LED Strobes

[Swiss Toni]

Another common breach of lighting regs seen on our roads concerns the use of flashing white and red lights on bicycles .

Whilst is is legal to have flashing white/red LED's showing to the front/rear these can only be used as a supplement to constantly illuminated lights and may not be used on their own .

Unfortunately , many cyclists seem to be unaware of this and ride around with ONLY flashing LED's . I suppose at least it is better than no lights at all .

I *believe* that used to be the case, but The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 2005 changed Reg 13 such that it became legal.




EDIT: (Found it!)

Regulation 6 amends regulation 13 of the 1989 Regulations so as to permit pedal cycles or trailers drawn by, or a sidecar attached to, a pedal cycle to be fitted with front and rear position lamps which flash. In the case of lamps which must be fitted pursuant to regulation 18, lamps must, when flashing, produce a light with an intensity of not less than 4 candelas.

 

[Mr E]

If it is an ambulance, it will say ambulance on the V5.

That's a Rapid Response Vehicle (RRV) in that video. It is used for medical emergency purposes only, so by law it is 'for ambulance purposes'.

As I say, there is confusion over the subject so I would love to hear from anyone who does use blue lights to hear under which law they use them legally.

The police told me - and supplied the strobes...

If challenged, I can refer them to the control room who called me out on an medical emergency. I also carry the letter from the police that explained what I can and can't do, and under what circumstances (for example, I can't use them if I come across an RTC as I wasn't called out). Falls under the "ambulance purpose" bit, and my company pays an additional insurance premium gratis that covers me under those circumstances.

 

[JumboBeef]

The police told me - and supplied the strobes...

If challenged, I can refer them to the control room who called me out on an medical emergency. I also carry the letter from the police that explained what I can and can't do, and under what circumstances (for example, I can't use them if I come across an RTC as I wasn't called out). Falls under the "ambulance purpose" bit, and my company pays an additional insurance premium gratis that covers me under those circumstances.

Do you claim exemption (speed limits, red lights etc) and if you do, do you have it in writing that you can? Did you do any blue light driving training?

 

[Dieselman]

Regulation 6 amends regulation 13 of the 1989 Regulations so as to permit pedal cycles or trailers drawn by, or a sidecar attached to, a pedal cycle to be fitted with front and rear position lamps which flash.

Flashing lights are easier to see than static ones.

As you rightly say they can now be used but they must flash uniformly as opposed to randomly or with the illumination moving position, to maintain their BS accreditation, thus be legal.

 

[219]

Agreed that the flashing lights are easier to spot .

The issue I had is that they don't help you to see where you're going in the dark .

As I live in the country , and will occasionally cycle home from the railway station after dark along unlit country lanes , I do need lights that let me see where I'm going . I have always had a 'Cat Eye' halogen headlamp and conventional tail lamp as well as flashing LED lights ( white front facing one on my helmet and red rear facing one on the bike , the type with several LED's that sweep randomly in an arc ) . At least if one light fails I do have backup .

 

[Mr E]

Do you claim exemption (speed limits, red lights etc) and if you do, do you have it in writing that you can? Did you do any blue light driving training?

I don't tend to vastly exceed the speed limits - and we only have one major set of lights in the area I cover and I've never had to go through them on red. TBH I'd feel quite anxious about doing that as it's a staggered crossroads on a dual carriageway. The only other lights are on a pedestrian crossing and I have gone through those on red when cleared, but I don't think there is a camera on those. As there is nothing in the documents that I have about this specifically I tend to be careful, but I have been flashed by a camera but not heard anything about it (but that could have been becasue of no film, I don't know).

The request for myself and one other to be equipped with strobes came from the Fire Service in the village - I had to show my various advanced driving courses and do a half day assessment with an instructor before they let me loose.

The main advantage I find is that other drivers move out of the way or otherwise make way for you so that you can make decent progress. The other advantage is that the police around here use E-class estates too

 

[Swiss Toni]

The police told me - and supplied the strobes...

If challenged, I can refer them to the control room who called me out on an medical emergency. I also carry the letter from the police that explained what I can and can't do, and under what circumstances (for example, I can't use them if I come across an RTC as I wasn't called out). Falls under the "ambulance purpose" bit, and my company pays an additional insurance premium gratis that covers me under those circumstances.

Did they tell you that you'll get no additional consideration if you are involved in an accident while they are in use?
If you go through a red light at walking pace and someone T-bones you, you are very likely (almost certain) to be prosecuted in the same way as if anyone else went through the same lights.

Not intended to be ****y, but it is the rule applied to all of the emergency services...

 

[JumboBeef]

If you go through a red light at walking pace and someone T-bones you, you are very likely (almost certain) to be prosecuted in the same way as if anyone else went through the same lights.

Not intended to be ****y, but it is the rule applied to all of the emergency services...

If you have exemption, then you can treat red lights as a give way.

You need to totally clear whether you can claim exemption or not: I would get it in writing if I were you, otherwise...............

 

[flango]

Did they tell you that you'll get no additional consideration if you are involved in an accident while they are in use?
If you go through a red light at walking pace and someone T-bones you, you are very likely (almost certain) to be prosecuted in the same way as if anyone else went through the same lights.

Not intended to be ****y, but it is the rule applied to all of the emergency services...

Going back a while I used to drive for Mines Rescue in a variety of vehicles from Range Rover to 46 tonne artic which was a mobile lab. I was trained and authourised to drive on blues and twos, the rules then used to be red lights could only treated as a give way under both blues and twos as the only vehicles that had two tones were the Range Rovers this only applied to them. We also could claim exemption from speed limits and speed cameras.

We never took the vehicels home but a bit like retained firemen had to live close to the base, which for me meant travelling 3 miles in my own car, with no blues or nothing if you were called out.

 

[Swiss Toni]

...I was trained and authourised to drive on blues and twos, the rules then used to be red lights could only treated as a give way under both blues and twos as the only vehicles that had two tones were the Range Rovers this only applied to them. We also could claim exemption from speed limits and speed cameras...

I appreciate that the instruction is that red lights may be treated as a Give Way, but I'm not sure how widely it is appreciated that the approach to prosecution is the same as anyone else - I mention it here because those not being trained directly by the emergency services may not have the same exposure to a courtroom

If you got the impression that some allowance might be given for the fact that you were en-route to a life-threatening incident when considering whether to prosecute or not - it isn't.

Exemption to speed limits and other requirements doesn't stop you seeing the inside of a courtroom - it can often be the place where the drivers belief that the exemption applied is really tested.

Police, Fire and Ambulance personnel are paying tickets and getting points on their licence every day because they were (most often) speeding when an exemption did not apply.

Human nature being what it is, there are folks trying their luck too - those same drivers trying to apply a legal exemption when they are caught bang-to-rights and facing charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice (and losing their jobs).

 

[Swiss Toni]

If you have exemption, then you can treat red lights as a give way.

You need to totally clear whether you can claim exemption or not: I would get it in writing if I were you, otherwise...............

PS

There is no link between blue lights, 2-tones and any legal exemption -

If the exemption applies you do not need to display blues or have the siren on (a common misconception?).

If you are covered by the exemption, you can still be prosecuted for driving without due care, if the standard of your driving falls below that of a careful and competent driver (and would a careful and competent driver pass through those red lights in that manner or drive at that speed on that road at that time and in those conditions...?).

Its a nightmare.

 

[flango]

I appreciate that the instruction is that red lights may be treated as a Give Way, but I'm not sure how widely it is appreciated that the approach to prosecution is the same as anyone else - I mention it here because those not being trained directly by the emergency services may not have the same exposure to a courtroom

I was trained by the emergency services and respected them so much that now some 20 years later I now train the emergency services as an instructor.

If you got the impression that some allowance might be given for the fact that you were en-route to a life-threatening incident when considering whether to prosecute or not - it isn't.

I agree no one is exempt from prosecution in an RTI but you are exempt for red light or speed infringements, still.

Exemption to speed limits and other requirements doesn't stop you seeing the inside of a courtroom - it can often be the place where the drivers belief that the exemption applied is really tested.

Been there done that got the Tee shirt as an expert witness as an advanced driver instructor, in quite a few polacs that have ended up in court.

Police, Fire and Ambulance personnel are paying tickets and getting points on their licence every day because they were (most often) speeding when an exemption did not apply.

If in Fire engines and Ambulances Never, police if not under blues are questioned and the incident investigated, time of offence is checked against incidents in progress at that time for all police marked and unmarked vehicles.

Human nature being what it is, there are folks trying their luck too - those same drivers trying to apply a legal exemption when they are caught bang-to-rights and facing charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice (and losing their jobs).

I agree there ia always someone who will try it on to get out of a sticky situation, fortunately most magistrates can spot them.

 

[flango]

PS

There is no link between blue lights, 2-tones and any legal exemption -

If the exemption applies you do not need to display blues or have the siren on (a common misconception?).

Not true, The current Police Class 1 training program approved by ACPO states " A red ATS may be treated as a give way if the vehicle is displaying blue flashing lights and alternating 2 tone siren" i.e. White noise in between two tones which mainly applies to Traffic cars not panda's. I teach it !

If you are covered by the exemption, you can still be prosecuted for driving without due care, if the standard of your driving falls below that of a careful and competent driver (and would a careful and competent driver pass through those red lights in that manner or drive at that speed on that road at that time and in those conditions...?).

Agreed but the defence will put up an expert witness in court, usually an advanced driver trainer to give their view on events and safe driving, I know I've done it.

Agree on the nightmare as I've advised on cases that have suffered poor driving and also some that have featured excellent drving but unforunately a member of the public caused the incident by poor observation

 

[Swiss Toni]

I was trained by the emergency services and respected them so much that now some 20 years later I now train the emergency services as an instructor
.

(I'd gathered most of your experience from previous threads... )

Not sure how to read this though?;

If in Fire engines and Ambulances Never...

As a Professional Witness, you'll appreciate the surprise (and often disgust) felt by drivers attending life-at-risk incidents who find themselves in a position where their livelihood (and home etc) is at risk because of an incident that arose from their driving to the said incident. In truth, they do (should) all know that their noble role afords them no additional protection and that all other road users deserve to be protected by a legal system that takes action against blue-light drivers who fall below the required standard?


Either way, you are correct that the red-light offence will not be what the standard of driving is compared against, it is against the standard of driving of a careful and competent driver - which in turn leads to a greater offence.
Whilst the legal exemption may be claimed (and accepted) the offence being considered is not one of "jumping a red light", it is likely to be one of driving without due care for other road users...

 

[Swiss Toni]

Agree on the nightmare as I've advised on cases that have suffered poor driving and also some that have featured excellent drving but unforunately a member of the public caused the incident by poor observation

Hence the need for your training?

Day 1 Lesson 1

"Watch out for the other guy..."

 

[Swiss Toni]

I agree there ia always someone who will try it on to get out of a sticky situation, fortunately most magistrates can spot them.

If it is dealt with at Magistrates it's either too late or else it is about to get very messy.

I can't imagine you attend Magistrates too often. Crown Court perhaps?

 

[Swiss Toni]

If the exemption applies you do not need to display blues or have the siren on (a common misconception?).

Not true, The current Police Class 1 training program approved by ACPO states " A red ATS may be treated as a give way if the vehicle is displaying blue flashing lights and alternating 2 tone siren" i.e. White noise in between two tones which mainly applies to Traffic cars not panda's. I teach it !

I appreciate that the training may recommend it, however there is no link in law.

If it helps, even a Traffic Driver attending a Burglary-in-progress would not be expected (by ACPO) to sound their siren as they edged through a red light near to the scene.

Depending on who you train, you may/not be aware of Class 1 Drivers who would not be expected to apply these guidelines in their normal line of business.

 

[flango]

(I'd gathered most of your experience from previous threads... )

Not sure how to read this though?;



As a Professional Witness, you'll appreciate the surprise (and often disgust) felt by drivers attending life-at-risk incidents who find themselves in a position where their livelihood (and home etc) is at risk because of an incident that arose from their driving to the said incident. In truth, they do (should) all know that their noble role afords them no additional protection and that all other road users deserve to be protected by a legal system that takes action against blue-light drivers who fall below the required standard?

Sorry I totally agree with you what I meant was a fire engine or ambulance caught on a speed camera will be exempt and the incident not followed up. An emergency services driver involved in an RTI should always be investigated, as in all professions there are people who slip through the net and in certain circumstances put themselves and members of the public at risk, leading to catastrophic life changing incidents. The public have the right to be protected by a legal system that takes into account sub standard professional driving and no one should ever think they are above the law. The worst examples of these are some police pursuit drivers, the red mist comes down and the only conclusion they see is stopping the car they are pursuing, irrespective of public safety, this is usually when an incident occurs. The safe thing to do would be back off and "live to fight another day" there is never any action that justifies putting members of the public at risk.


Either way, you are correct that the red-light offence will not be what the standard of driving is compared against, it is against the standard of driving of a careful and competent driver - which in turn leads to a greater offence.
Whilst the legal exemption may be claimed (and accepted) the offence being considered is not one of "jumping a red light", it is likely to be one of driving without due care for other road users...

We actually personally had an example of this, one Friday night a few years ago we were coming back fom the supermarket on a single carriageway 40 mph limit, my wife driving approaching a red traffic light, we could hear the sirens, behind us 2 x fire engines on blues & twos and deep horn, we are stood at the red light blocking their progress. Safest action, advised my wife to go check her side and if both our sides were clear go through red light and pull into the road immediately to our left allowing them access. What we forgot was the lights had a red light camera. Sure enough a week later we got a NIP, gave the information and wrote back explaining the situation and asking them to look at the following 2 photographs which would clearly show fire engines confirming our explanation. Received a fixed penalty back £60 & 3 points. Incensed we took the court option waited for the documents to arrive and then wrote back again explainiing the situation. CPS dropped all charges

Sometimes our laws are so open to interpretation and can be exploited by those with a need to do so

 

[Swiss Toni]

Sorry I totally agree with you what I meant was a fire engine or ambulance caught on a speed camera will be exempt and the incident not followed up.

That sounds like it may be a local policy, but is/has not been the case nationally - there are plenty of Fire, Police and Ambulance drivers with the points to prove it. I'm sure I'd no more want to see one emergency service rushing back to base for their lunch than another...

Incensed we took the court option waited for the documents to arrive and then wrote back again explainiing the situation. CPS dropped all charges.

Clearly the correct result as you relied on the same exemption as applied to any vehicle passing through those lights at that time - it is the nature of the task that allows it, not the colour of the vehicle, its flashing lights or any ACPO Policy...

 

[flango]

I appreciate that the training may recommend it, however there is no link in law.

Actually in the letter of the law you are probably correct, need to check that as it probably needs to be made clearer in training procedures

If it helps, even a Traffic Driver attending a Burglary-in-progress would not be expected (by ACPO) to sound their siren as they edged through a red light near to the scene.

Very good point , you could have a class one driver attending such an incident who would not want to announce his arrival, again may need some thought in training procedures, really appreciate this dialogue does make you think of things that could happen you don't cover. Most of the training is geared towards failing to stop incidents.

Depending on who you train, you may/not be aware of Class 1 Drivers who would not be expected to apply these guidelines in their normal line of business.

Again very good point some people would certainly not ant to announce their arrival