The OP is asking if brake checking, which is momentarily braking hard to deter someone that is following too close to you, is illegal? My suggestion is that, if you did that and a crash ensued, then if the tailgater could prove you did it deliberately, you could be liable to be charged.
In the road code, besides suggesting the 2/4 second rule, it says you must leave enough space between you and the vehicle ahead of you to allow a vehicle behind to pass you. (and presumably slot in front of you)
Two other things I would not about tailgating (following too close):
1. It's pointless 2. I have observed two types of tailgaters: The original is the aggressive driver. Newer is the person who doesn't consider they are tailgating. They are used to modern vehicles brakes and handling, and don't think about the possibility of what could happen, and don't understand the physics of vehicles. And a third: Everyone should tailgate when taking off from a green light until reaching driving speed. It would get so many more cars through a light phase.
rob_man,
Oct 22, 10:44am
Me neither, on the rare occasions it does happen I allow the car to pass as soon as possible because I'm not so important that I have the right to hold other people up.
tweake,
Oct 22, 10:52am
not sure if thats an actual law. the minimal legal following distance gives more than enough room for someone to overtake and slot in. that will be more about people deliberately closing the gap to stop someone changing lanes or coming onto the motorway.
tweake,
Oct 22, 10:55am
i think its more of a case they will pass regardless if you "allow it" or not.
mrfxit,
Oct 22, 10:55am
To be even fairer, I see far more panic/ arrogant passing on merge lane ends then tailgating now
mrfxit,
Oct 22, 11:00am
Regards following distances etc. They are guideline suggestions & theres a lot of those suggestions in the road code. The thing is that they are based on practical & common sense (for the most part) & when it's proven you have ignored enough of those suggestions in a single event, it becomes a legal situation with relevant regulations/ penaltys to suit
my mate drives HT and is always brake checked immediately after the said vehicle has passed him, 2yrs ago he put in a dash came and he sends footage to police, they send letters to offenders apparently
tweake,
Oct 22, 11:44am
7.17 Motor vehicles following other vehicles (1) This clause— (a) applies if the driver of a motor vehicle (vehicle A) is following another vehicle (vehicle B); but (b) does not apply where the speed limit is 50 km per hour or less. (2) The driver of vehicle A must, except when overtaking vehicle B with the intention of passing it, keep a sufficient distance from vehicle B to enable the driver of any other vehicle to overtake and pass vehicle A and then move in behind vehicle B when conditions are such that this can be done safely.
pge,
Oct 22, 11:56am
FYI:
Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004
7.17 Motor vehicles following other vehicles (1) This clause— (a) applies if the driver of a motor vehicle (vehicle A) is following another vehicle (vehicle B); but (b) does not apply where the speed limit is 50 km per hour or less. (2) The driver of vehicle A must, except when overtaking vehicle B with the intention of passing it, keep a sufficient distance from vehicle B to enable the driver of any other vehicle to overtake and pass vehicle A and then move in behind vehicle B when conditions are such that this can be done safely.
Looks like I am a tad slow when posting, but I will leave it up. :-)
poppajn,
Oct 22, 12:02pm
You must be able to stop in half the visible distance
tweake,
Oct 22, 12:55pm
only on unlaned roads. on laned roads its stop in the distance you see in front of you.
yz490,
Oct 22, 1:41pm
Reminds of a fright [wake up call] i had on the Auckland motorway a few years ago & me not used to crowded motorway driving [country bumkin], cars up front stopped & only takes a glance in the mirror at the wrong second to close the gap & am always just quick automated looking in the centre mirror. Shit it was close & felt the ALB [Honda anti lock brakes] kick in for the one & only time. Maybe i should activate them more just to get them used to it--maybe not. Hell i was going to try & squeeze in between the lanes but wouldn't have fit. Too close thanks but can see how nose to tails start--by noddy's like me. Which has me thinking, someone said 'dogs', could the the [imaginary] dog owner be at fault for a multi car pile up or is every one bar the first guy liable for their own--if insured. Good case for compulsory third party. 'Think' they have it in the UK?. Ok Rant Over.
mber2,
Oct 22, 1:44pm
in reply to tweake.So if you are driving on the desert rd then you must be able to stop in the 20kms you see in front of you or you need your brakes renewed
hkjoe,
Oct 22, 5:31pm
From the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004; NZ Legislation
In addition to clause 7.17 Motor Vehicles Following Other Vehicles, is Clause 5.9, Stopping and Following Distance. So there are legal minimum distances for following, based on speed range.
5.9 Stopping and following distances
(1)
A driver must not drive a vehicle in a lane marked on a road at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in the length of the lane that is visible to the driver.
(2)
A driver must not drive a vehicle on a road that is not marked in lanes at such a speed that the driver is unable to stop in half the length of roadway that is visible to the driver.
(3)
A driver must not drive on a road a vehicle following behind another vehicle so that the driver cannot stop the driver’s vehicle short of the vehicle ahead if the vehicle ahead stops suddenly.
(4)
No driver may drive a motor vehicle on any road following behind another vehicle at a distance behind that vehicle of less than—
(a) 16 m, if his or her speed is 40 km an hour or more but less than 50 km an hour; or
(b) 20 m, if his or her speed is 50 km an hour or more but less than 60 km an hour; or
(c) 24 m, if his or her speed is 60 km an hour or more but less than 70 km an hour; or
(d) 28 m, if his or her speed is 70 km an hour or more but less than 80 km an hour; or
(e) 32 m, if his or her speed is 80 km an hour or more but less than 90 km an hour; or
(f) 36 m, if his or her speed is 90 km an hour or more.
hkjoe,
Oct 22, 5:40pm
And please don't complain about the sexist specific his and her pronouns in this clause.
slarty45,
Oct 22, 5:56pm
Brake checked a mufti at Puhoi Was doing about 105 & mufti wanted me to go a bit faster so he "pushed" eye think is the oink term for it Heard his tyres squeal and saw him do a U turn looking for quota somewhere else
marte,
Oct 23, 2:53am
Not true, I had a idiot ram his car into the rear of my van and then police gave me a ticket for 'overtaking in the left lane'. As far as I know, they didn't ticket him because the AA insurance tried to get me to pay for the damage (he) caused to his car.
And,if you are behind a car comming up to a set of traffic lights, and they are about to turn orange and the car in front of you jams the brakes on and stops short of the line "because the lights just turned orange a cars length before I got there. " And you run into the back of their car. Who's fault is it?
nice_lady,
Oct 23, 8:00am
Yours.
hkjoe,
Oct 23, 10:22am
Yours, because if you were 2 seconds away, and alert, you would have stopped in time, and secondly you should be even more aware and ready approaching traffic lights just in case they do change. Not clear though of the situation in your first case, from your description. 'overtaking in the left lane. ', etc.
bill-robinson,
Oct 23, 12:56pm
I am a bird lover, and if a car is following me closely I brake for any poor bird that cuts accross in front of me so it does not get tossed around in the following cars turbulant air stream. if the car hits me that is my excuse, if the driver can catch the bird and get a statement we will go to court and sort it out.
purplegoat,
Oct 23, 1:04pm
Wow what a hero . a very immature hero but a hero none the less Alternatively you could just move left when it’s practical and safe to do so Or perhaps ignore them ? So when the car behind loses control and takes out another innocent person because of ya “ bird lovin “ will ya still feel a hero ?
bill-robinson,
Oct 23, 1:30pm
he must have kept his car up to WOF standard at your workshop
marte,
Oct 24, 12:41am
This bits quoted from the road code. {A yellow signal means stop, unless you are so close to the intersection that you can't stop safely. A yellow signal indicates that the lights will soon turn red.}
The key bit is. (unless you are so close to the intersection that you can't stop safely.) If stopping so suddenly for a light that's not actually red, and its safe to drive thru on the orange light. And the behind you runs into the back of your car, but would have stopped short of the white line. Its not safe to stop. If its not safe to stop, you caused the accident by stopping for a 'not red light'. ~~~~~~ The second point, traffic lights, two lanes going forward on the left hand side of the centrerline. The left hand lanes got a 'left turn' and a 'drive forward' arrow on it. The right hand lanes got a 'drive forward' and a 'right turn' arrow on it. Theres one lane on the left hand side of the centerline on the other side of the intersection.
As I got to the intersection there's cars in the right hand lane, the first ones turning right. So I drive thru the intersection in the clear left hand lane.
That's 'over taking on the left' according to the Police officer. I got a ticket for it.
pauldw,
Oct 24, 7:21am
Since when did that make it correct? There's a lot of lawyers that would be out of work if the Police were always right.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.