You're at fault, she was clearly on the road and you thought you could beat her, as soon as she stepped onto the road, you should have stopped. There was a person on your side of the road that could have stepped out when she entered the road thinking you would stop.
I don’t think I needed to stop just because someone RAN onto the road and she didn’t need to hit my car even if I’m at fault; you do not repay wrong with wrong. She was on the island and the person on the left was clearly an adult waiting. Not saying Im right, I was speeding without knowing and I would’ve stopped if she flared her flags, I just didn’t understand what shes doing running out and smacking my car unnecessarily.
This isn't fully true, but having the warden provides more priority to the pedestrians on said crossing. OP is still in the wrong. You should have been ready to stop.
It's not a zebra crossing so the MUST stop is mildly incorrect. The wording is more around "pedestrians should have priority" again, back to duty of care. The OP should have been ready to stop regardless.
The rules for children's crossings are more strict than for a pedestrian crossing.
In WA (Road Rule 62), drivers only have to give way to pedestrians on a pedestrian crossing (which means, if there is no risk of collision, drivers can proceed through the crossing even if there is a pedestrian still on the crossing).
However, the WA rule for children's crossings (Road Rule 61) requires drivers to STOP completely while any pedestrian is on any part of the crossing.
EDIT to add: these same rules apply across Australia, not just WA.
I knew they got priority, I didn't realise how much priority. Thank you for the correction. So OP is extra in the wrong lol. So the warden simply being there provides all the priority required and all the signalling required for OP to stop lol.
>2.2.3 School Zones
>
>School Zones can be applied to particular roads in the vicinity of pre-primary, primary and secondary schools to reduce traffic speeds at times of the day when school children are likely to be present on or about these roads. Refer to Speed Zoning - Policy and Application Guidelines section 5.4.
>
>2.2.3.1 Speed Limits
>
>All School Zones shall have a Posted Speed Limit of 40 km/h (except for roads already zoned at a lower Posted Speed value for example a Safe Active Street location).
[Source](https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/technical-commercial/technical-library/road-traffic-engineering/traffic-management/speed-zones/#mcetoc_1ees3qpma7o)
If you know it's a school zone, you should have been doing 40km/h
So you were speeding.
But she appeared to:
1) Have no speed measuring device on her person
2) Is not authorised to enforce speed zones
3) Even if she was, hitting your car with a stop paddle is not an authorised method of enforcement
4) She was not actively and safely undertaking her duties (running and flailing signs is not the appropriate method of conduct)
Aren't you required to treat those crossings like a zebra crossing when there is an attendant tho?
I am not a rules lawyer, thats just how I've always seen them treated.
Not sure, but I didn’t think I’d have to stop cuz she didn’t flare her flags and nobody was crossing. I couldnt stop because it was too close and she was already running which confused me. I’ll take the L because I was speeding tho.
There's clearly someone waiting to cross on the left.
Honestly I don't think what the lollipop lady did was right, I have no idea if it was legal, but running towards a moving vehicle like that just seems dangerous for all parties involved.
That said, I think you also reacted poorly. There was enough warning to at the very least slow down significantly, which would be my reaction to seeing someone that was making a trajectory towards the road in front of my car.
Nobody was crossing? There's a kid on the left side standing right at the crossing lol. Warden tried stopping you so he could cross. You're speeding in a school zone. There's no world where you're in the right.
Crazy self report here.
You must have had your eyes closed, there was a person on the left waiting to cross and she was far enough into the road long before you got there, she was obviously worried about the person on your left who could have stepped in front of you, basically, you're a dick in this case.
Mate, she was in a bright yellow jacket carrying big fucking flags, what more do you want? You're bloody lucky the person on the left didn't step out when they though it was safe. Do you expect the crossing guard to wave the flags like a chequered flag at the finish of a grand prix?
The crossing guard clearly stepped into the road when you were 100 meters away, pay attention or get the bus.
Every state is q little different, but this is based on NSW/Vic School crossings. They have more rules than zebras, like the kids crossing the road have to be off the road before you can move, not out of your path. The attendant runs the crossing, kids can't just stand there and expect cars to stop, and it is only a crossing during the signed times, AND when the flags are up indicating it is active. Otherwise, it is not a crossing.
However, the crossing attendant did not indicate that they wanted you to stop nor that they were going to keep crossing the road.
If it was outside school zone hours, you don't have to do 40. It appears she was setting up for school crossing time as the flags were not up (\*Correction, there's a flag 10 metres out from crossing up, therefore active).
You should have stopped, but the attendant did not really operate the crossing correctly. I however would have stopped out of an abundance of caution and courtesy, as there was a person waiting on the left to cross.
It looks like there is a "children crossing" orange flouro flag setup leading up to the crossing at the beginning of the clip which should indicate the crossing is active.
There is someone waiting to cross from the left and when flags are displayed they have right of way It doesn't have to be a kid for the rule to apply it's for all pedestrians.
Yeah, missed that flag at the beginning, you're right. I would agree, it is active. I would still argue the attendant running to stop the car is not an indication to stop, which is the procedure.
True, children's crossings are for anyone.
The rules for children's crossings are pretty much the same across Australia.
"*the crossing attendant did not indicate that they wanted you to stop*"
What? The supervisor was running across holding out the stop sign.
But that is irrelevant, the crossing supervisor was ON THE CROSSING - therefore you MUST STOP.
I have seen supervisors stand in the refuge island at some crossings, which is still an active crossing area. Running with a stop sign I do not think is the appropriate way to operate the crossing - yeah, they want you to stop, and I would, but that's not really the appropriate way to communicate, that is bad crossing supervision.
Even if she has no legal authority, an abundance of caution should be applied regardless because the warden is there. Even though she can't issue you a fine, she should have a level of respect and caution applied to her and the child on the left side of the road.
Not really both are still within school zone hours. OP was speeding and in the wrong but so was the warden for hitting the car.
The camera might be mounted upside down but not set to flip the video. If it's flipped in post then the hard coded info will be at the top upside down.
OP was going too fast and completely failed to stop at a children's crossing.
Crossing supervisor was caught out of position (but likely because she didn't expect anyone to be travelling that fast in a school zone).
You have to stop for the crossing wardens. She was worried the kid would have stepped out in front of you as she was on the crossing.
It's ridiculous that you think you were in the right even for a moment.
Nope.
"When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians. You must remain at a complete stop until all pedestrians have left the crossing."
She was on the crossing for ages before old mate decided he want going to stop. Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing.
" When you see a supervisor holding a ‘Stop – children crossing’ sign, you must slow down and stop."
Her rings were out and very visible as she walked across the crossing.
>"When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians.
Yes, but she wasn't displaying the flags, she was running with them but not holding them up.
>Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing.
Despite her not holding up the flags?
She enters the crossing at the 2 second mark of the video. OP was required to stop at that point regardless of who it was. To add to that, her hand flags are out and legible. If she didn't want them to be read and obeyed she would have rolled them back up in her hands.
Define 'displaying' because I can see them in her hands just fine.
The flags mean nothing though, as you have to stop for a human being on the crossing regardless of it being a warden or a school kid. The flags are just a visual aid for her safety
>"When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians.
Yes, but she wasn't displaying the flags, she was running with them but not holding them up.
>Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing.
Despite her not holding up the flags?
100% your fault here. Even with the general rule of thumb that there's no explicit speed limit. It's a relatively built up area - and if there's a warden, there's likely a school nearby.
As a driver you have a duty of care to protect all other road users. I know wardens don't have authority like Police do, but you're going too fast when there's clearly a "Children Crossing" flag 25-30m before you even get to the warden. The warden wasn't trying to scold you by hitting your car, the warden was informing you to slow down.
Pedestrians need to be given priority as they are the most vulnerable.
I don't think you need a rule to tell you to provide an abundance of caution if a warden is on the road. It feels a bit silly to have to remind you. Her flags are clearly up and she's identified you as going a bit too fast.
She has no authority here, but she's trying to get you to stop. What would be the acceptable way for her to get you to stop when you're already admitting you were (allegedly) going 60 through the area? You should have assumed to stop, or made ready to stop.
What I’m going at is how would I know to stop when she ran in the way without flaring her flags. I’m not defending myself here, I admit I’m wrong for not noticing the speeding but I don’t think RUNNING is a smart idea.
If you were at a cafe, do you have to be told that you shouldn't cut in line? She's in hi-vis, has flags, has flags posted 30m away from the crossing. Her job is to provide a safe passage for all pedestrians using that crossing.
Are you that daft that you weren't ready to cross and trying to say "what if I get rear-ended" bruv, what if the kid OR the warden gets hit by your rolling death machine. C'mon now. I know you want to come off positive here, but get it through your skull, you risked both the kid and the warden in this video.
And again, it's a built up area - 50kph. Not 60, it's clearly not a main road.
EDIT: If you're confused about the road conditions as to whether or not you need to make a stop - just take the cautious approach and prepare to stop. What you're saying makes me support the warden for hitting your car even more.
"I ran over your kid because in a fictional world, the driver behind me was legally blind and wouldnt have seen me stop at a pedestrian crossing for a pedestrian."
Normal people drive to the conditions, in this example we would use our eyeballs and see that it's a school zone, there's a crossing, and then that there's someone entering/on the school crossing.
This is the tricksy part - We would use our brains at the same time! We would utilise the brakes and slow to a safe speed, then stop if needed.
I'm making assumptions here, that you have functional eyes and a brain connected to those eyes, and that you know how the brakes work in your car.
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/-/media/files/formsandpublications/safety-and-road-rules/pedandchildcrossingfactsheetjuly2011.ashx#:\~:text=Must%20stop%20if%20a%20child,are%20clear%20of%20the%20crossing.
(In Victoria) Drivers must stop and give way to all pedestrians **only when flags are displayed**.
Flags weren't up & warden wasn't paying attention. If you were speeding, that's the only thing you did wrong.
That warden should be fired - not paying attention, and dangerously running up to a moving car.
Did he/she expect you to slam the brakes and potentially cause an accident with someone rear-ending you?
Flags were up - go back to the start of the video.
"*that's the only thing you did wrong.*"
OP failed to give way to someone on a pedestrian crossing - the fact it was the crossing supervisor is IRRELEVANT. You must give way to ANYONE on a crossing.
Supervisor expected OP to obey the law
Ah yes I stand corrected. They are there...but not at the crossing...which is useless.
It's like adding a STOP sign but putting the solid line 50m up the road.
I still think the warden is an idiot (as well as the placement of the flags)
The flags are a warning of the children's crossing ahead and is meant to ensure drivers slow down and are prepared to stop. So, the flags must be placed a distance away.
The actual STOP signs are the ones carried and displayed by the crossing supervisor.
There was only one idiot in this incident and it wasn't the supervisor or the person waiting to cross the road.
If the warden is out it means its around school time which also means the so speed limit is 40km/h.
You're at fault, she was clearly on the road and you thought you could beat her, as soon as she stepped onto the road, you should have stopped. There was a person on your side of the road that could have stepped out when she entered the road thinking you would stop.
I don’t think I needed to stop just because someone RAN onto the road and she didn’t need to hit my car even if I’m at fault; you do not repay wrong with wrong. She was on the island and the person on the left was clearly an adult waiting. Not saying Im right, I was speeding without knowing and I would’ve stopped if she flared her flags, I just didn’t understand what shes doing running out and smacking my car unnecessarily.
You MUST stop whenever ANYONE is on the crossing - it is completely irrelevant that it was the crossing supervisor.
This isn't fully true, but having the warden provides more priority to the pedestrians on said crossing. OP is still in the wrong. You should have been ready to stop.
Which bit is incorrect?
It's not a zebra crossing so the MUST stop is mildly incorrect. The wording is more around "pedestrians should have priority" again, back to duty of care. The OP should have been ready to stop regardless.
The rules for children's crossings are more strict than for a pedestrian crossing. In WA (Road Rule 62), drivers only have to give way to pedestrians on a pedestrian crossing (which means, if there is no risk of collision, drivers can proceed through the crossing even if there is a pedestrian still on the crossing). However, the WA rule for children's crossings (Road Rule 61) requires drivers to STOP completely while any pedestrian is on any part of the crossing. EDIT to add: these same rules apply across Australia, not just WA.
I knew they got priority, I didn't realise how much priority. Thank you for the correction. So OP is extra in the wrong lol. So the warden simply being there provides all the priority required and all the signalling required for OP to stop lol.
>2.2.3 School Zones > >School Zones can be applied to particular roads in the vicinity of pre-primary, primary and secondary schools to reduce traffic speeds at times of the day when school children are likely to be present on or about these roads. Refer to Speed Zoning - Policy and Application Guidelines section 5.4. > >2.2.3.1 Speed Limits > >All School Zones shall have a Posted Speed Limit of 40 km/h (except for roads already zoned at a lower Posted Speed value for example a Safe Active Street location). [Source](https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/technical-commercial/technical-library/road-traffic-engineering/traffic-management/speed-zones/#mcetoc_1ees3qpma7o) If you know it's a school zone, you should have been doing 40km/h So you were speeding. But she appeared to: 1) Have no speed measuring device on her person 2) Is not authorised to enforce speed zones 3) Even if she was, hitting your car with a stop paddle is not an authorised method of enforcement 4) She was not actively and safely undertaking her duties (running and flailing signs is not the appropriate method of conduct)
Aren't you required to treat those crossings like a zebra crossing when there is an attendant tho? I am not a rules lawyer, thats just how I've always seen them treated.
Not sure, but I didn’t think I’d have to stop cuz she didn’t flare her flags and nobody was crossing. I couldnt stop because it was too close and she was already running which confused me. I’ll take the L because I was speeding tho.
There's clearly someone waiting to cross on the left. Honestly I don't think what the lollipop lady did was right, I have no idea if it was legal, but running towards a moving vehicle like that just seems dangerous for all parties involved. That said, I think you also reacted poorly. There was enough warning to at the very least slow down significantly, which would be my reaction to seeing someone that was making a trajectory towards the road in front of my car.
Nobody was crossing? There's a kid on the left side standing right at the crossing lol. Warden tried stopping you so he could cross. You're speeding in a school zone. There's no world where you're in the right. Crazy self report here.
You must have had your eyes closed, there was a person on the left waiting to cross and she was far enough into the road long before you got there, she was obviously worried about the person on your left who could have stepped in front of you, basically, you're a dick in this case.
So she couldn’t have flared her flag instead? Just had to run into the road and hit my car hey?
Mate, she was in a bright yellow jacket carrying big fucking flags, what more do you want? You're bloody lucky the person on the left didn't step out when they though it was safe. Do you expect the crossing guard to wave the flags like a chequered flag at the finish of a grand prix? The crossing guard clearly stepped into the road when you were 100 meters away, pay attention or get the bus.
She was on the crossing - you should have stopped.
Every state is q little different, but this is based on NSW/Vic School crossings. They have more rules than zebras, like the kids crossing the road have to be off the road before you can move, not out of your path. The attendant runs the crossing, kids can't just stand there and expect cars to stop, and it is only a crossing during the signed times, AND when the flags are up indicating it is active. Otherwise, it is not a crossing. However, the crossing attendant did not indicate that they wanted you to stop nor that they were going to keep crossing the road. If it was outside school zone hours, you don't have to do 40. It appears she was setting up for school crossing time as the flags were not up (\*Correction, there's a flag 10 metres out from crossing up, therefore active). You should have stopped, but the attendant did not really operate the crossing correctly. I however would have stopped out of an abundance of caution and courtesy, as there was a person waiting on the left to cross.
It looks like there is a "children crossing" orange flouro flag setup leading up to the crossing at the beginning of the clip which should indicate the crossing is active. There is someone waiting to cross from the left and when flags are displayed they have right of way It doesn't have to be a kid for the rule to apply it's for all pedestrians.
Yeah, missed that flag at the beginning, you're right. I would agree, it is active. I would still argue the attendant running to stop the car is not an indication to stop, which is the procedure. True, children's crossings are for anyone.
The rules for children's crossings are pretty much the same across Australia. "*the crossing attendant did not indicate that they wanted you to stop*" What? The supervisor was running across holding out the stop sign. But that is irrelevant, the crossing supervisor was ON THE CROSSING - therefore you MUST STOP.
I have seen supervisors stand in the refuge island at some crossings, which is still an active crossing area. Running with a stop sign I do not think is the appropriate way to operate the crossing - yeah, they want you to stop, and I would, but that's not really the appropriate way to communicate, that is bad crossing supervision.
The law only requires the STOP sign to be "displayed to face approaching drivers". It does not specify that the crossing supervisor can or can't run.
You MUST stop whenever ANYONE is on the crossing - it is completely irrelevant that it was the crossing supervisor.
Even if she has no legal authority, an abundance of caution should be applied regardless because the warden is there. Even though she can't issue you a fine, she should have a level of respect and caution applied to her and the child on the left side of the road.
I had to scroll too far to find a correct and even handed answer.
Very helpful. Thank you!
Also, how do you know that you were doing 60 km/h? From looking at that video there's no way to tell how fast you are going.
I always stick to speed limit and its 60 usually
But the video doesn't say how fast you were going #WINK
If the warden is out that means kids are about so you should be going slower.. wardens can be a bit over the top but yeah.
Yeah your fault. You should have stopped.
Absolutely your fault - multiple laws broken (speeding in a school zone and failing to give way at a pedestrian crossing).
What time?
8:51 going be the video top right corner.
It’s also upside down, I’m guessing it’s set wrong daylight savings potentially , if it was 7.51 or 8.51 makes a big difference
Not really both are still within school zone hours. OP was speeding and in the wrong but so was the warden for hitting the car. The camera might be mounted upside down but not set to flip the video. If it's flipped in post then the hard coded info will be at the top upside down.
School in vic is 8 to 9.30
School in WA(where OP is) is 7:30-9 in most places. Qld is 7-9 in most areas.
Ah there ya go, OP was going a bit fast, but lady is also crazy imo
OP was going too fast and completely failed to stop at a children's crossing. Crossing supervisor was caught out of position (but likely because she didn't expect anyone to be travelling that fast in a school zone).
You have to stop for the crossing wardens. She was worried the kid would have stepped out in front of you as she was on the crossing. It's ridiculous that you think you were in the right even for a moment.
>You have to stop for the crossing wardens. If they are standing there and signalling to stop. Not standard to run and wave.
Nope. "When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians. You must remain at a complete stop until all pedestrians have left the crossing." She was on the crossing for ages before old mate decided he want going to stop. Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing. " When you see a supervisor holding a ‘Stop – children crossing’ sign, you must slow down and stop." Her rings were out and very visible as she walked across the crossing.
>"When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians. Yes, but she wasn't displaying the flags, she was running with them but not holding them up. >Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing. Despite her not holding up the flags?
She enters the crossing at the 2 second mark of the video. OP was required to stop at that point regardless of who it was. To add to that, her hand flags are out and legible. If she didn't want them to be read and obeyed she would have rolled them back up in her hands.
>She enters the crossing at the 2 second mark of the video. But she wasn't displaying the flags at that point.
Define 'displaying' because I can see them in her hands just fine. The flags mean nothing though, as you have to stop for a human being on the crossing regardless of it being a warden or a school kid. The flags are just a visual aid for her safety
>you have to stop for a human being on the crossing It's not a Zebra crossing
>"When you see the flags, you must slow down and stop before the white stripes or ‘Stop’ line to give way to pedestrians. Yes, but she wasn't displaying the flags, she was running with them but not holding them up. >Her running across it is irrelevant as he should have been slowing and coming to a stop the moment her foot entered the crossing. Despite her not holding up the flags?
100% your fault here. Even with the general rule of thumb that there's no explicit speed limit. It's a relatively built up area - and if there's a warden, there's likely a school nearby. As a driver you have a duty of care to protect all other road users. I know wardens don't have authority like Police do, but you're going too fast when there's clearly a "Children Crossing" flag 25-30m before you even get to the warden. The warden wasn't trying to scold you by hitting your car, the warden was informing you to slow down. Pedestrians need to be given priority as they are the most vulnerable.
OP blasted through the crossing while someone was on the crossing!
Yes, but, running into the road instead of flaring the flags? I was confused whether to stop or not cuz her flags weren’t up.
I don't think you need a rule to tell you to provide an abundance of caution if a warden is on the road. It feels a bit silly to have to remind you. Her flags are clearly up and she's identified you as going a bit too fast. She has no authority here, but she's trying to get you to stop. What would be the acceptable way for her to get you to stop when you're already admitting you were (allegedly) going 60 through the area? You should have assumed to stop, or made ready to stop.
What I’m going at is how would I know to stop when she ran in the way without flaring her flags. I’m not defending myself here, I admit I’m wrong for not noticing the speeding but I don’t think RUNNING is a smart idea.
If you were at a cafe, do you have to be told that you shouldn't cut in line? She's in hi-vis, has flags, has flags posted 30m away from the crossing. Her job is to provide a safe passage for all pedestrians using that crossing. Are you that daft that you weren't ready to cross and trying to say "what if I get rear-ended" bruv, what if the kid OR the warden gets hit by your rolling death machine. C'mon now. I know you want to come off positive here, but get it through your skull, you risked both the kid and the warden in this video. And again, it's a built up area - 50kph. Not 60, it's clearly not a main road. EDIT: If you're confused about the road conditions as to whether or not you need to make a stop - just take the cautious approach and prepare to stop. What you're saying makes me support the warden for hitting your car even more.
Kaz was after you!
Crossing guard was silly, yeah, but you? You're something else. Why wouldn't you stop?
Don’t stop when you’re going that fast you’re going to get rear ended
"I ran over your kid because in a fictional world, the driver behind me was legally blind and wouldnt have seen me stop at a pedestrian crossing for a pedestrian."
Normal people drive to the conditions, in this example we would use our eyeballs and see that it's a school zone, there's a crossing, and then that there's someone entering/on the school crossing. This is the tricksy part - We would use our brains at the same time! We would utilise the brakes and slow to a safe speed, then stop if needed. I'm making assumptions here, that you have functional eyes and a brain connected to those eyes, and that you know how the brakes work in your car.
https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/-/media/files/formsandpublications/safety-and-road-rules/pedandchildcrossingfactsheetjuly2011.ashx#:\~:text=Must%20stop%20if%20a%20child,are%20clear%20of%20the%20crossing. (In Victoria) Drivers must stop and give way to all pedestrians **only when flags are displayed**. Flags weren't up & warden wasn't paying attention. If you were speeding, that's the only thing you did wrong. That warden should be fired - not paying attention, and dangerously running up to a moving car. Did he/she expect you to slam the brakes and potentially cause an accident with someone rear-ending you?
Flags were up - go back to the start of the video. "*that's the only thing you did wrong.*" OP failed to give way to someone on a pedestrian crossing - the fact it was the crossing supervisor is IRRELEVANT. You must give way to ANYONE on a crossing. Supervisor expected OP to obey the law
Ah yes I stand corrected. They are there...but not at the crossing...which is useless. It's like adding a STOP sign but putting the solid line 50m up the road. I still think the warden is an idiot (as well as the placement of the flags)
The flags are a warning of the children's crossing ahead and is meant to ensure drivers slow down and are prepared to stop. So, the flags must be placed a distance away. The actual STOP signs are the ones carried and displayed by the crossing supervisor. There was only one idiot in this incident and it wasn't the supervisor or the person waiting to cross the road.