Indicator Highway Code rule that could see drivers fined £5,000 and get nine points
Using an indicator is an essential part of driving but failing to use one properly can lead to a fine and penalty points on your licence
Motorists could face a hefty fine of up to £5,000 and nine points on their licence for simply misusing their indicator. Indicators are an essential tool in any vehicle.
They communicate your intentions to other road users and pedestrians before you make a manoeuvre. This allows others to react appropriately and reduces the risk of accidents.
However, incorrect use of indicators can confuse other road users and increase the likelihood of an accident. According to Rule 104 of the Highway Code, road signals are used to warn and inform other road users.
Drivers should always give a clear signal with plenty of time, ensuring that the signal will not mislead any other road user. To achieve this, the Highway Code advises drivers to use signals to inform other road users before "changing course or direction, stopping or moving off" and to cancel them once they're no longer necessary.
The Highway Code further states: "Make sure your signals will not confuse others. If, for instance, you want to stop after a side road, do not signal until you are passing the road. If you signal earlier, it may give the impression that you intend to turn onto the road."
To make sure you're adhering to the Highway Code, it's wise to employ the mirrors, signal, manoeuvre method, ensuring your use of indicators doesn't bewilder other motorists or pedestrians. Moreover, when signalling to turn, provide ample notice for others to react.
Nevertheless, don't signal too prematurely as this could confuse other road users.
Risk of misusing indicators
Police may deem misusing or neglecting to use an indicator as 'careless and inconsiderate driving,' which could then mean you are breaking the law. The Metropolitan Police said: "The offence of driving without due care and attention (careless driving) is committed when your driving falls below the minimum standard expected of a competent and careful driver, and includes driving without reasonable consideration for other road users."
As a result, those convicted could face penalties up to a £5,000 fine and as many as nine penalty points. However, often officers may opt for a fixed-penalty notice (FPN) of £100 plus three points, at their discretion.
Bear in mind that if a new driver has had their licence for less than two years, accruing up to six points on their licence will result in it being revoked. Consequently, the driver will need to retake their test before they can drive again.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
21 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Questions raised by Madeleine McCann suspect's new letter - from DNA to photos
In his latest bid to clear his name, and gloat at police, Christian Brueckner has sent a letter to police which highlights six major questions in relation to the case A vile letter from the prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has raised some questions over the case. German prosecutors are convinced of Christian Brueckner's guilt — but he has never been charged and denies any involvement. In his latest bid to clear his name, and gloat at police, he has sent a letter to police saying "decisive questions can never be answered", according to reports. Christian Brueckner, who is in prison for raping a 72-year-old woman in Praia da Luz in 2005, reportedly sent a letter to officers saying questions which would implicate him in the case of the three-year-old British girl, who vanished from the same resort 18 years ago, cannot be answered. Brueckner is due to be released from jail in September if no further charges are brought. In October last year, he was cleared by a German court of unrelated sexual offences, alleged to have taken place in Portugal between 2000 and 2017. In the note, seen and translated by The Sun newspaper, Brueckner reportedly wrote: "It is the important questions, the decisive questions that can never be answered." He went on to ask the following six questions: Was I or my vehicle clearly seen near the crime scene on the night of the crime? Is there DNA evidence of me at the crime scene? Are there DNA traces of the injured party in my vehicle? Are there other traces/DNA carriers of the injured party in my possession? Or photos [of the above]? Is there a body/corpse? He added that the accusations against him "will not hold up and that the investigation will be dropped". The letter carried on with Brueckner claiming that the case was built on "purchased witnesses" but said he understood the German legal system well and claimed it would be unlikely for him to be locked up for her disappearance. It comes after German and Portuguese police came together this week to search every properties and pieces of land linked to Brueckner, as his sentence is due to end in September. Investigators are said to be set on the idea that the paedophile took the three-year-old but and are desperate to prove this before he is freed - the predator has denied any involvement. This search, the most significant since 2008, included an abandoned farmhouse surrounded by partially collapsed outbuildings. Police were spotted removing mounds of earth from the scene, which was then taken away in plastic bags for further examination. Firemen were also spotted draining an abandoned well. Despite this, nothing related to the missing girl appeared to have been found during the operation, police however have not shared an official statement on what could have been discovered. To date, the Metropolitan Police has spent more than £ 13million on Madeleine's case, dubbed Operation Grange
Daily Mirror
4 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Drivers packing the car up for a holiday issued urgent £300 fine warning
In the case of an accident involving an overpacked vehicle, travel experts warn that if a driver is found to be at fault, they could be slapped with a whopping £2,500 fine When heading away on vacation, some holidaymakers prefer to bring as many of the comforts of home along with them as possible. But as the summer season draws ever closer, UK drivers are being urged to pay close attention to how much they cram into their cars. Overloading your vehicle not only puts your safety and that of other road users at risk, it can also result in hefty fines, penalty points, and even invalidate your insurance. Overloading occurs when a vehicle is carrying more weight than it is legally designed to handle — every vehicle has its own weight limit. This includes the combined weight of passengers, luggage and any additional equipment, such as roof boxes or bike racks. Known as the Maximum Authorised Mass (MAM), this weight limit can be found on a plate inside the driver's doorframe and in your vehicle's handbook. Exceeding this limit, even unintentionally, is a breach of UK road laws. To avoid passing the permitted payload, weigh your luggage and consider the weight of all passengers — four adults plus luggage can easily exceed the MAM of smaller cars. Distribute weight evenly by placing heavier items low and central in the boot, which helps maintain stability. Avoid stacking items above the seat line to keep rear visibility clear. Never carry more passengers than there are seatbelts, as this is a separate offence with its own penalties. When using a roof rack, drivers should be aware of its associated weight limits and how it might affect the vehicle's handling. Overloading a car has several serious consequences. Extra weight makes your car harder to steer, reduces stability and increases stopping distances. Brakes under such stress may struggle to cope, while the risk of mechanical failure also rises significantly. Overloaded vehicles put extra pressure on tyres, increasing heat and the likelihood of a dangerous blowout. The extra strain also means that suspension, brakes and other components wear out faster, potentially leading to costly repairs and breakdowns. Overpacking can block your view of mirrors and blind spots, further increasing accident risk. Additionally, engines must work harder to move the extra weight, leading to higher fuel consumption and more trips to the petrol station. Jamie Fraser from Wild Packs explains: 'Overloading the car with too many items can obstruct the driver's view, endangering those in the car as well as other road users. This is due to Rule 98 of the Highway Code, which states that drivers must not overload their vehicles and should always stay within the weight limits recommended by the vehicle manufacturer. 'Drivers who overpack their vehicles risk a £50 fixed penalty for exceeding weight limits or blocking their view. Furthermore, in the event of an accident, overloaded vehicles may render insurance claims invalid. In more severe cases, if authorities determine that a vehicle is in a dangerous condition due to the excess weight, the penalties can increase to a £2,500 fine, three penalty points, and even a driving ban." The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) and police regularly check vehicles for overloading, especially during holiday periods. Penalties are structured according to how much the vehicle is overloaded. If you exceed the maximum limit by less than 10%, you can be fined £100. If the overload is between 10% and 14%, the fine increases to £200. For overloading by 15% or more, the penalty rises to £300 and you will also receive three penalty points on your licence. In extreme cases, such as being overloaded by more than 30%, you could face a court summons. If found guilty of dangerous driving, this could result in up to two years in prison. Repeat offenders risk even harsher penalties, including driving disqualification. Overloading your car can also invalidate your insurance policy. In the event of an accident, insurers may refuse to pay out if your vehicle was found to be overloaded at the time. Additionally, you may be prohibited from continuing your journey until excess weight is removed, or your vehicle could even be impounded. With the DVSA and police carrying roadside checks and fines up to £300 (plus penalty points) for overloading by just 15%, all UK drivers should double check their loads before heading off on holiday. Ignoring these risks not just your safety, but that of everyone on the road — and if deemed to have caused an accident, could land you with a whopping £2,500 fine.
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Former DC police officer sentenced to 18 months for lying about leaking info to Proud Boys leader
A retired police officer was sentenced on Friday to serve 18 months behind bars for lying to authorities about leaking confidential information to the Proud Boys extremist group's former top leader, who was under investigation for burning a Black Lives Matter banner in the nation's capital. Shane Lamond was a lieutenant for the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., when he fed information about its banner burning investigation to then-Proud Boys national chairman Enrique Tarrio. Last December, after a trial without a jury, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Washington, D.C., convicted Lamond of one count of obstructing justice and three counts of making false statements. Tarrio attended Lamond's sentencing and later called for Trump to pardon Lamond. 'I ask that the Justice Department and the President of the United States step in and correct the injustice that I just witnessed inside this courtroom," Tarrio said outside the courthouse after the sentencing. Prosecutors recommended a four-year prison sentence for Lamond. 'Because Lamond knew what he did was wrong, he lied to cover it up — not just to the Federal Agents who questioned his actions, but to this Court," they wrote. "This is an egregious obstruction of justice and a betrayal of the work of his colleagues at MPD.' Lamond's lawyers argued that a prison sentence isn't warranted. "Mr. Lamond gained nothing from his communications with Mr. Tarrio and only sought, albeit in a sloppy and ineffective way, to gain information and intelligence that would help stop the violent protesters coming to D.C. in late 2020, early 2021," they wrote. Tarrio pleaded guilty to burning the banner stolen from a historic Black church in downtown Washington in December 2020. He was arrested two days before dozens of Proud Boys members stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Tarrio wasn't at the Capitol that day, but a jury convicted him of orchestrating a violent plot to keep President Donald Trump in the White House after he lost the 2020 election. Lamond testified at his bench trial that he never provided Tarrio with sensitive police information. Tarrio, who testified as a witness for Lamond's defense, said he did not confess to Lamond about burning the banner and did not receive any confidential information from him. But the judge did not find either man's testimony to be credible. Jackson said the evidence indicated that Lamond was not using Tarrio as a source after the Dec. 12, 2020, banner burning. 'It was the other way around,' she said. Lamond, of Colonial Beach, Virginia, retired in May 2023 after 23 years of service to the police department. Lamond, who met Tarrio in 2019, had supervised the intelligence branch of the police department's Homeland Security Bureau. He was responsible for monitoring groups like the Proud Boys when they came to Washington. Prosecutors said Lamond tipped off Tarrio that a warrant for his arrest had been signed. They pointed to messages that suggest Lamond provided Tarrio with real-time updates on the police investigation. Lamond's indictment says he and Tarrio exchanged messages about the Jan. 6 riot and discussed whether Proud Boys members were in danger of being charged in the attack. 'Of course I can't say it officially, but personally I support you all and don't want to see your group's name and reputation dragged through the mud,' Lamond wrote. Lamond said he was upset that a prosecutor labeled him as a Proud Boys 'sympathizer' who acted as a 'double agent' for the group after Tarrio burned a stolen Black Lives Matter banner in December 2020. 'I don't support the Proud Boys, and I'm not a Proud Boys sympathizer,' Lamond testified. Lamond said he considered Tarrio to be a source, not a friend. But he said he tried to build a friendly rapport with the group leader to gain his trust. ___
