at least mention this specific point. The correct way of warning road users of your presence is the horn. Flashing lights can mean, hey, I'm here or OK buddy, you go first, or even a simple watcha, thank you, look at me. Clearly it also means, look out there's a tax collector on the next bridge. It's because of this varied use that headlights at least were specifically called out as having no meaning whatsoever.

That's my understanding anyway.

Just going to reprimand myself for not having up to date information prior to posting that... I'll consider myself officially chastised...

"The Highway Code is clear and unambiguous about the use of flashing headlamps; Rule 90 states:

'Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights in an attempt to intimidate other road users' .

Rule 91 adds: 'If another driver flashes his headlights never assume that it is a signal to go. Use your own judgment and proceed carefully'.

The rules quoted above are a development of a basic principle which has been in the Highway Code from the early days. The 1946 Highway Code (rule 36) stated: 'Do not rely on signals to proceed given by unauthorised persons' (although, ironically, it also contained the 'I am ready to be overtaken' arm signal!).

Too easy to flash?

Flashing headlamps probably started to become common practice amongst drivers around the mid sixties/early seventies. The design of cars changed during that period providing a 'flasher switch' on the steering column making it easy to give a quick flash; before that light switches were generally on the dashboard with a foot operated dip switch.

Now that flashing the headlights just needed a flick of the fingers easy the 'rules' started to take a back seat."

So there it is

 

[MOCAŠ]

Burger, there's a clue in the fact that it is a legal requirement for every new car sold in the UK to have the facility to flash the headlights.

Here's the info from the latest edition of the Highway Code:

110: Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.

111: Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.


112: The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn

• while stationary on the road
• when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am

except when another road user poses a danger.

So, as Pontoneer said, using the horn and flashing your headlights both serve the same purpose: to warn other drivers of your presence. When it would be illegal to use your horn, you flash your lights instead. When both are legal, you use whichever is more appropriate to the situation.

 

[219]

Flashing headlamps probably started to become common practice amongst drivers around the mid sixties/early seventies. The design of cars changed during that period providing a 'flasher switch' on the steering column making it easy to give a quick flash; before that light switches were generally on the dashboard with a foot operated dip switch.

Mercedes-Benz cars of the 1950's certainly had a column mounted flasher switch , as well as the floor mounted dipswitch .

The nice thing about the column switch was that it had two positions : one was non-latching and was for momentary headlamp flashes to attract attention ; the other position latched on and , after a second or two , actuated a flasher unit which caused the headlamps to flash continuously - this effectively translated into 'big Mercedes coming through , GET OUT OF THE WAY' Perfect for storming down the autobahns when other traffic was more pedestrian .

 

[LTD]

I think the guy fined had a crap lawyer then - unless there were circumstances we are not being told about that led to the charge of obstruction.

 

[219]

He represented himself , and reportedly was argumentative with the cop who originally set out to give him a ticking off .

 

[renault12ts]

I think the guy fined had a crap lawyer then - unless there were circumstances we are not being told about that led to the charge of obstruction.

Emm...he defended himself...

 

[MOCAŠ]

Another reason why warning oncoming drivers that police are stationed up ahead may be regarded as obstruction is that it could well alert someone to avoid the area altogether. So let's say you flash someone who is driving without a licence, or insurance - they now know they need to turn off or do a U-turn asap to avoid the risk of being caught by ANPR.

In fact, there's a report of an incident in 2008 where one of Jamaica's most wanted men went around police checkpoints that had been set up on his most likely routes after a driver had flashed his headlights to warn of police ahead, after which drivers were warned that flashing headlights may result in "unwittingly facilitating criminal activity".

https://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/132321_Flashing-headlights-helping-criminals--say-police

This goes back to the point I made previously, that by flashing indiscriminately, you have no way of knowing who you are "helping".

 

[MOCAŠ]

...unless there were circumstances we are not being told about that led to the charge of obstruction.

I think this is a big part of the problem here - we're going by a less-than-perfect press report. All it really says about the incident itself is: "When stopped by a police officer Thompson disagreed with the suggestion that he was ‘perverting the course of justice’ and was then allegedly told: ’I was going to let you off with a caution - but I’m not now.’"

So, unanswered questions include: in what manner did Thompson "disagree", and what precisely caused the policeman to (allegedly) change his mind about how the incident should be handled. I suppose we will never know for sure.

 

[Burger]

I absolutely stand corrected by everyone and myself with my subsequent post. However, I did say I was certain the highway code used to contain such info, but I can't find any evidence of that either so I assume senility is setting in

I also didn't word the response well either, and I apologise. I probably shouldn't be typing any messages today as I'm a little distracted on other matters... However, I didn't mean to imply that flashing headlights have any other legal meaning, I merely meant that people do use them for so many different meanings, legal or not.

Regards,

 

[LTD]

Dave

Chill. Other things in your life are more important now.

Log out and focus on them ...... or have a nice malt and forget about them.

It's only a discussion on t'internet after all ..................

 

[davethemus]

could you go as far to say that preventing a drunk-driver from getting in there car would be ' wilfully obstructing a policewoman in the execution of her duty ' because you're preventing some-one from committing a crime thus preventing the perpetrator from being punished.

 

[MOCAŠ]

could you go as far to say that preventing a drunk-driver from getting in there car would be ' wilfully obstructing a policewoman in the execution of her duty ' because you're preventing some-one from committing a crime thus preventing the perpetrator from being punished.

I'd say that was stretching a point. Provided you really did stop them from driving while drunk (eg: by offering them a lift, or ensuring they got a cab home) as opposed to just telling them to wait until the police had gone, you'd actually be ensuring that no crime was committed, which is "a good thing". That's different to warning someone who is already committing an offence so that they can avoid being caught for it.

 

[Mcnasty]

Who the F do they think they are?

I assume you are referring to the CPS who would have taken the decision to take this case to trial?

And I would take comments made by the accused with a pinch of salt, because there are always two sides to a story.

Granted IMHO, I don't think there was any merit in taking this case to trial as there is no benefit to anyone, especially the Police who will be/are accused of having better things to do.

The Police do not make the rules but are the body used by the legal system to uphold the law. So if the man did as was reported, then he has committed a criminal offence and is therefore reported for the offence, end of......

 

[davethemus]

That's different to warning someone who is already committing an offence so that they can avoid being caught for it.

there's no proof that these drivers were speeding and i'm sure a good lawyer could argue that if you prevent a crime from being committed then you deny the police the opportunity to solve that crime and catch the criminal, conspiracy is a criminal offence but more difficult to prove than the act itself so the police have been impeded.