Do pedestrians give way to vehicles at supermarkets?

[cheshirecat]

Trawled the forums - well at least for 10 mins. Supermarkets are intersections by law but do pedestrians have to give way to incoming/exiting traffic when walking across entranceway? They do have a resonsibility to know the road code I believe but is that law. Just had one argue they had ful rights to amble acrosss regardless

[Hopeful Bastard]

Yes they do have to give way..

[GOONR]

Trawled the forums - well at least for 10 mins. Supermarkets are intersections by law but do pedestrians have to give way to incoming/exiting traffic when walking across entranceway? They do have a resonsibility to know the road code I believe but is that law. Just had one argue they had ful rights to amble acrosss regardless

Not sure about over here, in the UK if a pedestrian is half way or more over the road you are meant to give way to them.. Personally I'd make the bugger run!

[Trudes]

Good question. The supermarket that I shop at in Johnsonville has that issue constantly at one of it's entrances. If you're driving in there you usually want to get off the road as quick as possible due to it being a busy main road and if you sit there too long you end up with quite a que of backed up traffic behind you or peole try and squeeze around you which puts them on the other side of the road and peds just walk out onto the driveway expecting you to wait for them. Have just about bowled many a stupid egg there who hasn't even registered that cars need to use that driveway. People are stupid and just expect you'll stop for them. They get a hell of a shock when you keep driving towards them sitting on the horn!

[gazmascelle]

Pretty sure they call it a footpath for a reason. I usually give way to cars etc though especially when there's a lot of traffic about..

[cheshirecat]

In Germany I think pedestrians get clobbered if they 'interfere' with cars. Their bottom line is that peds should be on the road regardless.
Problem I find is that the road code is so PC and badly written you end up in the 'wrong' ie get fined, even if logic dictates otherwise. If you hit a pedestrian in the above, even though you'd be in the right re road code, I reckon you'd get fined.
Any case histories here?

[Hitcher]

Instead of debating inanities, run one over and see what happens.

Dollars to donuts the fuzz will bust your arse.

[JimO]

car V pedestrian car always in wrong

[kwaka_crasher]

car V pedestrian car always in wrong

Not in the case of a public entrance - that's a marked road they're crossing which makes it an intersection. The footpath ends at the side of the road.

[red mermaid]

Actually in law it is all road as per the definition pasted below from the Land Transport Act;
road includes—
(a) a street; and
(b) a motorway; and
(c) a beach; and
(d) a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not; and
(e) all bridges, culverts, ferries, and fords forming part of a road or street or motorway, or a place referred to in paragraph (d):
(f) all sites at which vehicles may be weighed for the purposes of this Act or any other enactment

However if you look at the Road User Rule, it states in 4.4;
Giving way when entering or exiting driveway
A driver entering or exiting a driveway must give way to a road user on a footpath.

So a car does have to give way to pedestrians on the footpath. And the "Fuzz will not bust your arse". They will apply the law as it is written and if you are unsure you should ask someone who knows what the law is, not the horses arse that is so ready to give you a wrong answer.

[Ender EnZed]

the "Fuzz will not bust your arse". They will apply the law as it is written and if you are unsure you should ask someone who knows what the law is, not the horses arse that is so ready to give you a wrong answer.

I reckon you'd probably be right if you only got them with the back wheel. That way you can say they jumped under.

The horses arse

[p.dath]

My personal guess is the chunk of land you are referring to is private property (certainly once you have turned off the road). Sure it looks like a road, but it is on the supermarket's land.

As such, the Land Transport Act (and it's give way rules) would not apply.

[Ender EnZed]

My personal guess is the chunk of land you are referring to is private property (certainly once you have turned off the road). Sure it looks like a road, but it is on the supermarket's land.

As such, the Land Transport Act (and it's give way rules) would not apply.

The Road Code book (which is not law) does make a special point out of supermarket entrances being an intersection as opposed to home driveways (I think). But I would still expect to give way to anyone without a number plate.

[swbarnett]

My personal guess is the chunk of land you are referring to is private property (certainly once you have turned off the road). Sure it looks like a road, but it is on the supermarket's land.

As such, the Land Transport Act (and it's give way rules) would not apply.
I refer you back to red mermaid's post:



(d) a place to which the public have access, whether as of right or not;


The fact that it is private property is irrelevant. If you don't have a locked gate on your driveway this also could be considered by an over zealous Mr. Plod to be a road.

This discussion has been had before on KB.

[discotex]

Most motorists turning right to enter the carpark forget to give way to vehicles that are turning right to leave (unless there's a marked give way sign). It's hardly surprising that pedestrians forget it's technically a road as well.

[vifferman]

The Road Code book (which is not law) does make a special point out of supermarket entrances being an intersection as opposed to home driveways (I think).
Correct - and during a driving test, the examiners will give you fail marks if you don't treat carparks (and not just supermarket ones) the same as a roadway, despite what Joe Public seems to think.
However (but!) the bit about "A driver entering or exiting a driveway must give way to a road user on a footpath" is referring to a driveway with a footpath crossing (like a residential driveway). Our local supermarket's entrances/exits are not crossings but formed more like roads. If these kind do not have pedestrian crossings marked on them, then cars have right of way, except where the pedstrians are already on the road when the car comes along.

Talking about this - in the 10 years of living in D'Auckland, I have had one (1!!) occasion (last week) where I have been turning right out of the supermarket and someone turning right into it (from my left) has given way. :eek: There seems to be an unofficial but widespread rule amongst Kiwis that "the smaller road gives way to the bigger road" (i.e., "might is right").
Only one! Out of maybe 20 or more occasions.
I've also had several instances when turning right out of the unmarked (no Give Way or Stop) T-intersection at the end of our street (same circumstances as for the supermarket) where dumbarses have refused to give way to their right. A tootling helps, but I suspect just bewilders these ignoramuses. Makes me feel better though...

[Ender EnZed]

I've also had several instances when turning right out of the unmarked (no Give Way or Stop) T-intersection at the end of our street (same circumstances as for the supermarket) where dumbarses have refused to give way to their right.

Many of these (like carparks) are treated as if there is/should be a Give Way sign there but its just invisible. Try giving way when you're turning into it and most people will just sit there confused in exactly the same they would if there was a sign.

[oldrider]

car V pedestrian car always in wrong

Pedestrian not watch out for car = stupid pedestrian! :confused:

[EJK]

Just watch out and don't hit anyone.

Simple.

[huff3r]

Pedestrian not watch out for car = stupid pedestrian! :confused:

Either way tho, if the ped dies you get done for manslaughter :doh:

[slofox]

As a pedestrian, I always give way to everything. I figure I'll break more easily than they will...

[oldrider]

Pedestrian not watch out for car = stupid pedestrian! :confused:


Either way tho, if the ped dies you get done for manslaughter :doh:

I was thinking from the position of the pedestrian, from a drivers point of view, I give way to all of them!

Pedestrian hit by car gets badly injured, who gives a fuck who is in the right, it still hurts the pedestrian, that was my point!

[peasea]

Simple courtesy goes a long way, legal or not, and that goes for drivers/riders and ped's.

If I'm on foot I am extremely wary of driveways, supermarket entrances and alleys. Better than ending up in hospital or worse.

If I'm in a car and exiting same, the same theory applies. I'd much rather err on the side of caution than end up in a courtroom.

[BM-GS]

Have heard a footpath described as the pedestrian's lane of the road. If they're going straight on and you're turning, you should give way.

Of course, they should look and try not to walk in front of anything liable to kill them. They should obey the little red flashing man on the light-controlled crossings, too.

Usually it depends on what kind of mood I'm in how close I get to them before stopping. The jct of Shortland St & Queen St in Aucks CBD has real short lights (3 cars max) and when those dozey sods kept walking out, even on my green, I used to get upset. I used to do this turn a dozen times a day sometimes, driving for work. I even put in a purchase req. for one of those WW2 mine-clearance tanks with the big chain flail on the front, but it got rejected every time...

Never hit a ped yet, tho. Not worth it from anyone's POV.

[JimO]

Usually it depends on what kind of mood I'm in how close I get to them before stopping. The jct of Shortland St & Queen St in Aucks CBD has real .

i know someone who lost their licence for careless driving for 6 months for exactly that except they actually nuged the pedestrian

[cheshirecat]

So what we have so far is that a supermarket entrance is an intersection, like a service station so pedestrians need to give way to cars. If you hit a ped however, even if its the peds fault, you get done - but not the ped who can get all rightious, indignant and write letters to the ed etc.

In the form of the rest of the road code so seems about right.

Oh I brought this up because a women eyeballed me and tried to walk right across my path on purpose when I was turning in to a supermarket entrance. My point to her was I had to stop right in the middle of the road - on the wrong side of it with all the other cars trying to get in and out, so although she may have had rights it was dangerous and arrogant - or words to that effect

[GOONR]

i know someone who lost their licence for careless driving for 6 months for exactly that except they actually nuged the pedestrian

My mate back in the Uk was a right bastard, he would stand and wait at the lights, if a car got too close he would suddenly dive on the bonnet and roll off then.. Nothing, totally motionless on the floor, wait for the big crowd to gather and then just get up and walk away as if nothing had happened.

Priceless to watch but it must have given the driver the right shit's. That's not the only stunt he used to pull either, I don't think he was quite all there really.

[BMWST?]

So what we have so far is that a supermarket entrance is an intersection, like a service station so pedestrians need to give way to cars. If you hit a ped however, even if its the peds fault, you get done - but not the ped who can get all rightious, indignant and write letters to the ed etc.

In the form of the rest of the road code so seems about right.

Oh I brought this up because a women eyeballed me and tried to walk right across my path on purpose when I was turning in to a supermarket entrance. My point to her was I had to stop right in the middle of the road - on the wrong side of it with all the other cars trying to get in and out, so although she may have had rights it was dangerous and arrogant - or words to that effect

a supoermarket IS to be treated like an intersection....If the entrance is formed like a proper road way then i think most pedestrians will treat it as a road way.If the entrance crosses the footpath like normal residential driveway then i consider the pedestrian HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY

[GOONR]

a supoermarket IS to be treated like an intersection....If the entrance is formed like a proper road way then i think most pedestrians will treat it as a road way.If the entrance crosses the footpath like normal residential driveway then i consider the pedestrian HAS THE RIGHT OF WAY

That's really the way I see it too. Common sense really.

[kwaka_crasher]

i know someone who lost their licence for careless driving for 6 months for exactly that except they actually nuged the pedestrian

He should have fought it rather than just rolling over. Pedestrians aren't allowed to cross against a signal any more than vehicles are allowed to ignore red lights. And if there's a crossing within 20m they have to use it.

[JimO]

they were on a crossing but were crossing after the light turned green

[kwaka_crasher]

they were on a crossing but were crossing after the light turned green

Then they should have fought it.

[JimO]

did fight it in court car is in the wrong if it hits a pedestrian,

[kwaka_crasher]

did fight it in court car is in the wrong if it hits a pedestrian,

Bullshit.

[JimO]

Bullshit.

they have a careless driving conviction to prove it, but dont take my word for it try it yourself

[Road Guardian]

car V pedestrian car always in wrong

What about, give way to the bigger object?? :whistle:

[swbarnett]

they were on a crossing but were crossing after the light turned green
This is the crux of this one. If the pedestrian started crossing when their light was green they have the right to complete the crossing irrespective of what colour the car's traffic light is when they're half way across.

[kwaka_crasher]

they have a careless driving conviction to prove it, but dont take my word for it try it yourself

Been there, done that, wasn't even charged.

I'm just saying there's clearly more to the story than you've been made aware of or have made us aware of.

[kwaka_crasher]

This is the crux of this one. If the pedestrian started crossing when their light was green they have the right to complete the crossing irrespective of what colour the car's traffic light is when they're half way across.

I took his statement as meaning the pedestrian entered the crossing after the traffic signal turned green for vehicles.

If however the pedestrian was already on the crossing before the vehicle traffic signal turned green and the pedestrian hadn't entered the crossing after the pedestrian crossing signal had started to flash red, then you are correct.

[Skyryder]

My personal guess is the chunk of land you are referring to is private property (certainly once you have turned off the road). Sure it looks like a road, but it is on the supermarket's land.

As such, the Land Transport Act (and it's give way rules) would not apply.

Wrong. If the land can be accessed by the public it's classed as a road.

Actually if there is a ped crossing that for all appearances looks like a pedeatrian crossing you have to give way too. Even if they are not on the crossing but look like they are about to use the crossing still have to give way.


Skyryder

[cheshirecat]

Nothng like the precision of the law. So we now have that if something does looks like, but doesn't or isn't we must treat it as if it could or is. I'm going back to see Alice in Wonderland.