On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 19:59:31 +0100, "MB" wrote:


"Mark Goodge" wrote in message
shouse.net...
On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:57:32 +0100, Roland Perry put finger to
keyboard and typed:

In message , at
10:27:15 on Sun, 19 Apr 2009, MB remarked:
As for police advice, it's very specific (as part of a long list of
things they don't expect you to do):

"We do NOT expect you to put yourself in danger by crossing red
traffic lights to make way for us."

http://www.met.police.uk/mpds/advice.htm

That sounds like a clever way of saying "we would like you get out of
our
way at traffic lights if it is safe but if you have an accident we will
not
accept any responsibility and probably charge you"

Except when you look at the page as a whole, when it's clear that's not
the hidden meaning.

I think the last one on that page is the most telling:

We do NOT expect you to risk road camera fines by, for example,
moving in to bus lanes during hours of operation to make way for us.

That is, effectively, saying that making way for an emergency vehicle
is not considered sufficient grounds to challenge an automatically
issued fixed penalty notice from a camera monitored location. Bus
lanes are one common example of such locations, others would be
light-controlled junctions that have red light cameras.


Probably because enforcement of these is outside the control of the police
and they don't want to get in arguments with the companies or organisations
doing the enforcement. They should perhaps also advise about driving into
the entrance of some private car parks to clear a way for an emergency
vehicle because that could be enough to get a penalty.

Enforcement of bus lanes is not IMU outwith the control of the police
but is merely additionally enforced by some other agencies (e.g. TfL
using a "prescribed device" to detect offenders).