View Single Post
  #68   Report Post  
Old February 6th 09, 11:56 AM posted to uk.transport.london,cam.misc
Duncan Wood[_2_] Duncan Wood[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 17
Default UTLer in the news

On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 12:48:57 -0000, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message op.uoxj38f9haghkf@lucy, at 12:39:34 on Fri, 6 Feb 2009,
Duncan Wood remarked:
http://www.ukemergency.co.uk/others/DSC04085.jpg [1]

[1] Not unless it's operated by the NHS, which I can't tell from
that photo, but seems unlikely.

So you think it would be morally acceptable to obstruct it?

Not unless it was unavoidable, such as a red traffic light (where you
wouldn't even have the excuse that the Emergency Workers Act had led
you to believe it was OK).

Normally I give a wide range of public service vehicles precedence,
including buses and refuse trucks. But we are discussing the *legal*
situation.


Well you can validly calim you thought it was a mine rescue vehicle,
which is an emergency vehicle. If it isn't then it's breaking the law
by having blue flashing lights fitted.


Ah, I think you've fallen into the trap I have been trying to
highlight here.

There are *many* vehicles which are allowed blue lights, but which *do
not* come under the Emergency Workers Act.

In other words (and ignoring people with illegally fitted lights) you
cannot use the presence of blue lights to tell whether or not the
vehicle has a statutory right not to be obstructed.

Yes, they completely muffed that Act.



Well only inasmuch as if people are intent on obstructing them then they
might not be commiting a criminal offense.