Motorhomes over 3.5T new rules in France

[Ebbo]

As of 1st jan 2021 Motorhomes must display blind spot notices

see here (French website) https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/actualites/A14499

Translation from google

Heavy goods vehicles: installation of a blind spot signaling device ​

Posted on December 03, 2020 - ​

Directorate of legal and administrative information (Prime Minister) Illustration 1 Credits: © Road Safety Illustration 1 ​

Bikes, two-wheelers, motorcycles, scooters, scooters, hoverboards, gyropods, monowheels ... are always less visible than a car. With their smaller size, they are often placed in the blind spots of heavy goods vehicles (trucks, buses, coaches, etc.). In order to strengthen the protection of vulnerable users traveling on public roads, a blind spot signaling device must be installed on heavy vehicles from January 1, 2021. Provided for by the mobility orientation law of December 2019, it has just been implemented. 'be decided by a decree published in the Official Journal on November 19, 2020. Vehicles over 3.5 tonnes (goods transport vehicles and passenger transport vehicles) must be fitted with signage showing the position of blind spots as of January 1, 2021.​

This signage must be affixed on the sides and at the rear of the vehicle in order to be visible to cyclists, pedestrians and users of personal vehicles traveling on public roads. They are not always aware of the impossibility for the driver of the truck to perceive their presence, which causes sometimes fatal accidents, for example when the driver plans to turn while a cyclist is present on the side of the vehicle. This obligation applies to heavy vehicles traveling in an urban environment. It does not concern agricultural and forestry vehicles, winter service vehicles and intervention vehicles of the services managing highways or dual carriageways which are not intended to operate in dense urban environments. Failure to comply with this obligation is penalized by a fourth class fine. The model of the signage and its methods of affixing will be fixed by a forthcoming decree of the Minister responsible for Transport and the Minister responsible for Road Safety.

​

 

[2x2camper]

Makes you wonder how the Londoners are going to have any supplies when they're doing their best to ban lorries

I think if the lorries stopped killing people they might be a bit more welcoming.

 

[jongood]

I think if the lorries stopped killing people they might be a bit more welcoming.

Last time I was in London in a lorry I had to wait for a cyclist to extricate himself from between the unit and the trailer before I could set off from some lights, he was apparently trying to squeeze down the side while the traffic was stopped.

 

[Chocy boy]

Won't need them the way Covid is going.

 

[Norman Jones]

Perhaps the cyclists should have something written on their black lycra. Je suis invisible.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[2x2camper]

Perhaps the cyclists should have something written on their black lycra. Je suis invisible.

Why pick on cyclists we are supposed to be discussing danderous HGV's

If they weren't dangerous why would you have to put stickers on them to point out the dangers.

As I said on a previous thread about the stickers it about trying to avoid the blame after causing an accident. Why not blame the person who is injured or killed by because they didn't read the sticker. Surely energies should rather go into designing vehicles, including driver training, that are safe around people. After all its not just on roads that people are killed, just standing on footpaths can be just as dangerous.

 

[cmcardle75]

Its come in in london as well - For Lorries and Buses.
If it runs true to form the gendarmes won't bother enforcing it - just like they re not sat in calais waiting to check every motorist has got their headlamps changed and their Gilets, first aid kits, spare bulbs etc etc etc.

Yeah. When I was stuck on the slip road, totally blocking the route to Calais Port from the A26, I forgot to put my yellow jacket on as I got out with the police right there watching me. They couldn't give two niquers. They weren't even wearing them themselves. No British motorway police would dream of driving without them on, let alone wandering all over the carriageway. They were very polite, spoke about as much English as I spoke French and definitely weren't looking for excuses to spray fines in every direction.

 

[MacroMad]

It's a warning sign that could save lives and cost a couple of quid, It would also go a long way to minimise litigation should the worst happen.
If the gendarmes can see the sign then they probably wont stop you, and that might save any arguing over weight.

 

[Paulypaul]

Yeah, bloody lorry drivers....not giving way to the lycra clad mob who get on 2 skinny wheels and all of a sudden forget any rules or courtesy of the road.

No stickers or warning signs are going to instill any type of sense into the wannabe tour de france mob who dress and pretend to be road racers

 

[EssexBoy]

I think the point is that safe road usage relies on everyone having a decent level of hazard perception. It's now part of driving test.

Should all road users over 16 be tested?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[2x2camper]

I think the point is that safe road usage relies on everyone having a decent level of hazard perception. It's now part of driving test.

Should all road users over 16 be tested?

What, you want tomtest pedestrians?

 

[dunnah01]

Stop being so bleepin vain and stick em on each corner. Those that don't want to see em won't but if only one newby does then job jobbed

 

[jongood]

What, you want tomtest pedestrians?

banning the wearing off headphones would go a long way towards pedestrian safety.

I think we have reached the point where cyclists should be licenced and registered.

I also favour retests for motorists - perhaps an assessment every 10 years?

 

[2x2camper]

banning the wearing off headphones would go a long way towards pedestrian safety.

I think we have reached the point where cyclists should be licenced and registered.

I also favour retests for motorists - perhaps an assessment every 10 years?

Headphone don't hurt anyone

We need to focus on who actually does the damage, not blame the victim. Makes me laugh when the old suggestion testing and licencing is brought up by motorists, we have had that for years for drivers and motor vehicles yet they still go around killing and maiming people. How many motorists are on the road illegally? How many pedestrians and cycle have killed a motorists? Need to fix the actual problem first.

 

[jongood]

Headphone don't hurt anyone

We need to focus on who actually does the damage, not blame the victim. Makes me laugh when the old suggestion testing and licencing is brought up by motorists, we have had that for years for drivers and motor vehicles yet they still go around killing and maiming people. How many motorists are on the road illegally? How many pedestrians and cycle have killed a motorists? Need to fix the actual problem first.

My issue with headphones is when wearers wander across the road in oblivion, this has happened in front of me many times and with a surprising age range.

I'm a cyclist and a motorcyclist as well so would like both to be safer but there is no denying that an element of both ride like absolute hooligans, I know there are rogue elements in most forms of transport, but most if not all of the others are accountable where the cyclist is not.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[2x2camper]

My issue with headphones is when wearers wander across the road in oblivion, this has happened in front of me many times and with a surprising age range.

I'm a cyclist and a motorcyclist as well so would like both to be safer but there is no denying that an element of both ride like absolute hooligans, I know there are rogue elements in most forms of transport, but most if not all of the others are accountable where the cyclist is not.

At the end of the day everyone makes mistakes, but you don't deserve to be killed for it. The person driving the machine that does the killing needs to take and accept more responsibility for their actions. If that means going slower and taking more time then so be it.

I think you will find that cyclist have been accountable for their actions , in recent years there is one famous case. Now how many motorist get a couple of hundred pounds fine for killing other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians?

As I said above how many cyclists and pedestrians have killed a motorist?

Frustrating as it is people should have more rights than a lump of metal.

 

[funflair]

At the end of the day everyone makes mistakes, but you don't deserve to be killed for it. The person driving the machine that does the killing needs to take and accept more responsibility for their actions. If that means going slower and taking more time then so be it.

I think you will find that cyclist have been accountable for their actions , in recent years there is one famous case. Now how many motorist get a couple of hundred pounds fine for killing other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians?

As I said above how many cyclists and pedestrians have killed a motorist?

Frustrating as it is people should have more rights than a lump of metal.

As you know cyclists and pedestrians killing motorists is not the issue, the big issue is that cyclists and pedestrians are being killed or injured and sometimes this is down to their own actions, I think Jon is suggestion that you can not really be aware of your surroundings if you are cycling with a big set of headphones shouting in your ears.

When I was and apprentice in heavy engineering the big push on safety was always that YOU were responsible for your own safety and the safety of others, I think over the years that has changed and too much responsibility has been taken away from individuals looking after themselves and people are always looking for somebody else to look after them and ultimately blame when it goes wrong. We all have a role to play in safe and responsible use of ours roads.

 

[2x2camper]

sometimes this is down to their own actions

You're victim blaming. No one asks for a motor vehicle to hit them, yes we should take as much precautions as nesscary to protect ourselves, but if we don't that's not a reason to be killed, there is someone driving that vehicle that has a responsibility not to hit you.

To come back to the OP, the stickers are there to put the blame on the person not reading them, not the person doing the driving in mostly badly designed HGVs.

As society we seem to hold the rights of vehicles above that of people, using there own steam to get about. Why have motor vehicle become so god like?

 

[funflair]

You're victim blaming. No one asks for a motor vehicle to hit them, yes we should take as much precautions as nesscary to protect ourselves, but if we don't that's not a reason to be killed, there is someone driving that vehicle that has a responsibility not to hit you.

To come back to the OP, the stickers are there to put the blame on the person not reading them, not the person doing the driving in mostly badly designed HGVs.

As society we seem to hold the rights of vehicles above that of people, using there own steam to get about. Why have motor vehicle become so god like?

On the same theme are you suggesting that the victim is never at fault?

What if somebody walks or runs straight onto a pelican/zebra crossing without even a glance, yes all motors should give way but you have to give them a chance to stop, that pedestrian should take responsibility for his own safety and that of others OK he isn't going to kill the HGV driver but what about if there was a cyclist coming?

 

[jongood]

At the end of the day everyone makes mistakes, but you don't deserve to be killed for it. The person driving the machine that does the killing needs to take and accept more responsibility for their actions. If that means going slower and taking more time then so be it.

I think you will find that cyclist have been accountable for their actions , in recent years there is one famous case. Now how many motorist get a couple of hundred pounds fine for killing other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians?

As I said above how many cyclists and pedestrians have killed a motorist?

Frustrating as it is people should have more rights than a lump of metal.

I like cycling and tbh would like to do it more but it seems every time I go out that I see at least one cyclist acting recklessly, frequently scooting through the middle of stationary traffic, riding through red lights at speed and hopping onto the pavements with no regard for pedestrians at all. I have stopped the lorry many times to avoid collision with a cyclist making an illegal manoeuvre. This Saturday I was waiting to turn left at a traffic island with my indicators on and as I was ready to pull off I noticed a cyclist on my left side who couldnt see the oncoming traffic and subsequently went straight on. Would a sign have stopped him - I don't think so.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[2x2camper]

On the same theme are you suggesting that the victim is never at fault?

What if somebody walks or runs straight onto a pelican/zebra crossing without even a glance, yes all motors should give way but you have to give them a chance to stop, that pedestrian should take responsibility for his own safety and that of others OK he isn't going to kill the HGV driver but what about if there was a cyclist coming?

I am not going to argue every defence you put up in support of motorist or we could be here all year. The point of this thread is that putting stickers on a HGV's makes them safer, it does not. What we need is better vehicles and drivers that and a change in attitude that's put people ahead of lumps of metal.

 

[2x2camper]

I like cycling and tbh would like to do it more but it seems every time I go out that I see at least one cyclist acting recklessly, frequently scooting through the middle of stationary traffic, riding through red lights at speed and hopping onto the pavements with no regard for pedestrians at all. I have stopped the lorry many times to avoid collision with a cyclist making an illegal manoeuvre. This Saturday I was waiting to turn left at a traffic island with my indicators on and as I was ready to pull off I noticed a cyclist on my left side who couldnt see the oncoming traffic and subsequently went straight on. Would a sign have stopped him - I don't think so.

Why pick on cyclists? What about motorists who make mistakes as well. Don't get me wrong I am not defending cyclists or motorist who act in a stupid manner. What I am saying just because you are stupid is not a reason that someone in a motor vehicle should kill you. Yes it may be frustrating and annoying and may hold you up for a few seconds but that is just life.

As I said above why do we put lumps of metal above humans?

 

[eurajohn]

I am not going to argue every defence you put up in support of motorist or we could be here all year. The point of this thread is that putting stickers on a HGV's makes them safer, it does not. What we need is better vehicles and drivers that and a change in attitude that's put people ahead of lumps of metal.

I don't think the original purpose of the thread is " The point of this thread is that putting stickers on a HGV's makes them safer", it was to advise readers of a coming requirement in France.
You seem to be in denial that cyclists get killed because they go against the rules of the road and get themselves on the inside of HGV's where they can't be seen by the driver.
The French authorities are trying to stop this behaviour by requiring a highly visible notice being placed in a position on relevant vehicles, where it is possible the thoughtless cyclist (and others) will see it and think twice about putting themselves into an extremely vulnerable position.

 

[2x2camper]

I don't think the original purpose of the thread is " The point of this thread is that putting stickers on a HGV's makes them safer", it was to advise readers of a coming requirement in France.
You seem to be in denial that cyclists get killed because they go against the rules of the road and get themselves on the inside of HGV's where they can't be seen by the driver.
The French authorities are trying to stop this behaviour by requiring a highly visible notice being placed in a position on relevant vehicles, where it is possible the thoughtless cyclist (and others) will see it and think twice about putting themselves into an extremely vulnerable position.

Last post from me on the subjest because I need to get on with some work.

Everyone makes mistakes but I have have said they should not kill you.

What do the French authorities want to happen by putting stickers on a HGV. They want people to avoid dangerous situations that are caused by the blind spots on a HGV's. So the HGV's has the problem and instead of making them safer to drive and be around they push the responsibility back on those that have not created the situation.

It is all part of valuing lumps of metal more than humans.

Back to work

 

[eurajohn]

Last post from me on the subjest because I need to get on with some work.

Everyone makes mistakes but I have have said they should not kill you.

What do the French authorities want to happen by putting stickers on a HGV. They want people to avoid dangerous situations that are caused by the blind spots on a HGV's. So the HGV's has the problem and instead of making them safer to drive and be around they push the responsibility back on those that have not created the situation.

It is all part of valuing lumps of metal more than humans.

Back to work

Appreciate that will be your last word.
But what if the cyclist stopped putting themselves in dangerous blind spot, it is because they disregard the rules and put themselves there they get injured.

They do create the situation.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[funflair]

Last post from me on the subjest because I need to get on with some work.

Everyone makes mistakes but I have have said they should not kill you.

What do the French authorities want to happen by putting stickers on a HGV. They want people to avoid dangerous situations that are caused by the blind spots on a HGV's. So the HGV's has the problem and instead of making them safer to drive and be around they push the responsibility back on those that have not created the situation.

It is all part of valuing lumps of metal more than humans.

Back to work

Personally I don't value a lump of metal more than a human, the stickers are I assume to make other road users aware that HGV's are driven by humans who are not all perfect and that we all have a responsibility to stay safe, remember we are all responsible for our own safety and that of others.

 

[jongood]

Why pick on cyclists? What about motorists who make mistakes as well. Don't get me wrong I am not defending cyclists or motorist who act in a stupid manner. What I am saying just because you are stupid is not a reason that someone in a motor vehicle should kill you. Yes it may be frustrating and annoying and may hold you up for a few seconds but that is just life.

As I said above why do we put lumps of metal above humans?

Ignoring the histeria:-

The difference between a motor vehicle doing something illegal and a cyclist is the others have registration plates so are easy to call to account.

 

[HugoBNB]

Looking at the signage on the link, it appears to be warning more of a pinch point due to the length of the vehicle as it turns. Surely the ruling should be on the length of a vehicle as opposed to the weight? Also, it is not much use unless it is on the rear of the vehicle as, by the time a cyclist sees one that is on the side, it is too late. There is way too much reliance on signage IMHO and not enough education or common sense on the road. I make no distinction between cyclists, motorists or pedestrians with that statement. Stay safe all.

 

[nicholsong]

I think this is pertinent to this discussion: I asked a few weeks ago about responsibility for a vehicle which drags its tail into another lane because the geometry of the road prevents it from doing otherwise.

Is the legal responsibility on the driver of the dragging vehicle to make sure the space he needs for dragging is clear? Or is it the responsibility of other road users to keep clear?

The answer may vary from country to country just to complicate things.

This signage rule seems to imply the second of my alternatives, but if the first is the legal position these signs should not be necessary.

When on a bicycle I never position myself inside a lorry. If the light is red I may undertake but get ahead of the lorry so that I am in the driver's view. Generally I overtake most traffic on the outside. Only had one collision that way when a Rover 3500 pulled out without checking his mirror(in which I could be clearly be seen) and my brake lever gouged a line down his 4 panels, but no damage to me nor my bike. He apoloised profusely but did not even look at damage, so must have been company car

Geoff

 

[HugoBNB]

I think this is pertinent to this discussion: I asked a few weeks ago about responsibility for a vehicle which drags its tail into another lane because the geometry of the road prevents it from doing otherwise.

Is the legal responsibility on the driver of the dragging vehicle to make sure the space he needs for dragging is clear? Or is it the responsibility of other road users to keep clear?

The answer may vary from country to country just to complicate things.

This signage rule seems to imply the second of my alternatives, but if the first is the legal position these signs should not be necessary.

When on a bicycle I never position myself inside a lorry. If the light is red I may undertake but get ahead of the lorry so that I am in the driver's view. Generally I overtake most traffic on the outside. Only had one collision that way when a Rover 3500 pulled out without checking his mirror(in which I could be clearly be seen) and my brake lever gouged a line down his 4 panels, but no damage to me nor my bike. He apoloised profusely but did not even look at damage, so must have been company car

Geoff

I would say that ultimately, the driver is responsible for the positioning and routeo his vehicle rounding a corner or obstruction. A cyclist is responsible for their positioning on the road and conduct in relation to obstructions. Pedestrians should always be aware of hazards, particularly when They are standing close to the edge of a pavement on a corner. In other words, we all have a responsibility for the consequences of our actions.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jongood]

I think this is pertinent to this discussion: I asked a few weeks ago about responsibility for a vehicle which drags its tail into another lane because the geometry of the road prevents it from doing otherwise.

Is the legal responsibility on the driver of the dragging vehicle to make sure the space he needs for dragging is clear? Or is it the responsibility of other road users to keep clear?

The answer may vary from country to country just to complicate things.

This signage rule seems to imply the second of my alternatives, but if the first is the legal position these signs should not be necessary.

When on a bicycle I never position myself inside a lorry. If the light is red I may undertake but get ahead of the lorry so that I am in the driver's view. Generally I overtake most traffic on the outside. Only had one collision that way when a Rover 3500 pulled out without checking his mirror(in which I could be clearly be seen) and my brake lever gouged a line down his 4 panels, but no damage to me nor my bike. He apoloised profusely but did not even look at damage, so must have been company car

Geoff

My understanding is that the driver is always responsible for the vehicle and any trailer attached to it Geoff. You would know better than me but AFAIK under UK law you can write what you like on it but it won't make a jot of difference unless you could prove that the other party acted illegally. That can be quite tricky if you have a Cyclist on your nearside because you would have to prove that he undertook you. Of course (pay attention cyclists) the cyclist is still dead.