Can someone show me the law?

[MSTRS:Me]

Could depend on the class of truck. But it is so. Has been discussed many times before.

[Ender EnZed]

Could depend on the class of truck. But it is so. Has been discussed many times before.

If this is the case then it is definitely different from what's in "The official New Zealand road code for heavy vehicle drivers". I've just done a brief search which turned up these two articles on the NZTA website:

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/about/media/.../656/news.html
http://www.nzta.govt.nz/about/media/...1002/news.html

There's certaintly a strong suggestion there, as there is in the truck road code, to "Keep it 10 below" but the wording makes it quite clear that "advisory" signs state the "recommended" speed for the corner. That's not the kind of language they use around speed limits.

[red mermaid]

You are wrong, they are advisory signs.

And the same for the 'Road Code.' It is an advisory informational guide.

The law is the relevant Act, Regulations, and Rules.

Could depend on the class of truck. But it is so. Has been discussed many times before.

[Berries]

The law is contained in the Road User Rule 2004 and subsequent amendments. It is on the NZTA website here - http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/ru...004-index.html. If I can be arsed I will post the relevant clauses re yellow markings later on, but they won't be hard to find.

Don't rely on or quote the Road Code. It is pretty pictures to match the BS driving tests.

And curve advisory signs are just that. It might be 'common' or 'best practice' for trucks to do ten below, but there is no rule on it. The signs would be regulatory signs if they had any kind of legal backing and the process for installing them would be a bit different.

[BMWST?]

Have had a search, and can find nothing regarding crossing yellows in order to leave the road (eg).
We all know that yellow markings are there to indicate an area of heightened risk, so don't go there.
Legalities aside, obviously anyone wanting to cross, does so at their own risk and needs to take extra-special care to determine it's safe to do so.
We see cops doing U-eys over yellows all the time...with predictable results at times.
Perhaps this is one of those grey areas?

see this is why it is kind of interesting to me. Everyone knows the rules, but very few know the law.

....the driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line..."

they are "no passing" lines not "do not cross" lines

[Berries]

....the driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line..."

they are "no passing" lines not "do not cross" lines

You missed the last part of that clause out. In full it is -

2.9(2) The driver must not pass or attempt to pass a motor vehicle or an animal-drawn vehicle moving in the same direction within the length of roadway on which the no-passing line is marked until the driver reaches the further end of the no-passing line, unless throughout the passing movement the driver keeps the vehicle wholly to the left of the no-passing line.

So in fact they are "no passing if you have to cross them" lines.

[Berries]

If I can be arsed I will post the relevant clauses re yellow markings later on, but they won't be hard to find.

To answer the OP, who was talking about other yellow lines you have -

No stopping lines -

6.4 Parking contrary to notice, traffic sign, or marking
(4) A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle on any part of a roadway where the road controlling authority has marked a broken yellow line parallel to, and at a distance of not more than 1 m from, the edge of the roadway.

The clause that says you don’t have to stop at the yellow limit line at an intersection -

4.1 Giving way where vehicles are controlled by stop sign or give-way sign
(1) A driver approaching or entering an intersection on a roadway where the vehicles that are moving in the direction in which that driver is travelling are controlled by a stop sign at or near the intersection must—
(a) stop his or her vehicle before entering the path of any possible vehicle flow at such a position as to be able to ascertain whether the way is clear for the driver to proceed.

So if you pull up behind a car at a stop controlled intersection, stop behind it and then follow it through when he goes you aren’t committing an offence. Always a good one to start an argument that.


Yellow box markings at intersections. I stand to be corrected, but these I believe are just highlighting areas where you should not stop, which are covered by several clauses including -

4.5 Approaching and entering intersections
(2) Despite anything in Part 3, a driver approaching an intersection or an area controlled by traffic signals must not enter the intersection or controlled area if the driver’s intended passage or exit is blocked by stationary traffic.

I am not sure that the markings themselves have any legal meaning, although they are referred to in Section 10.6 of the Traffic Control Devices Rule, which is also on the NZTA website and required reading if you are looking to argue a ticket.


And fire hydrants, assuming they are highlighted with a yellow marking -

6.10 Parking near fire hydrants
(1) A driver or person in charge of a vehicle must not stop, stand, or park the vehicle—
(a) within 500 mm of a fire hydrant; or
(b) if the fire hydrant is situated below the surface of the road, within 500 mm of the centre of the cover of the hydrant.

And finally -

8.3(2)(b) Don't eat yellow snow.

It tastes like piss.

[oneofsix]

Yellow box markings at intersections. I stand to be corrected, but these I believe are just highlighting areas where you should not stop, which are covered by several clauses including -

I am not sure that the markings themselves have any legal meaning, although they are referred to in Section 10.6 of the Traffic Control Devices Rule, which is also on the NZTA website and required reading if you are looking to argue a ticket.
.

http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/tr...d-marking.html
5.3.6 Cross hatching (clear zones)

Where the departure of long vehicles or queues of traffic from a level crossing may be blocked by a nearby intersection or other traffic control device, an escape lane or clear zone should be provided.

Cross-hatch markings may be used to define a clear zone area that drivers should not enter when their departure from a level crossing is blocked.

Cross-hatched clear zones should be marked in the following manner:

colour – reflectorised yellow
cross-hatch line – 100 mm wide
border line – 100 mm wide
should not, on any lane, extend beyond 2.4 m from the nearest rail edge (3 m from the centreline of the nearest railway line).

Note the heavy use of should in the above, should is usually taken to mean it is desirable whereas must means no if but or maybes.

[FJRider]

Actually, the yellow speed advisory signs are law for trucks. In theory, at least, they indicate a safe speed for a truck to negotiate that particular corner without risking roll-over.

So why do the speed advisory signs go up to 95 km/hr ... ??? when the heavy vehicle limit is 90 ... ???

[FJRider]

Could depend on the class of truck. But it is so. Has been discussed many times before.

I guess thats why so many truckies have been prosecuted for exceeding speed limits posted on speed advisory signs ...

[Berries]

So why do the speed advisory signs go up to 95 km/hr ... ??? when the heavy vehicle limit is 90 ... ???

If you saw the prehistoric method for determining what the speed is you'd soon realise that they are not enforceable. Have a look at Appendix A3 here -

MOTSAM Part 1

[FJRider]

If you saw the prehistoric method for determining what the speed is you'd soon realise that they are not enforceable.

I am well aware how those speeds are determined ...

Not "enforceable" ... as such ....

But in the case of an accident ... if drivers (car, truck ...or motorcyclist) had been obviously ignoring the advisory signs. It wouldn't help their case, if dangerous driving charges were laid. As has been done in the past ...